Welcome back my friends to the show that never ends will end later this week. The Man Boobz Summer Video Fest continues with “SELL YOUR CAR OR ELSE!” Apparently this is how women are.
Posted on July 21, 2011, in $MONEY$, evil women, hypergamy, misogyny, oppressed men, video. Bookmark the permalink. 274 Comments.
Misogyny. I mock it.
I find a lot of it in what's called the "manosphere," a loose collection of Men's Rights, Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW), and Pickup Artist (PUA) sites.
TRIGGER WARNING: I quote some pretty extreme stuff here; also, the comments section is pretty much unfiltered, so be prepared.
Contact me by clicking my head, above, or at futrelle [at] well.com
Enjoy!
David Futrelle
 | Pecunium on Devastating new “fly… |
 | Jenn93 on Devastating new “fly… |
 | Kendra, the bionic m… on Devastating new “fly… |
| Pecunium on Devastating new “fly… |
 | Lauralot on Devastating new “fly… |
 | Moewicus on Devastating new “fly… |
| Pecunium on Devastating new “fly… |
 | Demios on Devastating new “fly… |
 | Crumbelievable on Devastating new “fly… |
 | blitzgal on Devastating new “fly… |
whoever bet the over btw wins big time. xD
if he’s not gonna leave until he convinces us that humour is objective, this could take a while xD
@Molly Ren xD no it’s all of us… and apparently we’re WRONG… and the more he explains, eventually we’ll find the joke funny, or we hate humour xD I’ve apparently hated Simpsons and Seinfeld all this time b/c we don’t find one joke he does funny xD
Hey YOHAMI, which seasons of Simpsons are your favourite btw? :3
Any specific episodes? :3
@David you haven’t been watching Seinfeld close enough! >:O
@Ami I actually find a lot of funny modern cartoons hard to watch because the animation creeps me out! South Park I find the hardest to look at, Simpsons less so.
That’s b/c you’re a feminist! >:O
xD
(actually there are some cartoons where the animation/artist style rly makes it hard for me to enjoy it or watch it at all too xD but that’s cuz I’m a feminist… AND the whole trans thing xD)
Okay, YOHAMI, you seem to be confused. I am not too interested in continuing this conversation, but let me clarify some things for you.
Things YOHAMI and summer_snow Were Arguing/Disagreeing About:
1. Whether modifiers are useful in conversations, or just “PC” (summer_snow believed that they were essential, while YOHAMI disagreed)
2. Whether YOHAMI is talking about his experiences or generalizing about women (this was a topic of contention because YOHAMI produced some unclear statements without modifiers.)
3. Whether the cartoon would be just as funny if it featured two brothers instead of a heterosexual pair. (this argument was unresolved, but I’m tired of talking about this)
4. Whether summer_snow is actually arguing, or “policing” (summer_snow and Pecunium believe that she is arguing, while YOHAMI does not)
Given the record of our conversation topics, I have to say, I’m not too interested in continuing this conversation. I’ll bet it would meander in circles some more as we talk about what we talked about, what we meant, and what we mean by talking about what we talked about.
Since you spent so much time trying to clarify things you said, I attempted to ask questions to find out what you really felt about things like the gender dynamics in the video. You got frustrated with that after a little while, and I wasn’t too interested in continuing the conversation while your opinions remained nebulous and undefined, since that was the cause of our prior circular conversations.
I’m sure we disagree on many more things about the video, but honestly it’s just not worth the amount of effort it would take to continue this conversation, and I’d rather go post on some other threads.
Good luck in your next argument.
Pecuniun,
“watched it three times. I don’t find it funny.”
Not finding it funny is fine, no problems with that.
However there you proposed an argument that when something is funny it has to be “plausible” which is nonsense. Not liking the cartoon or even getting offended by it is totally fine. But the logical explanation you tried to provide is a no go.
BTW Im not asking you to give me an argument about why you dont find it funny. If Im asking you an argument is because you seem to disagree with me, and Im not sure about what?
If the disagreement is just about if the cartoon is funny or not, I dont see the big deal.
Ami,
“I like how his idea of humour has now become the objective one and the problem must be feminism and reverse sexism xD Next he’s going to tell us the episodes of Seinfeld we find funny are wrong, or we find them funny for the wrong reasons xD”
Ah, you got me. I should change my plans now!!! not
summer,
OK thanks for taking the time to clarify what you were disagreeing on, heres my take:
1. Modifiers are very useful
2. Im not generalizing about “all women” nor have intentions to do so
3. The cartoon represents manipulative dynamics inside of a couple, thus unfunny (and inaccurate) if done with heterosexual brothers IN MY OPINION
Go have fun.
Its funny. All I said is that I find the video accurate and funny and that I personally know a lot of women and couples that behave like that video
I didnt think such a statement would trigger the “troll” alerts here
Yohami: “Yes, I´ve seen a lot of that too. Theres lots of abusive people in all shapes and forms. Have you seen more male than female abusers? did the mechanics they use resemble the stuff on the cartoon?”
Ummmmmm … Ima say … I’ve seen both male and female abusers, but been personally affected more by male abusers because I’m a straight female (as possibly you have the opposite experience because you’re a straight male). The mechanics may have resembled the stuff in the cartoon in a very general way (the “if you love me” stuff not being an exact representation of something I’ve seen, but as shorthand for “this person is demanding something and then becoming emotionally manipulative,” sure), but it doesn’t really ring true to me because of its creator’s tin ear for dialog/lack of facility with humor. (And also, perhaps, because of the odd nature of the medium — xtranormal is hard to do well.) Having thought about it a bit more, I actually suspect that the creator was going for a dash of humor + education about manipulative women, but for me it was off, both as a humor piece and an educational one. For a lot of reasons, but the leaden words falling flat aspect was probably a big one as to the humor; the lack of realism/nuance was probably the reason it didn’t work so well as an educational video for me. (I.e., if your girlfriend spins around chanting “loser,” you already know what’s wrong with your relationship.)
A few other points that weren’t really addressed to me. There’s enough black sheep/family dynamics stereotypes out there that I have a hard time understanding why — for someone who thought this video was funny in the ways you’ve described — setting this scene between two brothers couldn’t work as well.
I also have the feeling that you’re setting up an argument about humor, and why things that are subversive/sad in real life can be funny onscreen. And you’re right — at least in my opinion. Sometimes they are. I like “The Simpsons.” Hell … I’ve even been known to chuckle at some episodes of the “Family Guy.” What can I say? I’m feminist, but human. Typically I don’t like things like “The Hangover,” where the entire joke is “I pooped my pants and then raped my friend” (or whatever. I know that’s not really the plot of the movie … I actually didn’t make it all the way through “The Hangover”), but I can occasionally find something funny and acknowledge the ways in which it’s problematic as well. The thing is, that the video not only addresses a kind of sad human interaction that it’s hard to make funny, but it also falls so flat, is written with a complete lack of deftness, etc., that it just fails to ascend to any kind of humor level for me. Probably someone could make this kind of interaction funny to me. But this guy didn’t.
YOHAMI: As summer_snow pointed out. Our disagreement (not to be confused with an argument; which is a supported position on a subject of disagreement) is about what you think important; and that you don’t seem to think arguments have been made.
And yes, I do think that for something to be funny it has t be plausible. Even the things whch are impossuble (e.g. Wile E. Coyote standing in space before he realises he is in mid-air and starts to fall) have to have an internally consistent justification.
Your comment that “two brother’s wouldn’t be funny because it’s not believable” supports my position. Added to your statements that it’s believable because of your experience, I don’t see that your position is really all that different; because you said the “non-plausible” setting (3. The cartoon represents manipulative dynamics inside of a couple, thus unfunny (and inaccurate) if done with heterosexual brothers IN MY OPINION) would lose the humor.
Which means the real argument is, “are women like that,” dressed as, “this is funny”. Why? Because you defend the video as funny, only if it’s about women in relationships, not if it’s about generically abusive relationships.
Actually, just out of curiosity, I wonder if Yohami would think that a similar video showing a beleaguered woman and her cruelly manipulative boyfriend is funny? Same sexual tension, right?
Bee,
Thanks for that response, you´re by far the more equilibrated person from the ones who are addressing my comments here.
I have a similar experience to you, being a straight male and have experienced / witnessed manipulative people, both male and female, but with a higher exposure to female manipulation.
The cartoon is accurate in how the females manipulate. I think males can manipulate in the same way, but, more often, in my experience, males have a different way to achieve the manipulation. So just reversing the genders in the video wouldnt be a parody but just something weird. I think in a proper reversed roles, the guy would just sell the girlfriend´s car and then surprise her with his new mercedes. The difference? that female manipulation the woman pushes the guy to “want” do stuff for her, while in male manipulation the male does his way not caring about the woman´s feelings, and then blaming her or not taking her in consideration / reacting to the drama he generated by pointing at her like she was the cause. Can this happen gender reversed? I guess so, but I havent seen it.
So again, I have seen a lot of manipulation. The video depicts female manipulation properly, the mechanics fit stuff I have seen, etc, and with the absurdity of the two cars, which I think is extreme, that means = humor. Maybe dark humor, but I laughed.
As an educational piece, thought, it fails. As a piece to show the nature of women, it fails, because not all women are manipulative people, and going into interactions with women assuming they are manipulative fails, same as it would to enter into relationships with men assuming they would just sell your car and damage you and let you sob while they mock you. But, all of that happens. A lot.
So again, if the author of the video thinks he is not mocking a segment of people called “manipulative people” but making it about “women” this is sad.
The hangover: I missed there was rape on it? See, Im not a feminist. I get that a feminist has a higher threshold for perceiving threats against women. Which is fine. In the same hand, I feel disgusted by some jokes about men where men are assumed to be inherently bad and I have been disgusted by popular shows. Heck, I love dr house, yet I get disgusted in a lot of episodes when there are male characters kicked in the balls and / or portraited as useless. So, I understand people getting offended by the cartoon, not finding it funny, etc.
“I wonder if Yohami would think that a similar video showing a beleaguered woman and her cruelly manipulative boyfriend is funny? Same sexual tension, right?”
There are many parodies which can be done to mock how badly some men treat her women. But if they show a beleaguered woman with a guy cruelly manipulating her, I would probably feel disgusted, unless, unless the situation was so absurd and clearly a parody that had humor on it.
I dont find manipulation amusing - I get disgusted by it. But in this case the two cars example was over the top enough to make the cut.
Pecunium,
“Our disagreement is about what you think its important”
If this is about “modifiers” I already stated to death they are important
I get what you were saying with the plausibility now. To make humor you need 1) something for the rational mind to grasp and 2) absurd.
I have seen [some] women behaving like the one in the cartoon, so thats the plausible part. The two cars argument is absurd = the mix is humor. But, if you have never experienced such manipulation and you think its impossible, then you have absurd x2 = unfunny, plus a gratuitious portraying of a woman as abuser.
If thats the case, I get why you find it unfunny.
When I say I dont think the cartoon would work with two brothers, is because I havent witnessed this kind of manipulation between brothers (it might happen, though?) so with two brothers this is just absurd x2 to me.
But, remember I was the one proposing the two brothers as unfunny. There are many roles in which this can be a joke.
Make the two characters politicians with the senator trying to sell his employee car to get a new one for himself, and telling him “if you really care about your future” or whatever manipulation happens in politics, and its funny again.
The joke doesnt need sexual tension per se. The phrase “if you really love me” as a mean to manipulate, does. Thats why I think it wouldnt work with brothers. Replace it with “If you really care about mom/dad” and it might be funny again.
So. Out there, theres a bunch of manipulative people. The mechanics they use depend on the type of relationship they have with the people they are manipulating. Some of these people, are women, and the ones I have met, manipulate with the dynamics present in the video.
Thats pretty much my point. The humor is not about the manipulation, but the absurd part of it: two cars.
“Which means the real argument is, “are women like that,” dressed as, “this is funny”. Why? Because you defend the video as funny, only if it’s about women in relationships, not if it’s about generically abusive relationships.”
Nope, but that seems to be your assumption, which explains why you get defensive about it, even when Im not expressing anything like that.
No-one read my link here, either! The rejection! It burns!
I really admire the respect shown by summer_snow and Pecunium and Bee and everyone else who engages with them: I’d like to think MRAs are just deluded or ignorant and could come to see the error of their ways.
But having read the same shit over and over, and seen so many of them emphatically agree with the stupidest and evil crap, I think they have an investment in it they will never give up.
MRA arguments are a trip down the rabbit hole. Cause and effect never correlate, because they only want to make one point : “Women are bad.” If women are bad, they don’t have to take responsibility for anything themselves.
They want validation of their beliefs, but can’t find it because it isn’t there. So they dig in, deny, evade, bluff and make up shit. They are not trying to prove it to anyone else: just to themselves.
Yohami contends the video is funny because if it’s funny, that means the behaviour shown is real.
He wants the video to be satire because satire points out the wrongness in a real situation. He wants his personal view validated: that can’t be done if he acknowledges any other view.
He isn’t here to engage in discussion. He’s here because Manboobz is a threat to his beliefs, and he needs top prop up his ego and his mind set. Same with NOWslave and MRAL and Eoghan and Marc and all the rest.
The negatives men experience are not caused by feminism: they’re caused by anti-feminism. Patriarchy.
Feminism says: women are equal partners. Relationships are equal. Partners negotiate and accommodate each other. They have regard for each other, and the happiness of the other matters.
Anti-feminism says: woman is subordinate and inferior to the man. Relationships are unequal. One partner is trying to maintain power over the other. The happiness of only one person matters.
All that crap where women manipulate men through witholding/offering sex is a direct effect of anti-feminism. Put a human being in a cage, you will see survival behaviour. Survival behaviour is ugly.
Alimony and child support are a direct effect of feminism: but the fact that women are usually the main carers? Blame that one on anti-feminism.
All those men who couldn’t maintain an equal satisfying relationship with their partner because they were taught a huge list of things that men don’t do= anti feminism.
Anyone who seriously contends that the human beings they share the world with don’t deserve respect is no longer a contender for rational argument. They should be feared, or mocked.
Let’s do more mocking. Please.
I read your link, eilish! I was just busy playing whack-a-troll.
The men-buy-women-sell thing is a pretty accurate assessment of sexist gender dynamics, and one that usually stirs up the trolls hard. I guess MRAL’s still busy showering off the spit of disdainful beautiful women, but I’m sure he’ll stop by to tell you that you’re wrong and women rule the world of dating.
Have you ever read Figleaf’s two rules of desire?
@eilish
“I’d like to think MRAs are just deluded or ignorant and could come to see the error of their ways.”
Is it delusional to want equal child custody? (If the woman is the primary caretaker, isn’t the man who pays all the bills primary caretaker to both his wife and children?)
Is it delusional to want a live child? (abortion being the termination of a seperate life).
Is it delusional to want to never be forced to pay alimony? (no services are being rendered what is this money for?)
Is it delusional to get employment based on merit and not gender? (How can forced quota’s ever be considered equality?)
Is it delusional to be admitted for an education based on merit and not gender? (Again we have education based on gender.)
Is it delusional to have education which fairly teaches and grades reguardless of gender? (Why change education when the US was #1 across the board in reading, math and science? Is being ranked mediocre at best a better situation so the acievement gap is closed?)
Is it delusional to have a mans taxes used primarily to benefit women? (Why does virtually all taxes go to women for health, education, employment?)
Is it delusional to want the same punishment for the same crime? (Equality certainly doesn’t hold women to the same accountability as men. Why is this the only part of the State where men are given extra?)
Is it delusional for a man to not be evicted from his home on a womans word alone? (
Restraining orders assume guilt, no trial, nothing. How is this not an infringement on a mans right?)
All this and so much more is the directly caused by feminism.
And here is the final word on the matter by feminist eilish, “Let’s do more mocking. Please.”
“no services are being rendered” - what does that mean?
How come you forgot VAWA and Title IX, NWO?
I mean, if you’re going to barf up your entire list of talking points in one comment, how could you miss beating your favorite dead horses?
What about the silky clothes, NWO? What about the sandwiches?
Magie: There is a divorce. Support is assigned. Now he’s not getting any blowjobs, no fucking, no washing, no dinner, and he’s still supporting her.
Never mind that alimony laws are gender neutral, and some form of need has to be shown.
Never mind that the rest of NWOs screed is based on lies, or non-relevant assumptions.
It’s after all NWO, a slave to the New World Order… a pathetically rebellious one, but a slave; with the mind of a slave, and the attitudes of slave. Worse, one who sees equality as slavery.
Yeah, and what about the pedicures?
@Magpie
“no services are being rendered” – what does that mean?”
What is being done to earn that money of course. I’ve found if I don’t do anything no one pays me. What does a woman do that entitles her to a mans wages after the marriage contract is broken? If I break my contract to work, (quit my job) they rightfully don’t pay me.
eilish: I just read the link … *sheepish* I should have read it sooner! It rang true in a lot of ways, including that, honestly, I think that if anyone had ever asked me, throughout my life, whether dating is a market or a social interaction, I would have said a social interaction, but if anyone had asked me about any of the issues Amanda parses in the article — Do you need to raise your value/lower your standards to find an appropriate date?, etc. — I definitely would have said yes to that as well. The traditional notion just runs really deep. You think you’re rejecting it, but you’ve only rejected the top layer; the roots remain.
Slaveman: It’s delusional that you think the imbalances that you listed exist in the way you think they do, yes.
OK. I don’t remember any services being specified in my marriage contract or wedding vows though! I have heard the word ‘alimony’, but not seen it in practice. I thought if you were unemployed on divorce you would just apply for the dole or single parent benefit until you found a job.
@summer_snow
I’m sure you know Title IX and VAWA well enough by now, as well as the myriad of laws feminists have enacted which give women jurisdiction of a mans actions. At any time any woman can call the forces of the State to attack a man.
Just because of the majority of the 435 people who run this country are men, this in no way translates to any form of justice for the average man. Between men dying and being incarcerated in far greater proportions than women, men simply have no power. The only vote that counts in womens vote. That being the case the only issues of any value to a politician will revolve around what ever women want. Otherwise, none of these policies could ever have been enacted.
And as always the only thing feminism has to offer is hatred and mockery.
The comments are a clear example of womens hatred of men.
I’m busy doing part two of the Rape Prevention Tips List MST snark xD check it out on my blog when I’m done xD
But… *skims what happened* XD
we should set another over/under, I might need to rly push it up this time tho or the over would win easy xD
summer_snow: I came it across it a few days ago. Terrific work.
And oh look, in response to my declaration that MRAs can’t argue for shit, NOWslave has re-typed the MRA manifesto for us.
equal custody
live children
never have to pay alimony
access to employment based on merit
access to education based on merit
education that fairly teaches and grades based on merit
the ability to control where their taxes go, and make sure women do not benefit from them
same punishment for same crime
men not to be subjected to restraining orders
He forgot “women to accept all sexual overtures”
@eilish
Oh the things MRAs ask for, equal custody, merit based society, where their taxes go, not being evicted from their home, ect. No wonder you find it so misogynistic.
@NWOslave:
Awesome Gish Gallop there, NWO. It says that the goal is to overwhelm your opponents with questions that cannot be answered. Well? Challenge Accepted. (warning: long post ahead)
“Is it delusional to want equal child custody? (If the woman is the primary caretaker, isn’t the man who pays all the bills primary caretaker to both his wife and children?)”
No, wanting child custody isn’t delusional. But you don’t always get what you want, especially if you don’t deserve it. In cases where child custody is disputed, mothers and fathers have an equal chance at getting it.
“Is it delusional to want a live child? (abortion being the termination of a seperate life).”
If you think an egg is a live child as soon as it gets hit by sperm, then yes. You are delusional.
“Is it delusional to want to never be forced to pay alimony? (no services are being rendered what is this money for?)”
No, but again, you don’t always get what you want. From wikipedia:
“Alimony (also called maintenance or spousal support) is a legal obligation to provide financial support to one’s spouse from the other spouse after marital separation or from the ex-spouse upon divorce. It is established by divorce law or family law in many countries and is based on the premise that both spouses in theory have a legal obligation to support each other during their marriage (or civil union) or upon separation or/and divorce.”
The “services rendered” are towards the marriage (usually towards the children as well). This is part of the contract you create with your partner when you marry. If you don’t like it, don’t get married.
“Is it delusional to get employment based on merit and not gender? (How can forced quota’s ever be considered equality?)”
This is a stated goal of feminism, to not have employment be affected by gender. Forced “quota’s” (alright, seriously.. ‘s is for possesive, s is for plural) are put in place to enforce hiring by merit, and to combat employer bias.
“Is it delusional to be admitted for an education based on merit and not gender? (Again we have education based on gender.)”
See above.
“Is it delusional to have education which fairly teaches and grades reguardless of gender? (Why change education when the US was #1 across the board in reading, math and science? Is being ranked mediocre at best a better situation so the acievement gap is closed?)”
See above again. Also, you are religious, so you should know that science education is abysmal in the US, especially in the area of evolution. Most of the country (I think) doesn’t believe it exists. Attempting to use faith that you’re right, rather than facts, is part of the reason testing is so low.
“Is it delusional to have a mans taxes used primarily to benefit women? (Why does virtually all taxes go to women for health, education, employment?)”
[citation needed. really, really needed] Virtually all taxes don’t go anywhere, but a huge portion of taxes go towards the military (in the US anyway). Take it up with them.
“Is it delusional to want the same punishment for the same crime? (Equality certainly doesn’t hold women to the same accountability as men. Why is this the only part of the State where men are given extra?)”
See above, and the one above that. [citation needed], and if it is true, then yes, women should be held equally responsible.
“Is it delusional for a man to not be evicted from his home on a womans word alone? (Restraining orders assume guilt, no trial, nothing. How is this not an infringement on a mans right?)”
[citation needed so badly it isn't even funny]
“All this and so much more is the directly caused by feminism.”
Yeah, good luck showing this one.
“And here is the final word on the matter by feminist eilish, “Let’s do more mocking. Please.””
Given your expected response to this long-ass deconstruction of your list, I think eilish has the right idea.
And NWO’s ex isn’t getting any services rendered to her, either. (I’m a slow thinker)
@NWO:
“Between men dying and being incarcerated in far greater proportions than women, men simply have no power.”
I thought you wanted equality under the law, with no bias with regards to gender? Well, guess what? Most of the crime committed? Committed by men. It’s not like police are just rounding up any guy off the street, the criminals in jail almost all did something to deserve it.
What is your solution, stop jailing men? Wouldn’t that be bias towards a gender?
About equal child custody:
“SHARED parenting after separation would no longer be the focus of family law under controversial changes recommended in a government-commissioned report.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/shared-custody-laws-fail-children-20100128-n1rx.html#ixzz1SzG2bf2V
About abortion: I was chatting with one of the surgeons at our hospital, she said in most of the terminations here, the ‘product of conception’ is dead, or could never have developed into a baby.
Look! Magpie said two nearly relevant things!
*already dead
@Magpie:
Aww, don’t worry.. Either NWO has vanished again, or he’s reading my epicly long post and thinking about all the ways he could twist it to his own devices. You are absolutely relevant.
Good luck trying to convince NWO of the second one, though… He is absolutely convinced that a single cell and another single cell fusing together instantly becomes Johnny (never susie… wonder why…). Anything else is completely against common sense! Also the wife probably did something to kill off poor Johnny before it was removed. Anything else is against common sense!
Thanks Kirby. I’m not too worried about being relevant here, after all I don’t manage it very often in real life!
(I hope no one here is pregnant) the doc said ‘products of conception’ because there are a lot of ugly, unfortunate things that can grow inside someone besides booful bubbies.
“Why change education when the US was #1 across the board in reading, math and science? Is being ranked mediocre at best a better situation so the acievement gap is closed?”
Are you fucking THAT delusional? Seriously? When was the US #1 in reading, math or science? When? Never in recorded history. Ever. Secondary education in the US has always been a disgrace, for as long as anyone can remember. Except the reason it’s so abysmal isn’t women or feminism — countries that are in fact at the top in reading, math and science have rigorous curricula open to students of both sexes and focus on maximizing the use of students’ individual talents, not pigeon-holing them by gender, as you are arguing should be the rule. There are three culprits for the sorry state of American schools, in order of importance:
1. Religious wingnuts, who are opposed not only to the teaching of evolution, but to all science and indeed, all education beyond the (selective) reading of Scripture.
2. Ignorant, nationalistic wingnuts who think America is number 1 because it’s America, dammit.
3. Conservative greed, which relentlessly pressures governments to cut spending on schools and at this point, attacking public education itself — because God forbid a single cent of your money will go towards educating “someone else’s” children, whom you will nevertheless expect to take care of you in your old age.
4. Idiot parents, who think placing ANY kind of demands on children is tantamount to a crime against humanity.
Girls aren’t preventing boys from excelling.
@Amused:
I take it, with regards to NWO’s statement on US education, you are…
*puts on glasses*
Not Amused.
*YEEEAAAAAAAHHHHHHH*
Amused, don’t forget:
5. A culture that has been encouraging a doctrine of faux-populist anti-intellectualism ever since that egg-head Jimmy Carter told us we needed to get off foreign oil and the country voted overwhelmingly for a divorced, Hollywood actor who made them “feel good.”*
*Yes, I know that’s really reductive
@ Kirby
I first came across the term Gish Gallop a year ago, looked it up online, nodded my head in approval, and forgot it within a week. When Ami made her Gish Gallop card, I had to look it up again, and it was only when I saw the Rational Wiki page you linked to that I remembered having seen it before.
What a drag it is getting old.
So NWO agrees w/ Ellish we need more mocking?
Also more rape jokes! xD
http://ami-rants.blogspot.com/2011/07/ami-trish-and-zhinxy-snarkle-rape.html#more
(watch out, if you click this, you might be in danger of being raped)
xD
eilish,
“Yohami contends the video is funny because if it’s funny, that means the behaviour shown is real.”
Duh. Wouldnt that make every comedy show real as well? I dont “want” the video to be funny and Im not an MRA. My points are well stated, if you think anything at all about what I AM saying, address what Im saying, not your projections / imagination.
And Im not MRA.
“MRA arguments are a trip down the rabbit hole. Cause and effect never correlate, because they only want to make one point : “Women are bad.” If women are bad, they don’t have to take responsibility for anything themselves.”
I think they just want someone to blame for their disgrace, but, they werent doing anything for themselves before joining the MRA gang, and now that they are there, all they do is complain. Most of the people I have talked to in these blogs have victim mentality.
“Let’s do more mocking. Please.”
Ah. Now thats clever.
Eilish’s irrational tirade has been posted to the site with commentary. Thank you, Eilish.
Awesome awesome awesome xD
I did NOT know that comm existed! xD Am I there? xD I know a lot of ppl seem to HATE me xD
If I’m not there, can you quote me and put me there?
I mean there’s alrdy several forums and posts out there about how much ppl can’t stand how I write, or hate me… and there’s a vegetarian site that hates me xD
I’m VILE and HATEFUL tho… so I must qualify
There’s whole comment threads of my comments here to post xD I’m sure NWO can find you some
Srsly tho… my goal is now to get in there >:3 (if I’m not in there alrdy, I haven’t read thru the whole thing xD )
Ami: Don’t feel bad, it seems no one else knows it exists either.
FactFinder, I went to your blog but DEAR GOD THE ICONS. Now I’ll never sleep again. o.O
Since march 2011 (so… 16 months) it has gathered… 16 posts and zero friends.
You mean march 2010 or has it been for only 4-5 months? o_O
I wonder if it’ll actually quote whole things I say cuz they’re misandrist enuf or he’ll need to take little sentences out of context xD I’ve alrdy proven in a past post that I can do that to myself and take sarcastic things Ive said out of context to make myself the biggest man-hater evar XD now I’m curious which way he’ll go
and most of the posts are either from ManBoobz, or from MRA sites.
It seems factfinder has an obsession. He can’t stay away from us.
But with all the hate he says there is, it’s only one a month he manages to find the energy to write about.
sorry… brain crap. yes, four months.
He did get one comment, someone said his post was BS… he used a local custom and said, [Citation needed], right down to the brackets.
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
Am I there Pecunium?
It seems factfinder has an obsession. He can’t stay away from us.
It’s kind of like a car wreck, you know you should look away but you can’t.
No Ami: He is… though it’s not very good photography. I get a passing reference.
His idea of evil, nasty, hateful quotations is a bit odd though.
“Men’s Rights Activists. They like to complain that men are unprivileged using examples that are actually instances of misogyny coming back around to bite men in the ass.”
So… After a flurry of activity he’s sort of fallen off. But perhaps the recent comments here will inspire him to more action, and a truly amazing list of manufactured, and fractured quotations can be created.
If we’re lucky we can be on the lists of bad quotations from feminists for decades to come,
Ami: maybe not rape jokes? Plz?
Bee, spooky, isn’t it. Australian culture has less emphasis on buying/selling; and more on conforming to gender roles. e.g.”Women give sex for love and men give love for sex”. “During an Australian barbeque, the men will cook the meat outside, the women will gather around the kitchen table.” “Women talk about feelings, men talk about football.”
I have to confess: the first ( and so far only) time I ever took up the barbeque tongs, I felt a deep sense of transgression. And I’ve been a noisy feminist since forever.
Kirbywarp, I want you to know I read every word of your post twice. Solidarity, and all. You are the awesome. I mean, teh awesome. (Cool. I am not.)
I note with amusement that immediately after I complained about MRAs can’t tell the difference between things that are caused by feminism, and things that are caused by anti-feminism, NOWslave posted his list (I can’t believe I didn’t notice he didn’t mention Title X and VAWA. They’re his favourites!) of which seven of the nine are feminist goals. Which we hope one day will be achieved. (Only MRAs believe that feminism causes things feminism hasn’t achieved yet. It’s a special talent they have. Awesome, when you are looking for things to mock.)
My deepest apologies for calling Yohami an MRA. When he said,”The video depicts female manipulation properly”, and a bunch of other stuff that suggested he has a poor opinion of Women as a Whole Group, I jumped to the rash conclusion he was a paid up member of the MRA club. Clearly, the club he belongs to is “Misogynists who show up at the same time as MRAs.” I can understand why he is stung by the suggestion he displays the same ignorance and inability to argue coherently as MRAs. It’s a bitter pill. I can only say in my defence that I never read anything by commenters I believe are MRAs in any detail, because they are much funnier when you don’t listen to them carefully, and hence missed the subtle hints that Yohami prefers to hate women quietly on his own, rather than proclaim himself a member of the movement and look really stupid in public.
I’m baffled as to why Factfinder (just his name is hilarious!) thinks I will be deeply concerned/upset/what? about his re-posting of my post to whatever that site is. Any clues, anyone?
Because then you’ll become an object of ridicule among his vast global audience.
Fear the site!
If the goal is to show how awful feminists are, there should be at least one or two quotes that actually show something beyond “some women somewhere once said a bad thing about a guy.”
I want to start a campaign “GET AMI INTO FACTFINDER’S BLOG 2011!!!” xD
I think we’re supposed to feel humiliated or upset for being “outted” or something xD and then we’ll shut up and be intimidated xD
Also Ellish, we dun actually make “rape jokes”, we make jokes about the absurdity of the rape prevention tips list :3 (and the situations they fear xD )
I was being ironic w/ the “rape jokes” thing xD cuz ppl know me… but I forget that some ppl might not know me well (or at all, yet) :3
It does seem unfair, given the prominent role you play here, and especially on the forum.
Do you think an appeal to fairness would sway FactFinder?
Ami just needs to make an irrational tirade. S’easy. Point out one of the logic failures MRAs make, and Flufffinder will be thanking her in no time. (Thanks for explaining about the jokes, Ami. I was puzzled.)
I was going to go through NOWslave’s list and deconstruct what he really means: but maybe you should give it a go instead, Ami. You too could become an object of ridicule among his vast global audience. Whoo!