Friday, January 14, 2011

Ten years, ladies. Then the sexy lady robots will make you obsolete.

Ladies: Here is your nemesis.
Too much bad news on this blog of late. So today I bring you some truly good news for modern man. Not so much for the ladies, though. Apparently you gals are on the verge of becoming obsolete.

Or so says the fellow calling himself PatRiarchy -- clever! -- one of the unwitting contestants in Feministe’s Next Top Troll contest. Yep, flesh-and-blood ladies, watch out, because sexy lady robots are on the way:

Soon we men will no longer have any need of you at all and females will die out. By 2020 there will be the first full functioning android released onto the market. To be politically correct it will be a female. But economically it will be female becasue men would be prepared to pay a once off cost for never having to compromise and she would never take his kids. She can look like any female he wants and to his exact specifications. She will have great physical strength. Every piece of information ever recorded in human history at her fingertips. Including the Karma Sutra.

Yep, the Karma Sutra. It's a lot like the Kama Sutra, except once you master the Reverse-double-cowgirl-butterfly position you transcend the realm of suffering and escape the cycle of rebirth.

Back to the sexy robot ladies:

She will be better than any natural Western female on Earth. She will be supportive of everything he does. And the cost to keep her is significantly less than any Western female. So as time goes on the investment becomes amortised.

Amortized, bitches! Fucking A. Mort. Ized!

Ok, some of you human ladies must be thinking, will your ability to pop out babies keep you from being consigned to the scrapheap of history? That would be a big no.

Soon we will be able to create and grow perfect male humans in vitro without ever having to worry about what harmful things a mother may ingest.

So there.

The weak perish and you have allowed yourselves to become weak by claiming to be victims and thus claiming privileges whilst never having to be reponsible for your actions. ... When there’s no more mooching off men your fortunes will rapidly change and you will disappear. We’ve carried you for 3.5 MILLION years. Image what we can achieve with all the resouces that are saved from not having to support females. It’s a BRAVE new world dawning girlies and unless you grow up fast and stop whining and get doing you will fail.

Here's an actual photograph of what it was like 3.5 million years ago. As you can see, the Australopithecus dude is doing all the work while the gal, who's not even all that pretty, is dancing around like an idiot.





 --

If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly* use the "Share This" or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.

*Yes, that was a Bioshock reference.

71 comments:

  1. Hey, you omitted the beginning, where he makes it clear he is talking to a queer person. Actually, since he was responding to a comment by me, I can say that I explicitly identified myself as transgender/genderqueer as well. Because nothing says "please address your entire comment to hetero cis women" like starting out with the name of a queer person and a bizarre screed about moving to queer utopia.

    You know, I have dated women and I actually like some people, you know, damned flawed human people (but, of course, he can't imagine that men are human with flaws as well).

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hmmm . . . I wonder what Pat will be able to offer a fully-functioning, sentient lady robot with "great physical strength," and "every piece of information ever recorded in human history at her fingertips." I am your creator/owner, love me! has not been a long-term convincing argument, historically.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm not going to lie - that sexbot picture is almost as creepy as the dudes claiming it's the way of the future.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "I wonder what Pat will be able to offer a fully-functioning, sentient lady robot with "great physical strength," and "every piece of information ever recorded in human history at her fingertips."

    That information will, of course, include the thoroughly convincing arguments that men who claim to "own" sentient human beings are douchebags; that any being that's physically stronger and more knowledgeable than her "owner" naturally deserves to be the in position of authority in the family, and have her obviously inferior "owner" submit to her (hat tip to John Dias); and that hey, Jesus Christ, why do you have to put up with this guy's stinky farts and greasy love-handles when you can have a physically perfect robot?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Question: why wouldn't the women get sex robots? I don't know about you, but a fully-functional robot in every way identical to Johnny Depp seems like it would be amazingly popular.

    Besides, as a practical matter, people want to talk to other people, not to robots programmed to like them, no matter how hot they are.

    ReplyDelete
  6. what I loved most about that comment is the fact that he thinks that you don't need a woman's body to do in vitro

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ozymandias, that's what confuses me most about the sexbot rant. He seems to think that if you could replace women sexually you could remove all their power. The only power of a woman is the power of her allure. Women would be powerless to purchase their own sexbots, have their own children made in those artificial wombs, and would therefore slowly die out. All because men no longer desired them.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Davey:
    How many of these comments are genuine responses, and how many are sock puppets chewing the feminist philosophical cud with you?

    ReplyDelete
  9. @sc

    Do you want to call anyone in particular out on being a sock puppet, or are you just going to keep on trollin' along?

    Sock puppets are pretty easy to spot. Most writers are incapable of editing out their tells and idiosyncracies, and the timestamps on the posts also often give them away.

    ReplyDelete
  10. @Ozymandias

    We will all have our sex robots, looking like Johnny Depp, Pamela Anderson, whatever floats your boat. The only problem is being able to afford these things. Poor people will be stuck with smelly humans.

    And talking is overrated, anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Heh the equivalent to this would be some male robot with an ATM machine attached to it. That would be the primary focus to these certain women besides the sexual stuff.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Ok, I admit it. I'm Santo Christoforo, MD. I'm trolling myself.

    ReplyDelete
  13. nick:

    I know that is the extreme position, that men want young hotties and women want rich old dudes, but how do you square that with the fact that most of the people we see walking around are in relationships with people around the same age, level of attractiveness and socioeconomic status as themselves?

    I would feel extremely comfortable saying All of the ladies I know would prefer a robot man to be fun to be around, interested in the world, and willing able to pick up after themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Technologically its already possible to have human reproduction without men (although not practical in the least). I'm pretty sure that, if anything happens, the male gender will go obsolete first.

    Female reproductive organs are just much too complex.

    ReplyDelete
  15. David, my nemesis does not have pigtails.

    ReplyDelete
  16. This guy expects way too much out of his sex androids. Particularly the cost benefits and babysitting abilities. Service androids would need maintenance much like cars to stay pretty. Wigs and damaged fake skin would have to be replaced lest she start looking as shabby as a real woman, and moving parts would have to be kept in good repair for obvious safety and 'karma sutra' reasons.

    Probably you should plan on the upkeep being more comparable to a luxury car than a used car - after all, no one cares if all the panels on your 1991 Ford are all different colors, but how would you like your 10-year-old robot girlfriend to be a patchwork quilt of races and features? Especially if the location or frequency of the repairs tells everyone how you prefer your business. And have you ever tried to match carpet or paint for patch jobs when samples of the original are no longer available? Fake skin would be just as bad. And don't even think about routine maintenance - how much would you charge per hour to replace the worn-out naughty bits on the sex androids of skeevy men?

    You could just toss her when she looks too worn and get another one, or lease them from the sexbot dealership. Either way, like Thomas said, sexy sex-bots will be a rich man's toy.

    As for looking after his hydroponic children, have fun when they get old enough to hack her. Any guy who is counting on getting a robot to raise his kids should plan on doing a lot more actual parenting himself.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Hide and Seek-- Speak for yourself. I want a robot man with a vibrating dick and a strong resemblance to Mr. Depp.

    I have real men for the other shit.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Now come on Kyso-you just ruined the fantasy for these poor men trying to avoid human females in all ways.

    Now virtual women like lifesized versions of Sim 3 women...that is where these guys would really score the perfect woman.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Hey, I'm not saying it wouldn't be worth it. Plenty of people love their luxury cars, after all, and plenty of other people make a great living selling them things :) I'm just saying, if you want one all-purpose robot slave, you've got to be prepared to care for it properly. Or dress it modestly when it's serving drinks at your parties or poker games to cover up the scars.

    Probably the best thing to do would be to have two androids, one madonna for domestic purposes and a whore for sexytime purposes. This divides the wear and tear and keeps your peccadilloes private. For instance, if you're a hair-puller you can get lazy about replacing the sexbot's wig until it really needs it if you have a separate maid/mother-bot with her own hair. Try to keep the sexybot kind of nice, though, because your kids will find it eventually and there's a limit to how poor a message you want to be sending with this arrangement.

    Wow, this getting expensive and confusing. Women must really be complicated if replacing them with appliances is this involved.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Wow. what an exciting blog. I wonder if they make a lesbian version of the robot. I am not a lesbian but many of my friends are and this would get them off my back.

    ReplyDelete
  21. This guy's obviously never taken a biology class.

    You can't make a baby out of just sperm, you're missing 23 chromosomes! The ladybot doesn't have any chromosomes.

    So? Are the ladybots just going to clone the man they're with and make it a child? Because that would be pretty stupid. Having a large gene pool means that there's variation which helps when there are new or stronger diseases. Clones, or any kind of asexual reproduction makes the species very vulnerable to mass death and extinction.

    Are the ladybots going to MAKE DNA? Or will they have human female eggs stored? Because if they do, you can't let all women go extinct, you need to harvest their eggs...

    And, not even talking about reproduction, what happens when the natural resources run out? You know, the metals and fossil fuels, and the like? Will ladybots be handed down from generation to generation? "Son, I want you to have Pamalina Jolenson. I've cleaned out her sperm receptacle."

    And if they have a mind that's able to support and praise a man without being simple pre-programmed statements, and if the ladybots have all information on hand, automatically, won't they be or become aware of the oppression they face?

    All-in-all, it's an idiotic dream.

    All in all, this plan sucks.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Oops! My unfinished comment was published when I thought it was lost to the internets, will you erase it please, Mr. Blog-runner-sir?

    ReplyDelete
  23. You realize you can erase your own comments, right? There's a little trash can icon next to the time and date when you post them.

    (Having said that, watch me be wrong.)

    ReplyDelete
  24. The trash can disappears if your browser logs you out again after you post.

    ReplyDelete
  25. theclementine said...
    "I'm not going to lie - that sexbot picture is almost as creepy as the dudes claiming it's the way of the future."
    Think that's creepy? You should see what real women look like without their faces.

    Sandy
    "He seems to think that if you could replace women sexually you could remove all their power."

    Well not exactly. Not ALL of your power.

    Just the part that gives you enough leverage to make all talk of male control and oppression sound like so much utter nonsense to male ears.

    Just the part that gives you enough leverage to make men such as David throw his fellow man under the bus to get positive female attention hence the downward social and political spiral that is misandry.

    Just the part that gives you enough leverage to make you NOT FUNDAMENTALLY OUR EQUALS.



    Also you feminist types have some pretty weak ideas of what a 'sexual replacement' (for lack of better words) might be like.

    For one thing it's VR tech that will likely get there WAY faster than robotics AND way cheaper.

    But even THAT is not really thinking outside the box.

    nicko81m said...
    "Heh the equivalent to this would be some male robot with an ATM machine attached to it. That would be the primary focus to these certain women besides the sexual stuff."

    I always imagined an ATM machine with a built in vibrator and a recording of a male voice saying "Your more important than the universe and all parallel universes combined" on a looped tape playing over and over again.

    ReplyDelete
  26. @evilwhitempire My sex robot would NEVER omit an apostrophe.

    ReplyDelete
  27. LexieDi
    "And, not even talking about reproduction, what happens when the natural resources run out? You know, the metals and fossil fuels, and the like? Will ladybots be handed down from generation to generation? "Son, I want you to have Pamalina Jolenson. I've cleaned out her sperm receptacle."

    More lack of imagination from the supposedly creative gender.

    We grow kids in women genetically altered to serve as 'superwombs' (think living breathing fertility figures without head or limbs).
    Then we grow other genetically modified women to serve as sex slaves. (think Priss from Blade Runner) We'll even extend their telomeres so they won't grow old so fast.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Veralidaine said...
    "@evilwhitempire My sex robot would NEVER omit an apostrophe."

    We ll mine would cos mine would not be programed to prof red for gramaticle erors and smugly sight them for ad hominm a tac porposis as if they wore a refutition of the thory of relatvty as is customry for a lot of (mostly feminst) femals and sisy boys to doo.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Funny, because if you google "men are obsolete" you will get all sorts of main stream media articles celebrating the male decline. I have also read several short stories by feminists about societies where men are either relegated to slave status or locked in insemination warehouses. It is a common fictional plot device, so I am not sure why this guy is any different.

    This is interesting because one man having a rant is considered a threat by you.

    If feminists find it valuable to imagine worlds without men, I think it is very interesting to imagine a world where female sexual power is removed from society. If women lost the ability to attract men with sex, they would have to find other ways to attract them. (I say they because I am married and out of the game.) There would probably not be many male robots-many women look for different things in a man a robot cannot provide, such as an income and the idea of true love (the sex part most women can get without much trouble).

    It might be good for women to have to compete with a robot...it would make us strive to better ourselves.

    Besides, I would have thought this robot would do you all a favor...take all those icky sexual men out of the equation so the world would be filled only with sensitive, feminist guys.

    You cannot be pleased.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Oh, and as for the picture...I would like to see you bring down a wild gazelle with a rock and a stick.

    ReplyDelete
  31. The Biscuit Queen: Funny, I just googled "Men are obsolete". You're right that there are a couple of pieces on mainstream articles (an op-ed in MSNBC and a link to the Telegraph that doesn't work).Funny how none of the top links are actually feminist sites, or feminist news sources.

    I've been going around the feminist blogosphere a lot, and I have yet to read a single piece in any notable feminist blog (e.g. Feministing, Shakesville, Feministe) that actually celebrates the end of men, or denigrates men as a gender.

    Could you link me these supposedly ubiquitous short stories by feminists where men are enslaved or are locked in "insemination warehouses"? I can't seem to find any.

    ReplyDelete
  32. @LexiDi

    "This guy's obviously never taken a biology class. ... You can't make a baby out of just sperm, you're missing 23 chromosomes! The ladybot doesn't have any chromosomes."

    The chromosomes are not a problem AFAIK--get them from some other dude's genome, and splice them in.

    The real technical problems are much worse: no eggs, and no wombs. Without eggs, there's nothing to fertilize. And without a womb, there's nowhere for the embryos to develop. So even cloning wouldn't work without tech that is way more than 20 years off, if not completely impossible.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Well, one could freeze a large number of eggs which could be used for many generations. Problem is, the vast, vast majority of men would not want to live in a world without women, no matter how aweful those women may get. So even if one or two loonies wax poetic about a womanless world, it will not happen.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I did not claim that these feminist stories were ubiquitous, any more than you are saying these stories about a womanless world are ubiquitous. My point was that there are also women out there who dream of the same thing.

    I don't save links to the majority of what I read, sorry. If I can find it in a fairly quick search I will post it.

    MSNBC and other media outlets are far more sympathetic to feminist causes than men's issues. I would go so far to say they are in many ways feminist.

    ReplyDelete
  35. evilwhitemaleempire: "Think that's creepy? You should see what real women look like without their faces."

    WOW. You really said that?

    That's seriously disturbing. Just, wow.

    ReplyDelete
  36. EvilWhiteMaleEmpire: As of right now... none of that is possible. It's not about being "creative" it's about being realistic and why you're not going to have ladybots in 10 years... It's not possible outside of science fiction novels right now.

    I never saw Blade Runner. And if you just genetically modified human women to be sex slaves, they'd still have a brain and at least some would still want (and deserve) equality.


    Joe: As far as I know, you can't splice the DNA from two same-sex couples yet. And lets just say that you could. That would mean that, for the most part, the man-child would be part of both dudes and the dudes would be forever linked in the making of that child. What if the bromance fades? Then you get custody battles, I suppose.

    And yes, you have no eggs and no wombs. Either way... babies will not be made in this manner in 10 years.

    ReplyDelete
  37. These creepy loners can go off with thier robotic girlfriends to their parents' basements or one room apartments or darkened hotel rooms. The rest of us real men and women will live lives of love and laughter, sharing, growing, caring, not ever missing them at all.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Veralidaine: An apostrophe AND an E!

    I was just thinking "What does my moneyvibebot mean? My important universe? What what?!"

    ReplyDelete
  39. I also googled 'men are obsolete' and got 1/3 conservative columnists squawking about feminism, 1/3 recycled news stories about a research team that made sperm from bone marrow and 1/3 results for a book that is specifically asking the question about black men, which was probably not addressing the question from the same place as Biscuit Queen.

    I'm not sure I know what stories Biscuit Queen refers to. Almost every example I know of where the plot of the story involves some kind of deliberately man-hating matriarchy, the point is that some guy stumbles in and teaches someone how to love. That's supposed to be the conflict, I guess.

    I am willing to believe there are feminist scifi/fantasy stories about how unrelentingly awesome a world without men is, but I'm not sure where I'd look for those stories outside a feminist bookstore or maybe a used bookstore of the more eccentric type. Or livejournal :) The most mainstream example of that story I can think of is a Futurama episode from the third or fourth season, which I promise is not too terribly feminist.

    It is true that some scientists believe the y-chromosome is in decline and some news stories will use "men are becoming obsolete" as the hook, but now other scientists say the y-chromosome is not only not in decline, but is super-awesome at evolving. Either way, no big changes are in store for men before women become obsolete in 2020. I'd be panicking about that, but PatRiarchy seems to think the 2020 versions will also provide moral support, babysitting, and presumably housework, so I just might be interested in buying one myself. She could be my friend during the long lonely years ahead. Hey - the problems caused by the sexbots also have an android solution! We should devote the rest of this thread to picking out stocks in relevant companies - there's clearly money to be made here.

    ReplyDelete
  40. There was a prime time reality television show about all the women leaving for a period of time to show how inept the men would be without them. That was fairly well known.

    http://www.afterellen.com/archive/ellen/Print/scifi.html

    Here are a few stories about feminist, lesbian utopias.

    ReplyDelete
  41. There was a movie once that had no female characters except maybe one or two bit parts. I think it was called Master and Commander. Or maybe Glengarry Glen Ross. Crimson Tide? 12 Angry Men?

    http://www.imdb.com/keyword/all-male-cast/

    ReplyDelete
  42. @ The Biscuit Queen:

    Just read your link, and I have to say - none of the 4 books mentioned at the end were worlds in which "men are either relegated to slave status or locked in insemination warehouses". In one of the books about "feminist, lesbian utopias", women are actually enslaved by men. Only two of the books feature scenarios in which men as a gender have died out - neither are presented as utopias. And, as your link explicitly points out, "these utopias often excluded men not because the authors necessarily hated men, but because of a desire to envision a world in which power was not located in one (male) sex."

    So - I'm still wondering where are your examples of feminist, man-hating stories in which men are chattel and harvested for their sperm or whatever. Because clearly, since they are not very commonly found, then they can't be really representative of mainstream feminism or feminist literature.

    ReplyDelete
  43. LexieDi said...
    "And if you just genetically modified human women to be sex slaves, they'd still have a brain and at least some would still want (and deserve) equality."

    Not necessarily.
    The limbic brain could be genetically altered to make them actually want to please us. To feel wonderful when they succeed and feel awful when they fail to do so.
    Us ordinary humans are only selfish because evolution makes the limbic brain that way. (A 'natural' limbic brain is optimized to make an animal survive on it's own terms for the sake of it's DNA.)
    But these creatures would no more want to 'rebel' than you or I would want to stop breathing.
    They could even be given superhuman intelligence (massive neocortex) and it would not affect their 'loyalty' at all so long as we control how the limbic brain gets 'hard wired'.

    "As of right now... none of that is possible."

    Well duh. OR we'd have done it by now.

    shiloruh said...
    "These creepy loners can go off with thier robotic girlfriends to their parents' basements or one room apartments or darkened hotel rooms. The rest of us real men and women will live lives of love and laughter, sharing, growing, caring, not ever missing them at all."

    And further overpopulate the planet with more gits too no doubt.

    ReplyDelete
  44. I'm going to ignore evil's really creepy comment and just note that Left Hand of Darkness isn't about an all-woman world at all:

    "On Winter, gender does not exist; instead, the planet’s people are androgynous until they enter a stage called kemmer, during which they take on male or female sexual characteristics in response to their companion."

    ReplyDelete
  45. Well, Mr. Futrelle... You got to admit that evil's name pretty much sums up his vision for the future, eh?

    ReplyDelete
  46. Evil:

    Well sure. And I could be genetically altered to spit bonbons.

    I guess if you're going for that "anything is possible" mindset that could happen, sure.

    I love how you talk about how humans are wired to be selfish and the whole original post shows off how selfish some people are.

    Anyway, yes, it's not possible now. It won't be possible in 10 years, either, if it is ever possible. And if it becomes possible, well-balanced men probably won't take advantage for long if at all.

    ReplyDelete
  47. theclementine said...
    "Well, Mr. Futrelle... You got to admit that evil's name pretty much sums up his vision for the future, eh?"

    Oh, there will be plenty of evil in the future.
    Just not my evil.

    ReplyDelete
  48. theclementine said...
    @ The Biscuit Queen:

    ..... "men are either relegated to slave status or locked in insemination warehouses"

    ..... still wondering where are your examples of feminist, man-hating stories in which men are chattel and harvested for their sperm or whatever


    http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/LGB.asp

    DiManno, Rose (radical feminist)
    “Men are from another planet, sent here by spaceships to copulate with female earthlings and propagate the species—a task for which science has rendered them all but redundant.

    We need keep only a handful of donors on a sperm farm for that purpose, where they can subsist on pizza and beer and Playboy magazine.”

    (Toronto Star, January 11, 1999, p. 31)

    ReplyDelete
  49. Is there a main stream story about a world where women are gone and men reproduce themselves and have robot girlfriends?

    No? I didn't think so.

    My point was that while there indeed is a fringe story about an all male world there are stories about women doing the same thing. The Amazon legends are the same type of story. There is no comparable society for men only.

    A movie about areas of life historically with no women such as Master and Commander or 12 Angry Men have nothing to do with imagining a world where one gender is wiped out. That was a very lame comparison. The Red Tent is a book about women set in a female only space of the mentrual tents of the middle east in Biblical times. Certainly I would not say it had anything to do with this subject. There is nothing wrong with writing a story about one gender.

    ReplyDelete
  50. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utopian_and_dystopian_fiction

    Check out feminist utopia about half way down. Apparently this is a recognized genre.

    ReplyDelete
  51. @LexiDi

    > What if the bromance fades? Then you get custody battles, I suppose.

    LOL

    ReplyDelete
  52. Yohan, please show me the context in which Rose Dimanno said those things. The whole column. That reads like she's joking.

    A little bit of googling reveals that she's a newspaper columnist for the toronto star, and generally speaking there aren't a lot of radical feminist newspaper columnists.

    Also, that list you linked to completely misrepresents Judith Levine by quoting things she's written that are summarizing the views of others, not stating her own views.

    This is not the first time you've posted a list of "evil feminist" quotes that grossly misrepresent people. If you keep posting these same lists the only conclusion I can draw is that you are deliberately misrepresenting feminism to score a few cheap points.

    ReplyDelete
  53. You mean like this whole blog deliberately misrepresents the men's rights movement?

    ReplyDelete
  54. "A movie about areas of life historically with no women"

    Well, actually, many of those on the lists take place in contemporary society. So either we conclude from this that women are still being kept from certain arenas of life, or that the writers/directors are perhaps being sexist, or that for whatever reason they want to depict worlds that are all male.

    The fact is that despite the endless complaints about "misandry"in popular culture, movies are FAR more likely to feature men as the main characters and women as afterthoughts or "love interests" or essentially as sexy scenery than to feature women as the main characters/prime movers in the plot.

    Movies that effectively take place in all-male (or close to all-male) worlds are so commonplace that almost no one even bothers to raise questions about them. But when women write about all-female worlds it's suddenly, ZOMG they want to kill all men!

    ReplyDelete
  55. "You mean like this whole blog deliberately misrepresents the men's rights movement? "

    Well, no, because I don't misrepresent the people I quote. If you can find examples of me taking quotes out of context in such a way that I suggest that someone is saying the opposite of what they are actually saying, please post them.

    When I quote someone with a particularly weird or extreme view I make clear that these views are not generally shared in the MRM. In some cases I feel justified in making generalizations -- like saying that misogyny is common in the "manosphere." I feel comfortable in dong that because I can cite dozens if not hundreds of comments to that effect, comments that are often upvoted or agreed to by others, or at the very least not challenged.

    If someone isn't explicitly identified as an MRA, I don't label them as such. Many of the people I quote here are from MGTOW message boards and I identify them as such. I do not know if they consider themselves MRAs -- though many of them no doubt do -- so I identify them as part of MGTOW, not the MRM.

    You and other critics claim all the time that I'm misrepresenting the MRM. In doing that you are, yep, misrepresenting me.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Aren't men also obviated by this technology? Why does lady-borg need a dude?

    ReplyDelete
  57. David: Yohan, .....This is not the first time you've posted a list of "evil feminist" quotes that grossly misrepresent people.

    This is not my list, I gave merely a link to another website. Not even an MRA-Website, not the DailyMail...
    http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/LGB.asp

    -----

    About 'quotes' grossly misrepresenting people, you are really good with that, David, when it is against the MRAs.

    You are browsing MRA-forums with a fake-ID, copying some sentences out of context and are claiming that's the general MRA-way of life...

    ReplyDelete
  58. You do not make it clear at all that you are not labeling the entire MRM.

    The real estate world is dominated by women, and the movie is 20 years old. Even 20 years ago there would likely have been a woman in the mix. There are many, many real estate businesses these days who have all female staff. Would you consider that sexist?

    Crimson Tide is about a submarine crew. The logistics of making a sub gender divided are impossible. If there was interest and ability to woman an entire sub I think the majority of folks would have no problem with an all female sub crew. But to attempt to have two separate quarters in a sub is stupid at best.

    These few movies do not really reflect any true disparity.

    There are many movies being made today with mainly female casts, where men are a sideline at best or bad guys. The difference in genres is that 'chickflicks' tend to be romances because that is what women are paying to watch. Men enjoy watching movies which solve a problem or in which the characters act like young boys, and women enjoy watching movies which explore interhuman relations and/or where characters explore their freedoms. These trends are enough that Hollywood offers these options in the majority of films.

    Women are not kept out of any areas of life except combat. It is not men's fault that women choose rarely to go into certain fields. Would you blame women for men being so rare in nursing or teaching?

    ReplyDelete
  59. BQ: "You do not make it clear at all that you are not labeling the entire MRM."

    So it's my responsibility if you jump to conclusions?

    In any case, because some idiots do keep jumping to conclusions, I put a note about this in the fucking FAQ, for fuck's sake:

    "2) That every post I make about an individual Men's Rights Activist or antifeminist is intended as a critique of the Men's Rights Movement as a whole. Nope! Not all feminists agree on everything; not all MRAs agree on everything. When I critique an individual, you should take that as a critique of that individual. Though sometimes the things these individuals think are things that lots of MRAs think, which brings us to to our next item in the list."

    Do I need to put this at the top of every page in giant red blinking text or something?

    ReplyDelete
  60. Actually, I have gotten so sick of this particular pointless argument that I have once again put a disclaimer in the sidebar.

    ReplyDelete
  61. If the "American Women Suck" site put a disclaimer saying they are not criticizing women as a whole, yet the content stayed the same, would that convince you that they were not characterizing the whole group?

    It wouldn't convince me, just as your disclaimer does not keep me from noting that the content of your site is pretty solidly attempting to dismiss men's issues.

    If you were really just looking at misogyny, the term MRA would never be posted in the articles. It would not be relevant, as you would only be dealing with individuals, who may or may not be MRAs.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Uh, is the name of this site "Men Suck" or "American Men Suck?" No. Do I make generalizations about all men? No. Do I criticize misogynist men (and women)? Yes.

    Do I dismiss real men's issues? No. Do I dismiss made-up or exaggerated claims about male victimhood based on poor logic and dubious statistics? Yes.

    This blog started off focusing on the MRM. The more I looked at the MRM, the more misogyny I found. When I expanded my focus to look at MGTOW -- related to and overlapping with the MRA but not identical with it -- I found even more. I became more interested in misogyny, and changed the focus of this blog to concentrate on that.

    Since I am more interested with misogyny that's used to support dubious politics rather than random misogyny on, say, video game message boards, I still focus most of my attention on misogyny in the MRM andMGTOW movements.

    There are MRAs who are not misogynist, and perhaps even a few MGTOW who aren't, though given that MGTOW is all about avoiding women, that's a little rarer.

    I draw the material for this blog from "mainstream' MRA/MGTOW sites -- the sites that MRAs/MGTOWs flock to online. Only very very rrely is the misogynby I fnd there challenged by anyone on these sites, and in many cases there is a lot of support for these misogynist positions and a lot of attacks on the very, very few people who do challenge this misogyny.

    If you can point me to an MRA site or message board that is largely free of misogyny, I would love to take a look at it.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Biscuit Queens home site is Stand Your Ground, this site has rules about global generalizations etc. It excuses boorish behavior as “ranting”.

    However she has her eyes in the sand. Most of the members there are also members of much more radical sites, which she does not ever look at.

    After reading this post I looked at SYG. BQ asked about radical mra sites and was happy to note that these sites really were not REAL mra sites.

    Head in the sand labels The Biscuit Queen well. She is very well meaning but has been feed a line of bull crap a mile thick and believes every word of it.

    BQ. Instead of asking the guys on your board about radical mra sites why don’t you google them and then make up your own mind? Spend a couple of hours reading the posts on American women suck, or the spearhead. Then defend.

    ReplyDelete
  64. @Joe

    "Sock puppets are pretty easy to spot. Most writers are incapable of editing out their tells and idiosyncracies ..."

    Especially YOU Davey-boy, er Joe, er ...

    ReplyDelete
  65. Huh. Interesting that you should show up posting a comment about "sock puppets" and referring to me "Davey-boy" only a few minutes after one "Ernest Chatham" shows up in another thread here ... posting a comment about "sock puppets" and referring to me as "Dave."

    http://www.manboobz.com/2011/01/different-kind-of-flapper.html?showComment=1295500068666#c1968311352887281159

    Is the sock-puppet accuser himself a sock-puppet?

    ReplyDelete
  66. Davey-boy and Dave, now there's a tell-tale correlation if ever I saw one. "A few minutes after one 'Ernest Chatham' shows up (...) posting a comment" that I read and with which I am in full agreement. OK, I won't call you Dave anymore, but I sure as heck won't call you Sherlock (or Einstein either).

    ReplyDelete
  67. Her name is Kathy (Kathy!) Curtis. (Curtis). That is her name...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2qrs-R5hYM

    ReplyDelete
  68. 2020 seems late, dude. wasn't Kelly LeBrock supposed to have taken this dude out on the town thirty years ago?

    ReplyDelete
  69. If we could grow babies in artificial wombs, then that would be a huge deal for assisted reproduction technology. I just don't see anything like that happening anywhere in the near future. I also wonder what DNA codes children would have if they had fathers but not mothers, only incubators. Then I again I shouldn't put this much thought and effort into some crazy guy's ideas in the manosphere.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Sociable

ShareThis