Yearly Archives: 2011

Maybe she’s just not that into you, because women are incapable of love

Maybe the MGTOWers just need a hug from this strange bald man with no pants. Or toes.

Sometimes the fellows on MGTOWforums.com get all philosophical on us. At the moment they are discussing a question of great import: Are women incapable of love to the degree men love?

I suspect you can guess their unanimous answer – women are incapable of love — which is pretty much what you’d expect men who hate women to say about women and love. Some highlights:

Fairi5fair thinks women are monsters; he just can’t figure out which kind:

Women are just incapable of love period. The thrill of being able to use her pussy to get free shit is what women mistake for “love”. …

They are cold, grasping, selfish, and heartless parasites. They have no souls. They are all vampires. Undead zombies lurching from meal to meal.

Wait, so are they vampires or are they zombies? I think I can handle either one by itself, but if they are both at the same time we’re doomed!

Goldenfetus seems to be smoking something powerful:

Yes, they are less capable of love than men, or totally incapable.

One possibility I’ve considered is that in a natural … environment male ‘love’ (platonic) would be reserved only for other men, while women would be viewed as property or objects of reproduction whose value was derived from fertility and subservience without any basis in ‘love’ reciprocation. If so, I would identify feminism as the factor that misled men into extending this love, disastrously, to females - tricking them into believing that females have souls and are like males.

Loving a woman is like trying to pet a toilet, water a sandwich, or plow a parking lot and then wondering why you aren’t getting results. The defect (of understanding) lies with the man loving an object incompatible with love, rather than in the female whose nature precludes reciprocity.

Arctic thinks it’s all about the Benjamins:

Love to a woman is a man who is their servant 24/7 365 a day. …

The idea of love involving sacrifice to a female is as foreign as periods are to men. Why should she care about a relationship involving sacrifice on her part, when she is taught all her life to exploit men for her own uses? Sacrifice herself for a mere man? WHY? Why, when beta males are selling their souls to sniff her crotch? …

[I]ts safe to say the idea of women being in love begins and ends at the ATM of her committed male asset.

The Accomplice agrees:

Women do not seek love or companionship. Their main objective is to find a man of the highest status possible (Richest men, the toughest guys, most popular guy etc) who will protect them, provide for them and satisfy their selfish desires. … [T]he majority of women are too weak physically and mentally to do these things on their own, hence why they always chase after men …

A women’s idea of love is all hypergamy, nothing more.

Superion goes all Evo-Psych on us:

Women are incapapble of love is the great, horrible secret that society has tried to hide from men since the dawn of time.

Women are physically and mentally weaker than men.

In order to survive and pass on their genes they need the resources of the strongest and best providing male available.

To do this, women rely on beauty and guile to trick a male into being her slave.

Women do not love.

For men, love is a self-delusion.

We trick ourselves into wasting our resources on one particular female.

This makes no sense so we tell ourselves we’re in love to justify it.

Such an unromantic bunch! Maybe this will cheer them up.

Actually, screw them. Maybe it will cheer me up:

 

 

And if that didn’t do the trick, how about this?

 

 

David K. Meller on women getting cancer: “HA HA HA HA HA…LOL!”

Not reallly the appropriate response to someone else getting cancer.

Those of you who aren’t regular readers of the comments here may not appreciate the true genius of David K. Meller, an excitable and exclamation-point-loving MRA I’ve mentioned once or twice in my posts, but who shows up in the comments here with some regularity – ending each comment with his trademark “PEACE AND FREEDOM!!”

Mr. Meller is a great lover (not physically) of men:

Men, by and large, are a wonderful sex! We are more intelligent than women, more creative, at least in the areas outside the home. We are, also, as a rule, physically stronger as well …

He claims to love women, too – though not feminists, whom he seems to consider something other than human:

Women ARE people, and often wonderful people at that! Feminists, on the other hand, AREN’T! …

Women are people, and properly raised, educated, and loved,, are beautiful, charming, and lovely!

Despite his alleged love of women – at least the non-feminist ones – he often says utterly horrible things about them. The examples are too numerous to catalogue. But let me draw your attention to one rather telling comment of his I found recently on The Spearhead.

In the midst of a discussion of Sharon Osbourne’s now notorious comments about a woman who cut off her husband’s penis, Meller offered the following musings on the subject of women and cancer. I am having trouble finding much love of women in them:

It is .. possible that the breast cancers (not to mention ovarian and vaginal cancers) have a psychosomatic aspect to their development. … The feelings of vicious sadism, brutality, and callous indifference to another’s pain in such harpies must inexorably work on the molecular, genetic, and cellular level to generate consequences! I hope that you girls find these consequences as hilarious as I do when you annoy me with your next women’s health campaign against cancer!

Maybe women don’t strictly speaking, DESERVE cancer, but it will be hard for me to stop laughing at them …

Isn’t the thought of cancer-ridden women going under the knife amusing? Isn’t thought of women losing part, or all, of a sexual organ that is precious to them FUNNY? The pain women experience when recovering from surgery (and radiation or chemo, which is almost as bad) is still less than the agony which that poor man underwent when he underwent castration at the hands of a deranged, sadistic, and vicious she-weasel (my apologies to weasels)!

[F]or every man who is abused and tortured by his woman, it almost warms my heart that the same hatred and spite characteristic of the female human(?) sets THEM up for a similar fate down the road, as that bitterness, vicious sadism, and bloodthirstiness so characteristic of those who would LAUGH AT the suffering caused by a “woman” committing such a vicious crime predisposes them toward cancer, and (I hope) a similar fate!

Karma is always there, girls, and it is a bitch!! HA HA HA HA HA…LOL!

PEACE AND FREEDOM!!

David K. Meller

That “PEACE AND FREEDOM!!!” always gets me.

This being The Spearhead, Meller’s comments garnered more than a few upvotes. Not as many as he usually gets, admittedly, but some.

At some point I will do a Best of David K. Meller post, highlighting some of his “best” comments here. He is one for the ages.

Nice Guy Redux: If you’d gone out with me, you wouldn’t have gotten raped.

The contest for the Most Ironic Use of the Term “Nice Guy,” When Applied to Yourself –otherwise known as the MIUTNGWAY Award – is heating up. The previous front runner – the Tumblr guy who compared his inability to get laid to the Holocaust – now faces a serious challenge from a Redditor calling himself DogmaDog.

The other day Mr. Dog wandered into a discussion of the SlutWalks in the Feminisms and offered his two cents: he declared them “stupid,” and suggested that they won’t really help victims.

And then he started in on his own tale of woe.

I know I’m going to be shit on for saying what I’m about to say, but please hear me out.

Not a promising start, Dog.

I’ve never raped a woman, and I’m the ‘nice guy’ who never took advantage of a woman.

Do you want an award for this?

But a girl I was infatuated with in high school blew me off and treated me disrespectfully. She ended up being raped one night, while intoxicated. I do not know how I am supposed to feel about it.

As Don Draper would say, “what?”

How do you think you’re “supposed” to feel? Did you accidentally dislodge the part of your brain responsible for basic human empathy?

Apparently, the answer to that is “yes.”

[H]ow do you suppose I am supposed to feel about this woman I knew who got raped? I mean, I’ve never taken advantage of a woman, but I don’t understand how my ‘friend’, this girl I went to high school with, could go out and party all the time, and in turn treat me, her classmate, as though I were an inferior person for not enjoying the atmosphere of drunkenness at high school parties.

As it turns out, you’re an inferior person for an entirely different reason.

That girl was a mean girl, no? And by being disrespectful toward men, and prejudiced toward men, wasn’t she asking men to behave badly toward her? The only men she gave attention and physical affection to were the ones who hurt her back.

So let me see if I get this: she didn’t go out with you, a “nice guy,” so she was therefore “asking” to be raped?

Naturally, this being the Feminisms subreddit, and not The Spearhead, some of the regular commenters took exception to Mr. Dog’s victim-blaming and his complete lack of empathy for the victim – especially strange, since Dog, who says he is suffering from an (unspecified) mental illness, considers himself “a victim, in my own way,” of prejudice towards those with mental health issues. This experience, alas, has not given him any sympathy towards other vicitms.

Indeed, it seems that DogmaDog didn’t misplace his sense of empathy after all; rather, he threw it out of the house and got a restraining order against it. Responding to someone who suggested he show a little empathy, Dog lashed out:

Your empathy can go suck a dick. Empathy does nothing to help my situation. I suppose that is just the excuse people give themselves so that they can feel like they are actually doing something.

You basically called me an inferior human being because I can’t or won’t empathize for my friend who was raped. Well, ask yourself this, smart-ass, have you ever really wondered what good your empathy does? It does nothing. …

In reality, you are doing nothing but attacking me, and I may or may not have a ‘complex’, even though I don’t know what that is, but I can guarantee you, I HAVE NEVER RAPED ANYONE!!!

The sound you hear is me banging my head, ever so softly, on my desk. Empathy is what connects human beings to one another, what allows them to understand one another on a deep level.

When people are suffering – as you are, Dog, in dealing with your mental illness – a little bit of empathy from someone else can make all the difference in the world.

If you can’t feel even a little bit of sympathy for this woman you were once “infatuated” with, you’re not a nice guy at all; you’re an even bigger asshole than those drunken high school partiers you disdain. You may never have raped anyone — as you’ve repeatedly insisted, as if this should win you a prize – but “in your own way” you’re thinking like an abuser. Your lack of empathy for the victim, your continued bitterness towards her for turning you down, your sense of wounded narcissism; none of this is healthy, for you or for anyone who comes into contact with you.

You need help, dude. Please, please get it.

A Nice Guy’s lament: “First, they came for the rapists … .”

You’ve all seen the famous quote attributed to German religious leader Martin Niemöller:

First they came for the communists,

and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,

and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,

and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Jew.

Then they came for me

and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Now one embittered “Nice Guy” on Tumblr who goes by the name joetomcollins has written his own version, with feminists as the Nazis, rapists as the communists, and, well, just read it yourself:

When the Feminists came for the Rapists,

I remained silent;

I was not a Rapist.

When they locked up the stalkers,

I remained silent;

I was not a stalker.

When they came for the Players,

I did not speak out;

I was not a Player.

When they came for the men who they got bored of,

I remained silent;

I wasn’t some one they were bored of yet.

When they came for me, the nice guy,

there was no one left to speak out.

So, yeah. Let’s think this through a little bit. When Niemöller made his now famous remarks, he was expressing his own sorrow for not standing up to Hitler when he started arresting Communists. So is joetomcollins suggesting that he – and we – should have stopped “the feminists” from going after rapists and stalkers?

Joetomcollins doesn’t say, but he does have a lot more to say on the evilness of feminists and stuck-up women in general:

[I]f I’m going to be the bad guy no matter what I do… might as well get it the fuck out the way right up front.

I might as well ENJOY being the villain.

The FemeNazi messsage is LOUD AND CLEAR!

I am an average normal guy. I am never going to be good enough.

Especially in NYC where you only personalities you get are native “rats” who have learned to survive to being ruthless, and Type “A” psychopaths who come here to conquer everything.

Dude, if you don’t like the people in New York, then maybe, just maybe, you should move out of New York. It’s a high-pressure place and, well, you don’t seem to respond well to pressure, let’s put it that way.

He continues on with a refrain that I suspect will sound awfully familiar to a lot of you:

Man hasn’t had the ability to choose his woman for at least the last 150 years. The woman chooses the man. ALWAYS.

Now even showing interest is offensive to the FemeNAZI.

We aren’t talking about DOING anything but telling someone you think they are attractive. If a guy YOU liked rejected you, he would be Satan incarnate, but when a woman rejects a guy…

“HE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER!!!”

“HOW DARE HE THINK HE WAS GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME!!!!!”

… and we’re supposed to nod sheepishly and apologize for bothering you as we leave with a smile.

When I read shit like this I have to wonder: who exactly are you approaching, and what exactly are you saying to them? I’ve made some awkward passes in my day, but I’ve never gotten this response from anyone.

Could it be that you’re a dick? Your post seems to suggest that you are — an angry, self-obsessed dick almost completely lacking in self-awareness and empathy.

I mean, seriously, comparing your inability to get laid to the fucking Holocaust? Your bad luck with women to the murder of millions? Douche move, my man.

If you embrace your dickhood, as you seem to want to do, and become much more straightforward about your sexual desires, instead of trying to hide behind a nice-guy facade, you might actually get laid more often than you’re getting now. But you’re not likely to get a lot of repeat customers. And for good reason: no woman wants (or deserves) to be saddled with all your bullshit.

So let’s assume, for the purpose of argument, that you’re not a full-blown dick; you’re just a horny young guy on a sexual losing streak lashing out at women for your own failures. Let’s assume you are willing to work on actually reducing your dickishness. (Readers: All I ask is a little temporary suspension of disbelief.)

Reading your account of your romantic failures, and bearing in mind that most straight men don’t get this sort of response from the women they approach, there are several possibilities:

  1. either you are exaggerating the alleged awfulness of the rejections you’ve gotten, or
  2. there is something desperately wrong with your approach — perhaps you’re cornering women in elevators at 4 AM, or otherwise transgressing their boundaries in inappropriate ways — or
  3. the women you are approaching are, you know, bitches.

You really only have two choices here: you can spend the rest of your life wallowing in bitterness at women, or you can reconsider your approach. Find some woman you are friendly with – one you are not obsessed with fucking – and explain to her what’s going on, and ask her where you think you’re going wrong. If it’s your approach, learn to better respect people’s boundaries and read their body language; some women don’t want to be bugged by anyone when they are, you know, on the way to work. If it’s your selection of women, select different women.

And stop posting tirades on the internet about how women are a bunch of evil Nazis out to oppress you and your poor lonely penis. You know how, when you jump into cold water, your genitals shrink in horror from the cold? Something similar happens to the vaginas of most women when they read shit like you just wrote.

Dudes, watch out: Sex is a feminist plot to make your penis get sick and fall off

This is how they get you!

This is how they get you!

The dude at What Men Are Saying About Women – you may recall him as the inventor of the MRA two-dot period – remains my favorite illiterate MRA blogger. To be fair, the illiteracy is really just the icing on the cake of his ridiculous opinions. In a recent post he wrote about a new study that purports to show that there is more sex in countries with greater gender equality. (Probably true; the study itself, probably bullshit.)

Here’s the two-dot blogger trying to make some sort of point about it all:

Feminists have always promoted shagging as some type of recommended behaviour that should be allowed at random without limitation or indeed have any limits attached to it. Probably explains why most of the feminist mangina sites have little tags like “I support Porn” or “I support BDSM” as they would heartily agree that the promotion of free sex on demand would allow them unlimited access especially if there is a feminist female involved. Brainwashing does apparently have it positive side..

What surprises me the most is the lack of information concerning sexually transmitted diseases of all types. Those nasty disease like HIV or those others that munch your body at random. Not really something you want to be told after a night of debauchery with some slut feminist ( they promote themselves to be sluts now) willingly spreads her legs for some horizontal tango..

So apparently having more sex is bad because feminists..

And then you get AIDS..

And sentences should always be ended with not one but two periods..

Friday Night Kitten Fight: Cage Match!

I’ve got $5 on the cute one.

AntiFeministMedia 2: Women should be replaced by better technology.

Our glorious future

The other day we took a look at a Redditor who calls himself AntiFeministMedia. He does not seem to like the ladies very much. Indeed, in some of the posts of his I quoted, he went so far as to say that women are animals, not humans, and suggested that men should pretty much have the final say in anything involving reproduction (as clearly the women have been doing a terrible job of it).

So one might wonder: why have ladies at all? This is a thought that has crossed the mind of AntiFeministMedia more than a few times. And he’s got some ideas about how it could be done.

As he points out in this comment, men have known all along that ladies is trouble. But now, thanks to superior male brains, we finally have the technology to do something about it. Today, fleshlights! Tomorrow, the womb!

Men have known women are the problem right throughout history, and to deny it just goes to show how ignorant and stupid you are.

Religion’s, culture’s, all have there warnings about women.

And all these things will be known again. The dots will be joined, and its my hope that after this current fuck up of allowing feminism to take root, men will never allow it again.

I actually think its time men went foreward alone. We have the hi-technology now to clone little boys into the future, soon we will have female androids with artificial wombs. Identical to women in almost every way, except for the animal nature…

Women should be replaced by better technology.

Consider the many fine benefits of this plan:

If men didnt have to live in this human-female environment, but instead was guaranteed in having his sexual needs met, and his genes live on into the future, there would be a lot less conflict of all kinds.

This two-party system of male and female has served its purpose (in the most brutal way), we are rapidly approaching a time where things could be radically different.

Tell me more about this brave new world of which you speak, in which men can live their lives free of bitches:

Cloning science and female androids may just solve that woman problem for us.

I wouldnt advocate killing women, certainly not, but a gradual fade-out, allow women to live out their natural lives, while we transition to the new technology.

No need for anything as unpleasant as killing, no. Just the elimination of one gender by the other through a little “fade-out,” like they have in the movies. Nothing objectionable about this, not at all.

If you’ve followed any of these links back to the original comments, you’ll see that AntiFeministMedia, like most truly original thinkers, has gotten some resistance to his ideas — even from the normally forward-looking thinkers of the Men’s Rights subreddit. And a few downvotes!

But some of his comments are so clearly and obviously correct, so pithy and wise, that they get upvotes. Like this one, suggesting that female demand for iPads and mobile phones is one of the central driving forces behind war:

Well its nice to hear her comment that western women themselves have been complicit in foreign wars and the rape of native women by soldiers, so that companies can obtain gold and other precious metals for Ipads and moble phones which women seem to like so much.

Oh you evil women with your iPads and mobile phones! We men are of course immune to the devilish allure of computer technology. Indeed, I’m typing this blog post on an old Smith-Corona Galaxie Portable Typewriter.

I think we have a new [NSFW] catchphrase!

A You-know-whatted Circus in action.

MGTOWers have such a way with words. Here’s MrLahey on MGTOWforums explaining his movement in a nutshell:

[W]e’re voting with our feet, and the best way to say no to the cunted circus is to stop feeding it with your participation.

They’ll only notice you when they’re short your money.

“Cunted circus.” Lovely. I will be working it into as many conversations as I dare. Assuming I can figure out how to use it in a sentence. Can you?

(I’m taking off the “cunt” filter for the occasion.)

Garfield’s John Arbuckle becomes an MRA, or a PUA, or possibly an MGTOWer

You need a cat to keep you company, dude.

Actually, I’m pretty sure he’s been Going His Own Way pretty much since the strip started.

This is borrowed from the fabulous Garfield Minus Garfield. Thanks to speedlines on the Man Boobz Forum for finding this.

AntiFeministMedia: “Do you really believe men have ‘oppressed’ women for no reason?”

Shouldn't they all be?

My favorite Redditor these days is an angry little fella named AntiFeministMedia. How much of a douche is he? So much of one that sometimes he actually manages to get downvoted in the Men’s Rights subreddit for his excessive douchebaggery.

You may recall him as the author of the “the female gravy train of victimhood” quote I highlighted the other day. But I’ve been going through his comment history and have unearthed a number of other wonders.

It’s going to take more than one post to truly convey his charms. We’ll start today with some of his comments on women, and their vaginas, and why both need to be kept in check.

Women, you see, just aren’t made for freedom:

what happnes when you give women economic and sexual freedom, is that you get major social problems.

It simply doesnt work, because women are incapable of behaving themselves, men see their society disintegrating, their children suffering, and then decide to ‘put women in their place’.

If women wernt so irresponsible when they got their freedom, men would not have to step in and take it away from them. Seriously, do you really believe men have ‘oppressed’ (read: restrained) women for no reason?

It’s almost as if these ladies aren’t even human:

people are scared of women. Thats the truth about it. Women can be such nasty pieces of work that no one wants to get on their bad side for fear of them becoming hysterical … The female world is an animal world which a lot of men, being human, simply dont understand).

True, they do have vaginas, but that isn’t enough to make up for that whole not-being-human thing:

You may or may not believe this, but I am quite happy alone.

The only thing I’d want you from is a vagina, the rest of the time I’d despise you. You see I dont like who you are. I am a human being, while women are from the animal world. They think like animals, and that is not something I would want to pair with. While women are thinking about survival, Im thinking about god.

And, at least some of the time, about vaginas.

Speaking of which: Since ladies are such herd animals, they clearly shouldn’t be allowed to be in charge of anything, including the things that come out of their vaginas. You know, babies:

You seem to think in groups, not as individuals. Thats why I believe women shouldnt be given a choice. Children should automatically be the property of the male (again). If women cannot understand simple situations like those I’ve outlined, or even the fact that men should be consulted first before a child is created … then they are not the best people to be in control of reproduction.

After all, contrary to all that nonsense you might have heard in your high school sex ed classes, it only takes one person to get pregnant:

It takes two to tango, and one to get pregnant. The one that gets pregnant bears the ultimate responsibilty, particularly since she has full control over reproduction in the modern west. …

It is up to women to screen out bad men, and to choose a man capable of being a good father. That is the responsibilty of women. If a woman opens her legs to any sob, without spending the time and energy to assess wether he would make a good father, and then he runs off, then thats the womans fault. But again, we go back to women not being able to take personal responsibilty.

Exactly. When a man deserts his children, it is obviously the woman, not him, who is being irresponsible.

Given how badly women are doing at this whole reproduction thing, wouldn’t it be great if we could just remove women from the equation entirely?

AntiFeministMedia has some thoughts on this as well, which we will examine in a future post. Stay tuned.