Blog Archives
Kate Harding Tells Men’s Rights Activists to Go Fuck Themselves
You all need to go read Kate Harding’s bracing (and given all the recent doxxing bullshit, spectacularly well-timed) Jezebel piece titled “Fuck You, Men’s Rights Activists.” Here’s a sample:
Fuck you, first of all, for making it nearly impossible for decent men struggling with abusive partners or unfair custody arrangements to get the help they need and deserve. You have forever tainted those issues with your rage-filled, obsessively anti-woman horseshit, to the point where it’s become difficult for any rational, compassionate person to trust a man who claims he’s been screwed over in family court or abused by a female partner, even if he has. …
Fuck you for showing up every time women speak, especially about rape and abuse, and trying to make it all about you. Fuck you for derailing threads about the victims of Marc Lépine, a man who screamed about his hatred for feminists as he murdered fourteen women and injured many others, because you also hate feminists and want a fucking cookie for not killing anyone. Fuck you for making rape and death threats against young women who dared to protest a speaking engagement by a man who thinks little girls would enjoy being raped by their fathers if it weren’t for society telling them it’s dirty. Fuck you for whining about how unfair it is that women might wonder if you’re a rapist when you approach them out of nowhere, while completely ignoring how unfair it is that women feel the need to be on guard all the time in public. Or that if we relax and behave normally—drinking, dancing, dressing however we want—you will be the first motherfuckers in line to blame us for getting ourselves raped.
And it keeps going from there.
Thank you Kate, for putting it so well.
On A Voice for Men, a gay MRA takes on the real enemy: stubby-fingered lesbians
Over on A Voice for Men, much-beloved commenter andybob, an honest-to-goodness gay MRA, confronts what he apparently sees as the real enemies of “real gay men” like him: stubby-fingered lesbians and the “noisy, spangled disco version” gay men who don’t hate lesbians enough.
Lesbians barged into gay men’s spaces in droves jabbing their stubby fingers at everyone. Predictably, they proceeded to boss everyone around, making the gay rights movement about them. Note that homosexuality was a criminal offence for MEN ONLY. Lesbianism was never against the law. They had jackshit to whinge about, but they made gay rights about them anyway, and used it as a propaganda vehicle to support feminism.
Notice that GLTT [sic] became LGTT? [sic] How’s that for petty entitlement? Gay men should have fought back, but, to our everlasting shame, we didn’t. The only gay men who remained in GLTT were slimy political types seeking personal aggrandizement, zeta poodle carriers and moronic party boys who don’t give a shit about anything except the pattern on the umbrella in their drinks. Of course, the MSM focus entirely on this noisy, spangled disco version of real gay men like me: men who know exactly how greedy, relentless and downright shady those lezziefems are and don’t trust them one iota.
Truly an inspiring vision of solidarity!
In the comments, Perseus seconds andybob’s hatred of “lesbian femmies.”
I’ve come across a lot of people over the course of my life, a whole range of people, a wide variety.. different cultures, different backgrounds, different types and different temperaments. Shady people, adversarial people, etc..
I can tell you that where I have experienced the most uniquely sinister, hating and conspiratorial sensation has been from encounters with true-blood lesbian femmies. It’s as if they can barely contain their loathing. They have that look of someone who has been talking insane shit about you, conspiring and plotting intensely against you, and would stab you right on the spot if they could get away with it.
Project much?
Lesbian feminists place themselves behind the scenes, using hetero-females as their curtain. They regard hetero-females as immature, naive useful idiots, the former using the collective sexual and feminine power over men, of the latter, as the levers of manipulation that they wield. How far do you think a bunch of gumballs like Naomi Wolf could really have taken this thing?
Lesbian femmies, we’ve got an eye on you, you’re on notice.
Considering how utterly disposable regular females regard males as, how amplified does that disposability become to a creature which doesn’t even see that shred of value in him as a heterosexual mating utility?
Their hatred for males manifests in two objectives: 1) to injure and destroy and 2) to manipulate and control, to the fullest extent possible.
Nuttin wrong with bein gay. Somethin wrong with acts of evil..
Naturally, both andybob and Perseus received only compliments for their clear thinking from the assembled AVFMenners.
Andybob only dealt with the first two letters of the LGBT acronym; I shudder to think what he must feel about the other two.
If you stand for Men’s Rights, you’ll fall for anything
Gullibility, thy name is Men’s Rights Subreddit.
So, a day or so ago, a troll graced r/mensrights with a tale of imaginary woe about a bad breakup and its aftermath that seemed was designed to push a whole bunch of Men’s Rights hotbuttons all at once.
Lo and behold, the locals bit, and in the process revealed not only their incredible gullibility but also what you might call a highly blinkered view of modern relationships and social etiquette.
Today the troll fessed up, but not before the r/mensrights crowd, taking his tale for the truth, offered him some truly terrible advice laced with lots of righteous indignation.
Here’s the not-exactly-believable story the troll told them:
A Man Going His Own Way explains his quite possibly imaginary life
Another good reason to avoid strange women.
Over on the A Voice for Men forums – yes, they have forums – one Man Going His Own Way spells out exactly what he means by His Own Way. Here’s misterbill:
For me, MGTOW has three major components:
1. Refusal to cohabitate with a woman
2. Avoidance of fatherhood like the plague
3. Avoidance of being alone in a room with a strange woman (for fear of false accusations)
These are the core elements, IMO.
I’m not celibate, I get sexual satisfaction from several call-girls that I’ve built good rapport with over a few years. I’ll visit one of these women whenever I feel like it, usually once a month or so.
I have what I would describe as a female companion who others would describe as my girlfriend. We don’t have sex, not because I’m not attracted to her, but because my fear of possibly getting her pregnant petrifies me beyond belief. So we hang out 2 days a week and have very nice times together, going on about 5 years. She understands my beliefs and that we will never live together and that I don’t believe in the myth of love.
So I’m MGHOW, but not without women.
I’m 41 and fairly wealthy. In my 20s and through to of my early 30s ( although I wasn’t a PUA) I studied game theory and in combination with other aspects of my life, I had no trouble getting laid. Then a woman made a false accusation against me (and was further slandered by another), and I began to wake up to the perils of having sex with (and interacting with) strange women. The risks outweighed the benefits, and I turned to going my own way.
I travel on business frequently and the one exception to my rule with being alone with strange women is the easy pickings while traveling. There is a rule amongst many women that if you’re 500 miles away from home, it’s not cheating. I see this a lot with many married women. Gents, her vows mean NOTHING once she gets on a plane without you. Although I wouldn’t allow any of these women into my home, I accept the risk when I’m traveling. And there is always a risk of running into a psycho who is ready to explode.
I don’t really have any jokes here. But I will note that his story doesn’t make a lick of sense; I find it literally unbelievable.
He’s so paranoid about women because of a “false accusation” leveled against him back when he pursued women using “game theory” that he literally refuses to be in the same room with “strange women” – or even interact with them. Yet when he’s traveling he suggests he routinely has sex with “strange” married women. Huh? These women could still get pregnant; these women could still make accusations, false or otherwise, against him. Does he feel safe because he can skip town in a hurry to avoid the possible consequences of his actions?
He’s (allegedly) been involved in a 2-day-a-week relationship, for five years, with a woman he’s sexually attracted to. But he refuses to have sex with her because he’s terrified of getting her pregnant. If he’s that worried about getting her pregnant, and generally wants to “avoid … fatherhood like the plague,” why doesn’t he get a vasectomy? If, after he sleeps with a married woman in a strange city, she gets pregnant with his child, does he simply assume she’ll never be able to track him down?
I’m going to assume that most if not all of what misterbill is saying here is bullshit. But if he does indeed live his life in way that even vaguely resembles how he says he does, it’s a rather sad and strange and paranoid way to live.
American women: Monopoly capitalists of the vagina?
Men are tired of masturbating with the dead hand of capital!
Most manosphere misogynists lean to the right. But every once in a while I’ll run across an MRA who considers himself a man of the left. Today, while perusing the Spearhead, which generally appeals to some of the more reactionary MRAs and MGTOWers, I ran across a most intriguing example of the Manosphericus lefticus.
“Davani” describes himself as “a socialist and a supporter of women’s rights,” explaining that
the last thing I want is some kind of uneducated, barefoot-and-in-the-kitchen woman who I can’t even have a conversation with on any intelligent topic.
But Mr. D is a most unusual sort of socialist-feminist indeed. You might call him a Socialist of the Penis. Or, rather, a Socialist for the Penis. As he explains,
I am all for egalitarian culture (e.g., expanding women’s rights), but only if the women themselves are egalitarian. In the US, much more so than anywhere else, they are not.
Redditors shocked — shocked! — to find racism in the White Rights subreddit
A group of totally not racist white people who just happen to love riding ferris wheels dressed in white robes.
So the other day, whilst poking around on Reddit, I took a look at one of its more charming subreddits: r/whiterights – a subreddit full of racists who spend a good deal of their time (as dedicated racists do these days) to pretending that they’re not really racists, just good-hearted folks really really concerned about the plight of white people facing “minority oppression.”
Amidst an assortment of posts complaining about evil brown immigrants, “Jewish Power,” and the internal politics of neo-Nazi organizations, I noticed a posting from our old friend JeremiahGuy — the latest Reddit handle of the dude once known as Things Are Bad, an MRA so obnoxious he’s been banned from r/mensights and A Voice for Men.
Jeremiah links to a post on MGTOWforums –- another familiar name! — lamenting the fact that a black “fattie” has just been chosen as Homecoming Queen at the University of Mississippi – that is, the famously racist, formerly segregated school known as Ole Miss.
A Voice for Men commenter on feminists: “What we’re dealing with is not human.”
Dehumanization, old school style.
Today, a rather alarming, but also quite revealing, little screed by Darryl X, a regular commenter over on A Voice for Men.
It’s from the discussion of the AVFM post by Aimee McGee that got the fellas at MGTOWforums so worked up the other day. But Darryl has a somewhat different take than the fiercely woman-hating MGTOWers.
He takes aim not at women as a whole, but at certain vaguely specified “monsters,” by which he apparently means anyone who stands in the way of angry dudes getting their way, particularly feminists. The only examples he gives are women, but it’s pretty clear he hates feminist men with equal fervor.
In what follows, I have cut out a few sections that addressed McGee personally so as to make Darryl’s “argument” a little more streamlined and clear.
Meet the enemy, according to Darryl:
What we’re dealing with is not human. These things, these monsters, I’ve studied them inside and out for decades.
They must be disposed of without mercy and with extreme prejudice. One is enough to take down a nation if not the world.
Manosphere civil war? MGTOWforums vs. A Voice for Men
Uh oh! Do I sense a manosphere civil war coming on? Over on MGTOWforums, some of the regulars are spitting mad at A Voice for Men. In a thread with the lovely title “So it begins: AVfM diluted by cuntspeak,” the MGTOWer calling himself fairi5fair takes aim at a recent post by – get this! – a woman on AVFM.
Reddit MRA upvote brigade to the rescue! Or, the Battle of the Urban Dictionary Atheism+ Definition
Reddit MRAs, heeding the call to service, once again prove what dedicated activists they are. Check out the upvotes on this baby!
Today Urban Dictionary, tomorrow the world! (Also, check out those tags!)
New Men’s Rights hero: the Cleveland bus driver who punched and choked a female passenger
The bus driver winding up for the punch; the passenger’s arms are by her side.
Men’s Rights Activists have a new hero: a Cleveland bus driver who punched and choked a belligerent female passenger who had apparently refused to pay her fare.
The top post in the Men’s Rights subreddit at the moment, with more than 500 upvotes, links to a petition urging the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority to reinstate the bus driver, Artis Hughes, who was suspended after video of the incident leaked out. (See videos here and here.) According to the petition,
As a bus driver, mr. Hughes was lied to, insulted, threatened and eventually attacked by one of the passagers. He was clearly justified in striking back. Were he to suffer any negative consequences to his employment as a result of defending himself and striking back, this would set a disasterous precedent: he and other employees would legitimately believe that their workplace expects them to put up with harrassment, and that they will lose their jobs if they choose to stand up for themselves. …
As well as being a bus driver, mr. Hughes is a man, and [Shidea N. Lane, the passenger] is a woman. We continue to live in a world in which some people see fit to scold men for fighting back against the women who abuse them. After mr. Hughes struck ms. Lane, a woman could be heard protesting about it, saying “That’s a [censored] female”. Mr. Hughes responded by saying: “I don’t care. You want to be man? I’m going to treat you like a man!” This is a healthy attitude: if men refuse to strike back, fearing that the law will favour their female abusers over them, we create an environment in which women can harrass and victimize men with impunity. Instead, a man’s decision to fight back against a woman should be respected.
It is for these reasons - the fact that the bus driver was the real victim and was justified in hitting back; that he and other bus drivers should not fear the legal consequences of responding to attacks by passagers; and that men in general should not fear the legal consequences of responding to attacks by women - that we urge you to reinstate mr. Artis Hughes following the investigation on the incident, and hope that future policies will safeguard him and other bus drivers from legal assault whenever they respond to a passager’s physical assault.
