A dude named Sizzletron shares his “honest opinions that are entirely merit-based, about women.” (Spoiler alert: They actually aren’t.)

This picture has nothing whatsoever to to with the post. I just like it.

This picture has nothing whatsoever to to with the post. I just like it.

It’s Friday. Why not welcome in the upcoming weekend with a picture of an anarchist cat and a completely unrelated, completely unhinged manifesto from the MensRants subreddit, the Men’s Rights subreddit’s unruly younger brother.

In a post with the somewhat roundabout title “Just posting this publicly gives me an ulcer. But I won’t let it stop me,” an angry fella who calls himself sizzletron set forth his opinions about, well, a lot of things having to do with women. It’s a piece that’s pretty much impossible to summarize, since sizzletron apparently finds it difficult to keep the thread of an argument going from one sentence to the next.

Let’s dig in:

I think most women are very unfamiliar with being challenged to be better adults. I also think I have a lot of honest opinions that are entirely merit-based, about women.

We’re off to a good start with two sentences that have no logical connection to one another aside from the fact that their author is really, really mad at women.

I think that collectively most women, in the West especially, don’t have an understanding of ANY motivation that doesn’t support women blindly.

Uh, what? Motivation? I’m beginning to get the impression that sizzletron chooses a lot of his words by flipping through books and pointing at random selections.

For example, chivalry should dead and gone by now. I know it. Most guys who aren’t trying to get laid dishonestly know it. So why do women persist with claiming some sort of implicit right to it? Because it obviously benefits them to have men do shit for them, protect them (often from themselves, which would be hilarious were the net result so often fatal, or judicial, again for men), provide for them, admire them, pedestalize them. Feminism isn’t helping women. It’s putting baby in a very stupid, very un-respectable corner.

What does this even mean? How is chivalry the same as “putting baby in the corner.” Also, since when are feminists the ones promoting chivalry/

But sizzletron quickly moves on to a new topic: women’s intelligence.

Women are getting stupider by the day. Not hyperbole. Intelligence isn’t getting book smart. Intelligence is problem solving on your own without the agency of a mob apparatus.

What? What agency? What mob? What apparatus? WHAT IS GOING ON?

Ask me how much I actually respect the advances, societally, of a mob of hairshirts-for-men feminists? Not even a bit.

Wait, feminists are making men wear hairshirts? Even as a weird metaphorical accusation that makes no sense. People in certain religious traditions wore hairshirts as a way to show repentance; they didn’t force other people to wear them.

Now how many of those same organizations and feminists are alluded to lamely in a debate-by-the-numbers exercise that regularly passes for a discourse on gender relations?

Ok, I give up. I have no idea what the hell he’s even trying to say here.

You know what I do everyday?

Smoke weed? Read the “Ziggy” cartoon in the newspaper? Have a bowel movement?

I read the fashion mags my GF’s sister bequeaths us. My respect for women has absolutely PLUMMETED since I started doing so. Vacuous, vagina-centric, vapid, vicarious, venereal-in-waiting. All the ‘V’ words.

Uh, vicarious? “Venereal-in-waiting?” If you were going for something that was even vaguely coherent, you probably should have stopped with “vapid.”

But Mike, what about the good women, they aren’t all self-interested limelight addicts expecting money for nothing and sex for free. No, you’re very correct about that.

Ooh, a Dire Straits reference. It doesn’t actually make much sense, but way to show you’re up to the minute with what the cool kids are listening to these days.

But they aren’t calling out the chickenshit manipulations of the modern feminist message, either: You can be a strong respectable female AND a major victim when it bloody well suits you to do so. You can identify with abused women even if you’ve never been abused.

Yeah, I think that’s called “empathy.”

Blindly protect women without ever asking how much of the modern women’s plight is due to or contributed to by stupid women. Let’s start IQ testing all the victims of abuse and see what the median average is.

You’re going to blame the victims of domestic violence because you think they’re “stupid?” Really?

Really. Let’s do it! We’ll never know if I’m right until we do.

You’re an even bigger asshole than I thought. And I already thought you were a huge asshole.

Let’s start statistically plotting women’s propensity for violence, for ignorance, for mindless sorority.

Yeah, I’d love to see THAT chart.

Let’s start calling women out for being shallow appearance-concerned adults with a blind eye to the very pretense of such. No one really cares about your fucking furniture, or your sense of style.

Wait. Now you’re mad at women for having nice furniture?

No one of ANY value gives a shit about that stuff. Blowhards do. Frauds do. People who can’t DO, do.

Backing away now.

It is high time women grew the fucking pair they keep insisting they have, or STFU about it already. You’re starting to look like fools. I can’t ignore it any longer.

STFU about what? What is “it?”

And to all the white knights out there, stow it. <===This last line is for the benefit of my FB ‘friends’.

What a treat it must be to have Mike/Sizzletron here in your Facebook feed.

About these ads

Posted on February 21, 2014, in are these guys 12 years old?, block that metaphor, boner rage, chivalry, citation needed, crackpottery, creepy, evil women, excusing abuse, I'm totally being sarcastic, irony alert, kitties, mansplaining, men who should not ever be with women ever, misogyny, MRA, pedestalization, reddit, victim blaming and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 32 Comments.

  1. Hey Dave & company. Speaking of Dire Straits, I just listening to “Sultans of Swing” on the radio this morning…..damn, is that tune awesome. =)

  2. Because it obviously benefits them to have men do shit for them, protect them (often from themselves, which would be hilarious were the net result so often fatal, or judicial, again for men)

    As you all know, not a native speaker, BUT shouldn’t there be a “not” in this sentence? Isn’t he saying that it would be hilarious if men died (while protecting women from other women)?

  3. Feeling really bad for this dude’s girlfriend, and for her sister.

  4. Now how many of those same organizations and feminists are alluded to lamely in a debate-by-the-numbers exercise that regularly passes for a discourse on gender relations?

    He should look up the the definition of “allude”.

    Vacuous, vagina-centric, vapid, vicarious, venereal-in-waiting. All the ‘V’ words.

    Va va voom, Vietnamese, viscous, Voodoo, V: The Mini-Series

  5. Is this guy saying that feminists love women’s magazines? Of course you can be a feminist and still read them sometimes. I’ve done it. But feminists have criticized them plenty. I don’t think he did his research.

    Also, if you’re going to criticize people for being stupide, you should make sure your own post is at least somewhat coherent.

    Maybe my lady brainz are just too full of shoes and make up thoughts to comprehend his majestic and revolutionary prose style!

  6. Now how many of those same organizations and feminists are alluded to lamely in a debate-by-the-numbers exercise that regularly passes for a discourse on gender relations?

    Ooo, ooo, I get what he’s saying here!

    He’s saying that when you cite sources or provide facts gathered by others instead of just assfax as he prefers, you’re the one who’s being anti-intellectual and lowering the standards of the debate!

    Checkmate, feminists!

  7. Put down the Cosmo, dude. That rag has very little relation to real life.

    He writes like he’s 80 and has never actually met a woman.

  8. Furniture mags are what has this guy’s undies in a bunch?

    I wonder if he’s worried about hard chairs or soft ones? Sofas? Although, if he wants to take a stand against chaise longues, I’m totally with him. No one should be proud of having chaise longues. Chaise lounges. Longueseseseses. Those fainty-couchy things that I can never remember how to spell.

    And tassels. Tassels are contributing to the downfall of western civilization, and that’s real.

  9. He’s saying that when you cite sources or provide facts gathered by others instead of just assfax as he prefers, you’re the one who’s being anti-intellectual and lowering the standards of the debate!

    AHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!! I HATE this line of sloppy thinking. I blame Fox News.

  10. And tassels. Tassels are contributing to the downfall of western civilization, and that’s real.

    That must be why our kitty overlords love to play with them. Tassels are a tool of the Furrinati.

  11. Let’s start statistically plotting women’s propensity for violence, for ignorance, for mindless sorority.

    Yeah, I’d love to see THAT chart.

    LOL. I love how Mikey thinks throwing the word “statistically” in there turns this raging screed into a science project.

  12. Delurking cuz this was so glaring to me:

    “No one of any value” cares about sense of style at all, because that’s shallow. So it would have to be safe to assume that Sizzletron here wouldn’t care if a woman, say, didn’t shave her legs? Right?

  13. Hello, SeaLenz! Please enjoy your complimentary Welcome Package!

    You’re forgetting that buying matching towels or having nice furniture is shallow, valueless style. Women refusing to shave their legs or (heavens forfend!!) their armpits is against the Right and Proper Order of Nature!

  14. Ooh, a Dire Straits reference. It doesn’t actually make much sense, but way to show you’re up to the minute with what the cool kids are listening to these days.

    Now trending on Twitter:

    #HowDoIWorkThis
    #LargeAutomobile
    #MyBeautifulWife

  15. read the fashion mags my GF’s sister bequeaths us. My respect for women has absolutely PLUMMETED since I started doing so.

    My respect for non-misogynist men has not been diminished by all these impossibly stupid, poorly written, irrational manosphere hate rants, because I don’t ignorantly stereotype large swathes of humanity. Unfortunately, since Mikey finds empathy incomprehensible, I’m guessing bigotry comes easy to him.

  16. I don’t read fashion mags myself. Is incoherence a common result of reading too many of them? Or is it that he’s been fapping off too much over the models in them?

  17. Fizzletron reads fashion magazines everyday, and from these he’s formed an “honest” and “merit-based” opinion of women. And all women everywhere are the ones who lack intelligence.

    Blindly protect women without ever asking how much of the modern women’s plight is due to or contributed to by stupid women. Let’s start IQ testing all the victims of abuse and see what the median average is.

    Ah, I see, he’s just an abuse apologist. A woman gets beaten and abused because she’s stupid; not because the one doing the beating and abuse is an asshole.

  18. And a really scary thing about that whole “let’s chart the IQs of abused women” part is that historically, people (especially women) who are likely to have markedly lower IQ test scores - namely intellectually disabled people, cognitively disabled people, developmentally disabled people, mentally ill people - have an especially high risk of abuse from their families, caretakers, and spouses. This is the kind of ableism that gets disabled people killed.

  19. “No one of any value” cares about sense of style at all, because that’s shallow. So it would have to be safe to assume that Sizzletron here wouldn’t care if a woman, say, didn’t shave her legs? Right?

    Sizzletron himself has evolved beyond the need for clothes. Or couches.

  20. These guys like to argue that their “standards” regarding female attractiveness are biologically based, and at the same time, they denigrate any woman who spends time focusing on her appearance. Yet again, women are wrong no matter what they do. You’re ugly — you’re a terrible person. You spend time trying to look good — you’re a terrible person. I’m beginning to sense a pattern here…oh yeah, these assholes just flat out hate all women.

  21. I’m calling “cool story bro” on his claim to have actually read a bunch of women’s magazines. He clearly wants to distance himself from the source, so he came up with the sketchy “my GF’s sister” angle.

    Also women’s magazines are an ubiquitous target of MRA contempt, so much so that they function as part of the Unholy Trinity of Female Suckitude, along with Sex in the City and Jezebel.

  22. Somebody should “bequeath” him a stack of GQs, Esquires, and Playboys, so his respect for men can similarly plummet.

  23. He forgot the most important V of all: Ventriloquist.

  24. @Ivy shoots I don’t read the rest of Esquire, but I do like reading Charlie Pierce’s work on their politics blog. He has a propensity for using ableist language when referring to the fringier aspects of conservative err… thought. However, his analysis is usually good

    Also, his blog has the best motto “Fk the deficit, people got no jobs, people got no money.”

    As to this asshole in the OP, this screed seems fairly generic. Sounds a lot like the people yelling about kids these days and their rap music.

    The lack of coherence wasn’t even entertaining. 2/10.

  25. All the Vs? Really? So:

    Vibrant, Vital, Verified andVictorious

  26. Okay, so…I’ll see if I can try making sense of that. Deducting from other commonly used complaints and insults made by other MRAs and misogynists, I think he’s trying to make the following points:

    - Women try to fool themselves and each other into thinking they have any strength or independence, when really they need men (and the government) for everything.
    - Women having lives of their own = abusing men.
    - Treating women like human beings is special treatment, because it’s better than they deserve. As they’re actually less than human beings.
    - Women who are victims are not actually victims. They deserve whatever abuse they get because they actually bring it upon themselves due to their own stupidity. And it’s unfair and wrong that other people actually care about them.
    - Women, keep silent about your real problems because they make *my* life less convenient.

    Blech. That was disgusting to type. I need a kitty:

    Ah, that’s better.

  27. That’s a good point Mklein. Is this d-bag trying to say that it’s OK to abuse people with a low IQ? As the sibling of someone with an intellectual disability and as a half decent person the thought leaves me sputtering with rage to the extent that I can’t even say anything articulate about it.

  28. Yes, how dare women’s fashion magazines be all commercial and only caring about fashion. They should be running articles on modern issues, STEM fields, and atheism. You know, like men’s fashion magazines do.

    Also, what’s really funny about the Dire Straits reference, not only does it show that he’s heard “dadrock” before, but the song itself is about making fun of people who think the life of a rockstar isn’t work by having two lowlives. So basically, by making that reference, he’s being said lowlife thinking that the life of a woman is not working at all.

  29. @opium, I wasn’t criticizing those magazines; I just know they all give fashion, grooming, and dating advice just like the women’s mags do.

  30. I would agree with this statement:

    I think most women are very unfamiliar with being challenged to be better adults.

    Because most women are (a) not adults or (b) not terribly awful people.

    However, most adult women are have experience with the type of BS coming from misogynists like sizzleton. The misogynists may think this BS is “challenging” us to be “better adults” but no, its not. It’s just annoying, and in some cases harassing and depressing, noise.

    And look what happens when the misogynists are challenged to be better people.

  31. Let’s start statistically plotting women’s propensity for violence, for ignorance, for mindless sorority.

    I’m thinking of a Quaker or Buddhist Greek establishment called The Mindful Sorority. Somebody ought to try to set something like that up. Obviously, though, Mr. Sizzletron is not the man for the task.

    No one really cares about your fucking furniture, or your sense of style.

    How strange. That’s what Simone de Beauvoir said, and she said it much better.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,408 other followers

%d bloggers like this: