Category Archives: patriarchy

8 Men’s Rights Memes From A Voice for Men That Make No Damn Sense

Yesterday, we looked at 6 memes from A Voice for Men’s “meme team” and decoded what they really meant. Today, some memes from AVFM’s Pinterest page that are a bit harder to decode, because they really make no sense at all. I’ll do my best to try to sort them out.

1) TALK TO THE HAND

listening

What might it mean? “Ha ha girls talk too much, well joke’s on you because I’m GOING MY OWN WAY and later I’ll go home and make a poster about how I imagined I might I totally really did put that bitch in her place.”

I mean, that is what this poster is saying, right? It’s illustrating the notion that men and women should listen to one another by depicting a dude just up and leaving because he’s tired of listening?

How exactly does this advance any “men’s rights” other than the right of men to act like petulant children?

Read the rest of this entry

About these ads

Phyllis Schlafly channels the manosphere with a column about female “hypergamy.”

The world's most eligible bachelor?

The world’s most eligible bachelor?

Professional antifeminist Phyllis Schlafly – perhaps best known for her fervent opposition to the Equal Rights Amendment – seems to have been channeling the manosphere in a column she published yesterday on the issue of “paycheck fairness.” Turns out she thinks such fairness is actually a bad idea, because ladies love marrying rich guys more than they love earning money.

According to Schlafly, equal pay messes with the fundamental female desire for “hypergamy” – that favorite manosphere buzzword – and undermines marriage:

[H]ypergamy … means that women typically choose a mate (husband or boyfriend) who earns more than she does. Men don’t have the same preference for a higher-earning mate.

While women prefer to HAVE a higher-earning partner, men generally prefer to BE the higher-earning partner in a relationship. This simple but profound difference between the sexes has powerful consequences for the so-called pay gap.

Suppose the pay gap between men and women were magically eliminated. If that happened, simple arithmetic suggests that half of women would be unable to find what they regard as a suitable mate.

Indeed, Schlafly argues, women love marrying men who earn more than them so much that when the pay gap is eliminated some of them just won’t marry at all. Which is apparently the end of the world, or something.

The pay gap between men and women is not all bad because it helps to promote and sustain marriages. …

In two segments of our population, the pay gap has virtually ceased to exist. In the African-American community and in the millennial generation (ages 18 to 32), women earn about the same as men, if not more.

It just so happens that those are the two segments of our population in which the rate of marriage has fallen the most. Fifty years ago, about 80 percent of Americans were married by age 30; today, less than 50 percent are.

So it’s not enough that most people end up getting married; civilization will crumble if more than half of them don’t marry before the age of 30!

And so, she suggests, if American women knew what was good for them they would be begging for employers pay them even less, relative to men.

The best way to improve economic prospects for women is to improve job prospects for the men in their lives, even if that means increasing the so-called pay gap.

Hmm. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m pretty sure that Schlafly – a best-selling author and popular speaker on the right – didn’t send back any of her royalties or speaking fees so that she would feel more like a woman and her late husband would feel like more of a man, and I doubt she’s doing so now, as a widow. She’s also been unmarried for more than twenty years. Coincidence?

NOTE TO MEN’S RIGHTS ACTIVISTS: When you find yourself agreeing with Phyllis Schlafly on pretty much anything (beyond, say, the existence of gravity, the need for human beings to breathe air, and other widely accepted beliefs of this sort), this is an indication that perhaps your movement isn’t the progressive, egalitarian movement that you like to pretend that it is, and that in fact it is sort of the opposite.

That said, I should also note that Schlafly’s notion of “hypergamy,” while sexist and silly, is decidedly less obnoxious than the version peddled by PUAs and websites like A Voice for Men — congrats, Men’s Human Rights Activists, you’re actually worse than Phyllis Schlafly!

She just uses the term to indicate a desire to marry up. For many manospherians, by contrast, “hypergamy” doesn’t just mean marrying up; it means that women are fickle, unfaithful monsters who love nothing better than cuckolding beta males in order to jump into bed with whatever alpha male wanders into their field of vision. (I’m guessing Schlafly hasn’t actually been going through the archives at AVFM or Chateau Heartiste looking for column ideas.) While many MRAs love to complain about hypergamy, many of them also seem to think that it’s unfair that “beta” males with good jobs aren’t automatically entitled to hot wives.

In case anyone is wondering, the actual definition of the word “hypergamy” involves none of that. According to Random House Kernerman Webster’s College Dictionary, the word means “marriage to a person of a social status higher than one’s own; orig., esp. in India, the custom of allowing a woman to marry only into her own or a higher social group.”

That’s it. It refers to the fact of marrying up, not to the desire to marry up, much less to the alleged desire of all twentysomething women to ride the Alpha Asshole Cock Carousel. The manosphere’s new and not-so-improved definition came from a white nationalist named F. Roger Devlin.

ANOTHER NOTE: Big thanks to the people who emailed me about this story. If you ever see something you think would make for a good Man Boobz post, send me an email at futrelle [at] manboobz.com. I get a lot of ideas from tips!

 

 

Meet Dr. Thaddeus Pixel, Inventor of Science

Dr. Thaddeus Pixel, Inventor of Science. (Detail of poster from Chateau Heartiste)

Dr. Thaddeus Pixel, Inventor of Science. (Detail of poster from Chateau Heartiste)

So the other day some of the fellas over on Chateau Heartiste — one of the internet’s top destinations for racist, misogynist pickup artist wannabes — ran across a little graphic celebrating some of the lesser-known “[w]omen in science that you should know … and probably don’t.”

Apparently offended by the reminder that, yes, women have actually had some influence over history, one of Heartiste’s readers decided to make a graphic similarly celebrating the men of science. But while the original graphic contained pictures of only 12 women, this new graphic featured a vast sea of male faces, as if to rub in just how male dominated the world of science has been, and still is.

heartistemenscience

Looking at the graphic, Heartiste also thought he spotted another demographic anomaly: a preponderance of white faces. “That’s one pale looking pastiche,” he wrote.

“The Men in Science poster. A Snowvalanche of Whiteness,” agreed one of his commenters,”Bwahahaha.”

Huh. That’s weird. because when I look at the poster I don’t see a lot of white. I mean, if you blow it up a little you can see that the spaces between the various squares are white, but the squares themselves are all sorts of colors. Red. Pink. Black. Brown. Blue. Green.

Are a significant portion of the Men of Science from Mars?

And there’s another odd thing about this not-so-pale pastiche: it’s full of repeating patterns. If you look closely, you’ll discover that this isn’t one vast sea of male faces. It’s a small pond, endlessly repeated.

Specifically, it’s this bit (from the upper left-hand corner) pasted over and over.

heartisterepeatedpattern

Also, when you look closely at these alleged “scientists” they turn out to be real blockheads. Yep, if you zoom in a little further you don’t find an assortment of tiny Einsteins and fig-sized Newtons. You get this:

heartpixelbig

All hail the founding pixels of science!

Heartiste, you may want to get your eyes checked for bigotry.

Thanks to dashapants for bringing this wondrous graphic and its repeating patterns to my attention.

Red Pill Theorist: Women are like children. Except you can have sex with them.

This Morpheus dude may have a point.

This Morpheus dude may have a point.

Put on your thinking caps today, because we are going to wade into the highly rarefied world of Red Pill Theory. Our Guest Lecturer today is a totally ALPHA DOG Red Pill Redditor by the name of GayLubeOil — don’t worry, fellas, he’s straight! — who has some important insights for us all on the nature of women.

Namely, that women are basically just overgrown children. Who give blow jobs.

Let’s let him explain, in a post that’s now Number One With A Sticky in the Red Pill Subreddit.

Treating Women Like Children (self.TheRedPill) submitted 8 hours ago by Endorsed ContributorGayLubeOil - stickied post One of the key tenants of Red Pill is that women act like children. There are many reasons for this. Women are not held accountable for their actions growing up, so they are completely new to the concept of accountability. If a woman sucks a dick, she tells a realy long story about how she was put in a dick sucking situation. Women don't realy believe in their own agency. That's why they often believe in cosmic forces like fate and patriarchy, because nothing they ever do is their fault. If women don't take responsibility for their actions, someone else has to. That's why we have to treat women like children. Obviously, some woman is going to read this have a cascade of feels and then deal with said feels in the most immature way possible.  While Red Pill theory has definitely harsh view of women, the practical application isn't as anti-social as our detractors believe.  One of the things that children suck at, is regulating their internal state. They're too little to know if their hungry, sleepy or if they need to go for a walk. When a child throws a tantrum its often not about the toy, there is often some underlying issue you need to take care of.  As stupid as its sounds you can completely avoid a lot of arguments by ignoring everything she says and going for the underlying problem. I cant believe you never told me that you X! Aww is she hungry. She gets this way when shes hungry. Then just feed her some Greek yogurt or something, and the problem will go away. Or just take her for a walk around the block, because shes just anxious from being at work the entire day.  Red Pill holds that male leadership is the cornerstone of a good relationship. Sometimes that means treating her like a child.

After reading all of that, you may have a few questions. Obviously, the most important question is: why Greek Yogurt? Well, in addition to being very popular with the ladies, it is apparently quite high in iron. Let’s let Professor LubeOil explain why that’s so crucial:

GayLubeOil[S] 44 points 7 hours ago* The reason I used Greek Yogurt as an example is that its high in Iron. A surprising number of women are anemic which means they bruise easily. Its obviusly not your fault that she cant get enough nutrients into her body. However You don't want to be seen walking around with a bruised woman. Which is why GayLubeOil recommends feeding your anemic woman Greek Yogurt mixed with pomegranate so you don't look like an abusive asshole. If you are an abusive asshole yogurt and pomegranate will not fix or prevent hemotoma. Sorry abusive assholes.  permalinkparentgive gold [–]Knoxhon_ 8 points 5 hours ago Sorry abusive assholes.  lmfao
Well, with that critical issue taken care of in a totally not creepy or red-flaggy kind of way, let’s move on to some of the serious discussion Professsor LubeOil’s thesis inspired in the Red Pill Subreddit.

Ah, who am I kidding? They mainly just posted comments about how totally right he was and how women totally are a bunch of overgrown children. But saying women are children is totes not misogyny!

Usherai 39 points 7 hours ago For all the accusations of misogyny thrown at TRP, I don't think most guys, even here, go far enough. Women are exactly like children in that without strong male leadership they will ruin themselves by being slaves to their emotions and short-sightedness. Their inability to take responsibility for themselves means that men need to be the ones directing, influencing, and manipulating their emotions into beneficial behaviors and pursuits.  This means that the mindset RP men should have in their relationships with women is one of complete and utter superiority. Your analysis and suggestions are pretty spot on.
And, heck, even if a dude maybe is a teensy bit of a misogynist, what’s the big deal, so long as it convinces him to treat his women properly — that is, like you would treat special needs children.

GayLubeOil[S] 41 points 7 hours ago Even if someone is a blatant misogynist and thinks women are completely inferior to men, that doesn't necessarily translate into him treating women poorly. Lets say you had a special needs child . The kids obviously intellectually inferior, to you and his peers. You knowing this doesn't make you an asshole. Knowing this and admitting this is the first step in being a good parent for this kid. Yea maybe you have to wipe his mouth after he eats or pick up after him a bit more. But pretending that he is a totally normal kid is going to make you a shittier parent than admitting the truth. That's why you should do what men have done for most of human history:treat women like women instead of pretending that they are men with breasts.  permalinkparentgive gold [–]Knoxhon_ 14 points 5 hours ago misogyny isn't about superior/inferior. it's about a hatred of women as a group. this is a common misconception.  permalinkparentgive gold [–]Endorsed ContributorDemonspawn 13 points 4 hours ago But so much of the population has equality disease: thinking someone isn't equal must be coming from hate... because they are equal, don'tchaknow!

Damn those feminazis and their “equality!” Why, it’s almost un-American!

Men’s Rightser: Men win the “we care a lot” olympics because of the Titanic, 9/11

titanic911mensimplycare
The Man Boobz Pledge Drive continues! If you haven’t already, please consider clicking the little button below and sending some bucks my way.

Thanks! (And thanks again to all who’ve already donated.) Now back to our regularly scheduled programming:
This graphic is the top (unstickied) post on the Men’s Rights subreddit at the moment. Like that Warren Farrell quote I wrote about last week, it’s yet another example of a familiar claim made by misogynistic Men’s Righsers — that men are world’s true heroes, sacrificing themselves for the good of women too lazy or cowardly or whatever to stand up for themselves.

Read the rest of this entry

A Voice for Men doubles down: how dishwashers, TV dinners, and marital rape laws are rendering women obsolete. Also, the apocalypse.

Not the apology that Clint Carpentier is looking for.

Not the apology that Clint Carpentier is looking for.

We met new A Voice for Men writer Clint Carpentier earlier this week, when we took a look at a recent post of his waxing nostalgic about the good old days before marital rape laws, when wives couldn’t say “no” to their husbands and expect the law to take this no any more seriously than a husband intent on rape.

In a second posting, he’s doubled down on the whole marital rape thing and incorporated into a vast and fantastical vision of the past and future of humankind that bears so little resemblance to reality that it’s worth quoting in detail as a sort of case study in Men Going Their Own Way delusions.

Read the rest of this entry

Vox Day: Don’t call your wife “the boss,” because women are dogs, or something.

You may now lick the bride's face.

You may now lick the bride’s face.

Some married men like to jokingly refer to their wife as “the boss,” generally in a patronizing manner that suggests she’s nominally in charge of the boring everyday stuff in the household that he doesn’t really care about anyway.

But our old nemesis Vox Day isn’t having any of it. To refer to your wife as the boss, even as a joke, is to threaten to loose the forces of anarchy and chaos and feminism upon your family. Also, women are dogs. On his Alpha Game blog, he writes,

If you let a dog think he’s the boss, he will cease to defer to you and begin objecting, violently, when you interfere with what he now believes are his prerogatives. Women are no different.

That’s right. Give in an inch to your wife, and the next thing you know she’ll be sitting on the furniture and insisting on eating “people food” at the table.

It’s a tad ironic that Vox here has decided to degrade women by comparing them to dogs, when his whole “alpha” schtick is based on misguided notions about the behavior of “alpha dogs” and wolves.

It’s one thing to turn over your social calendar to your wife due to a lack of interest in the various social obligations of the family. But checking in to see if there is scheduling conflict, or simply being courteous enough to see if your wife minds if you go to the football game does not make you an employee or a child. Therefore, it does not make her the boss. And what might have been an ironic jest in the days of Mad Men is often taken quite literally now.

Marriage: an endless power struggle in which the wife must always lose.

What a lovely vision of the world!

I should also add that you should never ever, even jokingly, refer to Bruce Springsteen as “the boss” either, because if you do he’s going to be hounding you to hand in your TPS reports and forcing you to work on Saturdays. You don’t want that.

EDITED TO ADD: In the comments on Alpha Game, cailcorishev expands a bit on the whole “women-as-dogs” thing in what he evidently thinks is a humorous way:

 Since you mentioned dogs: virtually everything about disciplining a dog and being the pack leader applies to leading a woman (or children). I’m convinced that, if you took a woman on a 45-minute walk every day, as Cesar Millan recommended for dogs, it would eliminate a lot of her problems. Just make sure you lead her, having her take your arm and follow you where you want to go — or use a leash if she’s into that kind of thing.

I can only hope his wife — if there is an unfortunate woman holding this position — pees on the rug and chews up all his important paperwork.

A Voice for Men writer laments: “Since the advent of ‘marital rape,’ sex is no longer a loving duty, so it has become whim and weapon.”

Caution: RIng does not transform "no" into "yes."

Caution: Ring does not transform “no” into “yes.”

Has A Voice for Men just declared itself in favor of marital rape?

In the midst of a long and otherwise fairly tedious piece complaining about wives asking their husbands to do their fair share of the chores, Clint Carpentier offers some rather startling thoughts on marital rape laws, and how he thinks they help to make marriage a losing proposition for modern men.

In the good old days, he writes, “sex was a wifely duty she was obligated to provide as per the terms of marriage.” But “since the advent of ‘marital rape,’ sex [in marriage] is no longer a loving duty, so it has become whim and weapon … .”

Yep. Apparently “being raped by your husband” is really just a way to fulfill your “loving duty” as a wife.

So, Carpentier concludes, if wives demand that you do the chores around the house, and you can’t rape them at will, what’s the point of even having one in the first place? After all, he argues, in an age of washing machines and readymade meals chores are easy, and men can get “once per day of blasé sex” from “any street-hooker” or splurge on “mind-blowing sex once a week [from] a well trained call-girl.”

And so, he writes,

If women are demanding that their husbands do their “fair share” of the chores, then why do men need wives at all? In man’s attempt to make their wives lives easier, they have reduced the wifely duties to next to non-existent. Why, women? Why oh why would you drive those final coffin nails of obsolescence in? Aside from children, there’s no benefit left to having a wife.

Well, if the only “benefits” you can see in having a wife are someone who will do the cooking and cleaning and whom you can rape at will, then, no, there is no benefit to you in having a wife now that marital rape is illegal. And there is certianly no benefit to any woman in marrying or dating or possibly even being in the same room as you.

Where have all the good men gone? Well… where have all the good women gone?

That’s right: A man who considers marital rape to be a husband’s right honestly thinks that he’s one of the good ones.

AVFM’s Paul Elam loves to rail against the evils of traditionalism and chivalry. Interesting that marital rape is one element of traditionalism he apparently has no problem with.

Manosphere blogger: “Feminism is a morbidly obese, sexually promiscuous, short-haired, tattooed, cussing beast whom no man can ever love or trust.”

Beta male oppressed by feminism.

Beta male oppressed by feminism.

Does anyone read newspaper comics any more? Does anyone even remember reading newspaper comics? One of the worst of the bunch is a mawkish little one-panel strip called “Love is …,” with a simple formula: a little drawing of a plump, happy, naked couple (minus sex organs), with a caption starting off with the words “love is.” The more popular strips were turned into greeting cards. I actually have an oil painting someone made of the Love is couple that I found in a thrift store for $1.47. The caption: “Love is … letting him win once in a while.”

The strip began in 1970, and the creator turned it over to the current writer and artist in 1975. I have no fucking idea how on earth he can come up with a new “love is” caption every day. His life must be some kind of existential hell. He must spend hours just staring out the window looking for inspiration. Love is … a dog taking a shit, no. Love is … a fat guy waiting for a bus … no. Love is … sitting alone in my underwear wondering what has gone wrong with my life.

Anyway, the reactionary Manosphere blogger Dicipres has decided to do a similar thing with the phrase “feminism is.” Only without the little naked couple. Here are some of his captions-without-pictures.

Feminism is a morbidly obese, sexually promiscuous, short-haired, tattooed, cussing beast whom no man can ever love or trust.

Feminism is a family which hates itself.

Feminism is a line drawn inside your home between you and your wife.

Feminism is a woman furious over ‘rape culture’ and who masturbates while fantasizing being beaten and raped. …

Feminism is a woman who cannot be loved anymore since she hates the domineering man she lusts and sexually despises the submissive man she likes.

Feminism is alimony and every other weekend

Feminism is a son hating his father

Feminism is equality as the only measure for progress of a society …

Feminism is a demographic annihilation due to low birth rates

Yeah. I don’t think any of those are going to work as greeting cards.

And what do these guys have against women with short hair?

Dalrock on why men should avoid women who’ve wasted “a lot of courtship” and “used up their most attractive/fertile years.”

Woman with surplus courtship

Woman with surplus courtship

Dalrock, a manosphere traditionalist with a great love of charts and statistics and other accoutrements of SCIENCE, has managed to figure out a way to stretch “don’t be so picky, ladies, or you’ll get old and ugly and no man will ever want you” out to 1500 words.

Here are a few of them:

Read the rest of this entry

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,806 other followers

%d bloggers like this: