Search Results for bardamu
Big Manosphere Reveal: Matt Forney was Ferdinand Bardamu
Matt Forney’s a dick, so here are some goats in a tree.
Longtime readers of Man Boobz may remember “Ferdinand Bardamu,” the pseudonymous blogger behind the thoroughly despicable In Mala Fide blog. How despicable? Well, once upon a time, “Bardamu” wrote a post with the lovely title “The Necessity of Domestic Violence,” in which he set forth the proposition that “[w]omen should be terrorized by their men; it’s the only thing that makes them behave better than chimps.” Yeah. It was that kind of a blog. You can find some more of Bardamu’s terrible thoughts in the MB archives.
Ferdinand Bardamu: “Women should be terrorized by their men; it’s the only thing that makes them behave better than chimps.”
We talked a bit yesterday about pick-up artists and domestic violence – specifically, Heartiste’s suggestion that aspiring alpha males look to Chris Brown as a role model. So today I thought I would take the opportunity to write about one of the skeeviest and most notorious posts the manosphere has generated thus far – Ferdinand Bardamu’s “The Necessity of Domestic Violence.”
Bardamu took down his blog In Mala Fide some months back – I found the text of his post up on Manosphere Copies, a blog set up by the even skeevier MRA who goes by the name Jeremiah (aka JeremiahMRA, aka Things Are Bad) to host posts from manosphere blogs that are no more. In Mala Fide, which combined elements of PUA, Men’s Rights activism and “Human Biological Diversity” style racism, had a great deal of influence in the manosphere in its day. Bardamu published reprehensible things with regularity – see here, here and here for examples – so his defense of domestic violence is hardly unexpected.
Ferdinand Bardamu Caught Monologuing Again
“You don’t know the power of the dark side!”
Is there something about being an MRA that makes you want to monologue like a cartoon supervillain?
Over on In Mala Fide, our dear friend Ferdinand Bardamu has responded in an amusingly monologuey manner to Arthur Goldwag’s followup to his earlier article for the Southern Poverty Law Center on the Men’s Rights movement. Bardamu whips himself into a bit of a lather, describing “Snerdling and his compadres” – for some reason he’s decided to call Goldwag “Snerdling” – as the
vanguards of a dying institution, desperately jamming their thumbs in the dike to keep the truth from drowning them. They’re on the losing side of history. Their shrieks are the shrieks of the dying and damned.
Their shrieks?
Oh, but there’s more. This earlier comment in Bardamu’s post is sort of a classic in the “implied threat” genre so beloved by MRAs like Paul Elam and his gang:
You’ve bitten off far more than you can chew here. You’ve antagonized the fastest-growing and most relevant movement/entity in America and the Western world. With every sling and arrow, the manosphere swells in size, a voice for the most powerful and deadliest force on Earth — the disenfranchised young man.
Emphasis mine.
Amazingly, in the very next paragraph, Bardamu waxes indignant that Goldwag had the gall to refer to “threat[s], overt or implicit, of violence” from MRAs. Bardamu responds with a big, insincere “who, me?”
I’ve made threats of violence? Leftists always pull this game — they never give specific examples … .
You want a specific example? LOOK AT WHAT YOU JUST WROTE IN YOUR LAST FUCKING PARAGRAPH. That bit about Goldwag allegedly antagonizing “the most powerful and deadliest force on Earth — the disenfranchised young man?” That is an implicit threat of violence. It’s kind of hard to miss.
You want to see more specific examples of threats from MRAs? I’ve got post after post full of them.
Heck, he doesn’t even need to look at Man Boobz. All he needs to do is to look at the comments on his own post, starting with the very first one:
SPLC: Thanks for kicking the sleeping dog,that dog needed to learn to bite rather than sleep.
Then he can scroll down the page for this more explicit threat from Brigadon:
I prefer practicing real, unmistakable violence.
Further down the page, in response to a feminist who has stopped by to call the IMF regulars on some of their bullshit, Brigadon elaborates further:
I have called it a ‘war’ before, and I will again. It is not a cold war, it is a hot war, with constant and socially-approved violence against men. The only way to fight a hot war is with violence. …
So, maybe it sounds like a call for violence, but at this point any woman that calls herself a ‘feminist’, regardless of their protests that they are ‘not like those other ones’ Is a criminal, a traitor to their species, their culture, their honor, their family, their nation, their gender, and their world. There is only one punishment that fits a traitor.
How dare Goldwag suggest that MRAs ever threaten violence!
Apollo, meanwhile, somehow manages to overlook the threatening language in Bardamu’s post and suggests that the real threatmongers are … you and me:
[T]he Internet is full of people making violent threats. … Yet in the Manosphere, where I think real injustices are being brought to light, and people surely have a right to anger, you will NOT see the threats of violence that are so very common in so many other places of the Internet. When such a violent comment does pop up in the Manosphere, it is usually very quickly squashed by mods. And any such comments stand out simply because of how rare they are.
Yet one visit to Manboob, or any other Feminist site, and you will be able to quickly be able to find threats of violence. The blatant hypocrisy here is just sickening
[Citation Needed]
Also, though this is a whole other kettle of beans, the fact that Goldwag is Jewish seems to have inspired a number of the anti-Semites in the In Mala Fide crowd to crawl out from under their rocks – one of them being our old pal JeremiahMRA, who weighs in with a comment calling Goldwag a “creepy Jew,” in two words combining anti-Semitism with “creep shaming,” which in the weird world of the manosphere is the most hateful kind of hate ever perpetrated upon any mortal soul. (Goldwag offers a brief but pointed response to Bardamu’s post, and to the anti-Semitism, on his own blog.)
Is any of this really surprising on a blog whose name means “In Bad Faith?”
Someone posted this in the comments a while ago, and I couldn’t help but think of it as I wrote this post:
Yes, MRAs, you ARE the baddies.
Ferdinand Bardamu to fat chicks: don’t make me want you!
Syndrome, the king of monologuing.
As you may be aware, Ferdinand Bardamu of In Mala Fide has taken a brave and bold stance against “fat chicks.” That in itself is not very surprising, or interesting, really. But in a recent post he offers a take on the fat acceptance movement that betrays an strange bit of … paranoia, maybe?
After a few uninspired swipes at “fat-assed she-beasts and big-titted blubberboys” and the “femilosers” on Tumblr who recently batted around an anti-“fat chick” post from his blog, he makes this strange pronouncement:
These histrionic little girls are full of it. They don’t want fat acceptance — they want to FORCE men to be attracted to their endless rolls of fat and their cheesy crotch creases. Fortunately, their emotional delicateness will ensure that they will fail. We are the Patriarchs, and we’re coming to take back what’s ours. Beware.
Ferdy, don’t worry. The fat chicks of the world aren’t going to FORCE you to lust after them, and wouldn’t even if they could. I haven’t conducted a poll or anything, but I’m fairly certain that the fat women of the world are just fine with you not being attracted to them. Heck, I’m pretty sure most skinny women would prefer that you not be attracted to them either. They really don’t want your lucky charms.
Also, the weird little bit at the end there, the thing about “coming to take back what’s ours?” In The Incredibles, they called that “monologuing.” I don’t know quite what motivates so many manopshereians to want to talk like comic book supervillains. But it is sort of adorable.
Warren Farrell on Unemployment, Salesmanship, and Other Things That Are Like Rape, Supposedly
Warren Farrell: “We are still requiring men to be the sexual salespersons but now defining them as rapists when they do it well.”
Warren Farrell, as a sort of “elder statesman” of the Men’s Rights movement, may have gained a sort of weird respectability simply by being around as long as he has, and because he’s published books with major publishers. But the myth of Farrell’s intellectual respectability shatters pretty quickly once one takes a good, honest, and unbiased look at what he has actually written, in The Myth of Male Power and elsewhere.
We’ve already taken a look at some of the strange and troubling things he wrote about rape in that book. Farrell is also fond of rape as a metaphor, and regularly compares things that men endure to rape, as a way of bolstering his overall thesis that it is men, not women, who are the “disposable sex,” and who truly suffer.
Abused women “demand” their abuse: How MRAs make the abusers’ arguments for them
An Orlando man, Faron Thompson, was recently charged with battery and child neglect after an altercation in which he allegedly tried to force his fiancée to swallow her engagement ring when she tried to leave him. (More details here.)
This sort of abuse is depressingly commonplace when women try to free themselves from abusive and controlling men; indeed, if I posted every news account along these lines on this blog I wouldn’t have time to do anything else.
No, I mention this case because something that Thompson reportedly told police reveals a lot about the mindset of abusers. When they arrested him, police say, Thompson complained that:
Women always claim assault, but never accept responsibility for provoking someone.
That is how abusers think.
It’s also how a lot of MRAs think.
Indeed, when I read Thomson’s reported remarks, the y immediately brought to mind something written not that long ago by Karen Straughan, the YouTube videoblogger who goes by the name of Girl Writes What. Straughan describes herself in her A Voice for Men bio as “the most popular and visible MRA in North America,” and given the rapturous reception her videos get on You Tube and on Reddit, this may not be an idle boast.
In the rather revealing Reddit comment I’m thinking of (which I blogged about earlier), Straughan suggested not only that abused women regularly “demand” the abuse they receive, but that many of them also get some sort of sexual charge from it. Oh, I’m sure she’ll deny that she really meant all that, but I can’t see any other way to read the following.
Oh, and in case you were wondering what article she’s referring to in the last paragraph — the one she says isn’t “seriously ethically questionable” — it’s a post from the repugnant Ferdinand Bardamu arguing that men should “terrorize” their partners because that’s the “the only thing that makes them behave better than chimps.” For more about that charming piece, titled “The Necessity of Domestic Violence,” see my post here.
I’m having less and less of a problem with calling the Men’s Rights movement “the abusers lobby.”
I’m sure there are some MRAs who are as repulsed by Straughan’s argument as I am. If you’re one of them, and want your movement, such as it is, to be remembered as something other than “the abusers lobby,” you need to call out all those MRAs who make such arguments. Might I suggest that you start by challenging the “the most popular and visible MRA in North America,” otherwise known as Girl Writes What?
The Asshole Monologues: Glori-US Bastard tells “feminist, American Woman, and White Knights” what’s what
I know I’ve asked this before, but what exactly leads so many MRAs and PUAs and so forth to monologue like mad scientists and/or comic book supervillains? In the past, I’ve noted this in the writings of “Ferdnand Bardamu” of the late, lamentable In Mala Fide. But this sort of thing is everywhere. It’s amazing how many manosphere manifestos seem to be leading up to a malevolent “muahahaha! And now I will have my revenge!”
The MRA who calls himself Glori-US Bastard provides us with a convenient recent example in a post with the somewhat baffling title “Dear feminist, American Woman, and White Knights-a message from those who no longer desire you.”
GirlWritesWhat on “The Necessity of Domestic Violence”: “I don’t really find too much [that's] seriously ethically questionable.”
Yesterday, we took a look at Ferdinand Bardamu’s manosphere manifesto “The Necessity of Domestic Violence,” a thoroughly despicable piece of writing that concludes:
Women should be terrorized by their men; it’s the only thing that makes them behave better than chimps.
I decided to take a look at Bardamu’s post yesterday after running across a discussion of it in Reddit’s new FeMRA subreddit, a forum ostensibly devoted to what “women can do to advance men’s rights as women.” It’s a strange little subreddit, started by a man and dominated by some of Reddit’s most unsavory MaleMRAs, some of them banned in the regular Men’s Rights subreddit.
Meet the Enriching Vibrants (and a bunch of plain old racists).
Then In Mala Fide may be right for you!
I took a look at the always reprehensible In Mala Fide today, and ran across a very strange post indeed, written by someone calling himself Finndistan. Entitled “The Unfuckables,” the post started off by recounting a conversation that allegedly took place in the real world — the same real world, dear reader, that you and I live in.
Three guys sitting, good looking girl passes by, easily a nine.
“She’s beautiful man,” says one.
“Who?”
“That one. But she likes enriching vibrants.”
“I’d rather fuck an orc as now that looks more attractive to me.”
WHAT. THE. FUCK. is an “enriching vibrant?”
I look through the rest of the post. The strangeness continues:
It seems that fucking and enriching vibrants is becoming a fashion. Fine.
The only thing is this, I am an immigrant. Neither do I enrich, nor do I vibrate;
For me, and for many other men, Finnish, Western, non-Western, these women are undateable.
For me, and for many other men, these women are…
Unfuckable.
Once you let your pussy be enriched by a vibrating man’s rod, you radiate that. You shine in the dark.
You are an enriched vibrant-fucker.
You are unfuckable.
I look through the comments and find at least one reader as perplexed as me. Ferdinand Bardamu, the terrible human being behind In Mala Fide, steps in and clarifies that “vibrants = immigrants.”
That doesn’t really clarify very much, as Finndistan says he’s an immigrant, too. Nor does it explain all the “vibrating” nonsense. I return to the post, and find Finndistan working through a labored comparison with a Japanese nuclear disaster:
Fukushima was enriched. It was full of enriched plutonium. Then the earth vibrated.
My utmost respects go out to the men who sacrificed themselves to keep the disaster in check. Their debts will never be repaid. Not by a society that has alienated its men to the point of men dropping out of society in the millions.
What I am talking about is Fuckushima.
Fuckushima was enriched. It was full of enriched spermanium. Then the bed vibrated.
Fuck me if I sacrifice myself for that.
Ok then.
Setting aside Finndistan’s bizarre visions of nuclear spermageddon, I’m still perplexed as to why some immigrants – sorry, vibrants – are evil and “enriched” and “vibrating” while others – like Finndistan – aren’t?
I go to Finndistan’s own blog in an attempt to make some sense out of whatever the fuck he’s on about. I find a post entitled “The Fashion of Fucking an Enriching Vibrant - The Curse of The Unfuckables.” It starts out with this:
Allright,
We foreign men have a problem with The Unfuckables.
The women who got vibrated by enriching cock.
The women who got enriched by vibrating cock.
The women who got enriched by a vibrant.
The women who got vibrated by an enricher.
That’s no help. I go to another post in which Finndistan purports to explain his strange terminology. Entitled “The Unfuckables - A sensible explanation,” the post offers anything but that.
An Unfuckable is a woman who has gotten fucked by an enriching vibrant. Out of love, passion, of fashion, it does not matter.
Intimate contact, any kin[d] of penetration, and any kind of fluid exchange suffices.
Ok, then, I ask again: WHAT. THE. FUCK. IS. AN. ENRICHING. VIBRANT?
If I go into so much detail into The Unfuckables, I should go into some detail about enriching vibrants, enriching vibrating cock, vibrating enrichers etc.
I will call them vibrating enrichers, as this is the term I like most.
Being a vibrating enricher is a choice, so it is not something you are born with (cough cough), or something you cannot grow out of (cough cough)…
Before we go into choices, let’s go into what is not Vibrating, or what is not Enriching, thus what is also not supported by the state, the humanists, the multicultists, the diversity lovers.
Finndistan then lists a bunch of “acceptable” immigrant types, including:
The indian looking kid dressed in a smart business suit apparently having an after meeting beer with his Finnish colleague also dressed in a business suit. …
The middle eastern kid married to the same woman since I met him, who sired two kids, and is an honest working man.
The black dude who speaks perfect BBC english sitting on the table with two clearly high class Finnish girls. It is highly possible his clothing is tailored.
And then, on to those dastardly “vibrating enrichers.” Another list, including:
African kid coming over and immediately adopting to the American Gangbanger style.
The kid who’s wearing the saggin’ jeans with golden “Thug Life” embroidered throughout his ass
The middle easterner with the fake Armani shirt, pluched eyebrows, designer shapes shaved into his hair and make up on his face. …
The guy who’s choosing the gangbanger, the apaci style, over having any decent style, even including the Jersey Shore Douchebaggery. …
Basically anybody who is enriching the culture with their radioactiveness, and vibrating the culture with the vibration that made their homeland a place worthy escaping from.
So any woman who, er, exchanges fluid with any “enriching vibrant” man thus makes herself, in Finndistan’s eyes, an unfuckable.
Amazingly, the regulars back on In Mala Fide are able to get the gist of Finndistan’s rants without going to all the trouble I did. Ryu, the dude behind a blog titled White Nationalist Think Tank, comments:
Ah. So you’re talking about mixers – women who sleep with blacks, mexicans or muslims.
It’s just a step above beastiallity in my book. Her race and people are on the ropes. Enemies everywhere. Demographic crisis in the waiting. Then to show off how hip and tolerant she is or worse, to satisfy her own libido, she beds down with a protected group.
They are traitors, some of the worst offenders. The most beautiful woman in the world loses her charm after mixing. She’ll sleep with anything. Included are Heidi Klum, Nicole Kidman, and many of the people adapting negro babies.
Aleph Null adds his completely non-racist opinion:
I’m not a racist, except in the sense that anyone who recognizes reality in the USA is branded as a racist. And besides, I’m married.
But I have a very pragmatic reason for not wanting to bed a woman who “enriches vibrants.” African-Americans have 20 times the rate of Gonorrhea infection compared to whites, and 9 times the rate of syphilis and chlamydia. Blacks are 14% of the US population but accounted for 44% of new HIV infections in 2009.
The phrase “I wouldn’t fuck her with your dick” comes to mind.
PA, easily adapting himself to Finndistan’s odd lingo, adds
I find white women who slept with well-tanned enriching vibrants viscerally repulsive. Even if she’s a 9, I wouldn’t fuck her. There is something vile and unclean about her aura.
This is no offense to enriching vibrants — I wouldn’t feel that way about a non-white woman who is otherwise attractive, but who presumably has previously slept with her own kind.
A fellow with the oh-so-clever nickname Eugenick shares his racial and sexual fantasies:
I would love to enrich some Japanese, Korean or Chinese chicks myself. I could pass on my White genes for independence, individualism and creativity, while they would contribute a high IQ mean for the future generations to revert to, as well as a better predisposition for working hard. Maybe such hybrids would be the new master race. After all, marvels like Hong Kong and Singapore have emerged from the combined efforts of Asians and Whites.
Sadly, I live in a Eastern European country where the main vibrant minority are low-avg-IQ Gypsies, and Asians are close to none.
Marcus Marcellus helps to clarify what is implied when Manosphere dudes talk semi-euphemistically about the evils of women who choose “thugs” over “nice guys” like them:
To me, any white girl who kneels before a black American and puts his cock in her mouth is completely tainted trash. There’s a level of submissive degeneracy that I cannot cross. It’s a very dark, quasi-rape issue actually. …
Today, a good 10% of these Millennial sluts are actively chasing their negro a la Hollywood star, except instead of adopting one they sleep with one…until he murders them – or just beats them badly.
A whole treatise could be written on the psychology behind the current phenomenon, one that would not please feminist women as it would reveal the masochistic element in women’s sexuality. Personally, I’m only dating girls who don’t complain when I occasionally use the “n-word.” It’s a way to vet them without doing some creepy background checks. I do not hate blacks; I just don’t want to breed with them.
I would think almost any woman would be overjoyed to discover that men like these consider her “unfuckable.”
The Pussy Fountainhead
If you ever use the phrase "pussy fountain," it had better refer to this.
As a regular chronicler of the Manosphere, I’m used to reading a lot of truly horrifying shit. But even by Manosphere standards, the following stood out. It’s from our good pal Ferdinand Bardamu of In Mala Fide, who felt the need to end a recent post by putting this image in my brain:
Among my friends, all of us are splashing in the pussy fountain. Some are sipping, others are gulping, but none of us are thirsty or dehydrated.
So now it’s in your brain, too!
In case you’re wondering, this came from a post in which our intrepid pussy fountain splasher argued that men
shouldn’t trust men who can’t get laid — they are opportunists who will betray you for the slimmest chance of scoring some pussy. … I wouldn’t be friends with a man who was perennially hopeless with the ladies. I might empathize with him, but I wouldn’t want to be near him. So you should live your life as well.
After reading this, I instantly developed a similar policy of my own. I don’t want to have anything to do with guys who refer to sex as “splashing in the pussy fountain.” In fact, I’d really prefer that there were no such guys.
