Thursday, April 21, 2011

Men Who Hate Women, and the Women Who Love ... Porn

Cats also love porn.
So the guys over at MGTOWforums.com – who want nothing to do with women but somehow can’t stop talking about them all day every day – have some interesting theories on why some women like porn so much, sometimes to the point of addiction. 

According to the aptly named womanhater, it’s because they’re picking up tips; apparently, the better women fuck, the better they can fuck guys over:

Women (a few exceptions aside) see sex the same way a lumberjack sees a chainsaw - a useful tool. If they're 'addicted' to it then my guess is that they're in fact just studying it because they know it is their competition and they'd better learn how to do it like the men they hope to manipulate and extort want it. It's like any other form of physical performance - you get better by watching the professionals. There's not a man among us whose swing wouldn't improve if we spent several hours a day watching professional golfers.

True, at least that bit about golf. Based on my admittedly limited exposure to her work, I’m not sure that all the skills that one can learn from watching Sasha Grey necessarily translate all that well to non-gang-bang situations.

Zuberi, meanwhile, suspects that women watch porn just to spite men:

Are they really addicted to porn or are they desperately trying to keep up with the sheer number of men who watch porn? Are these harpies so insecure that they have to overtake men in everything? It's pathetic. There's already a number of women who are drinking themselves retarded trying to keep up with men that they think are power drinkers.
But are they really watching all the porn they say they’re watching? Shade47 is suspicious:

When women look at porn they see pixels on a screen. Just some more attention whoring from women looking for a new angle to reel men in.

Almsot every trashy girl Ive met claims to be into porn but when you look at her internet history its all retarded girl games on flash websites and shit. You know they arent covering their tracks by deleting browser history because that would involve understanding computers.

Damn these computer-illiterate, flash-game-loving, only-pretending-to-like-porn slatterns!

AC101202, by contrast, is convinced that a lot of women actually do love porn, or at least the more nasty and degrading parts of it – “facials, ass in the air, DP etc.” Why? Evolutionary Psych 101, dude!  Because their reptilian cave-lady brains just love gangbangs: 

Pre-civilization, women thousands of years ago spent their days getting nailed by dozens of guys. We all know here a majority of women have rape fantasies …

Women who are managers, in positions of power, probably get off most watching degrading actions performed on women. Their lower reptilian brain likes seeing women treated like sex objects, since the women who reproduced best were the one's who learned to enjoy gangbanging.

Now, I’m no evolutionary psych expert, but, er, what exactly is the evolutionary advantage of facials? I’m pretty sure you can’t get pregnant from semen on your forehead, in your eyes  or, say, up your nose. (At least I never have.) Perhaps someone better schooled in evo psych and the general evil of women could explain that to me.

--

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.

232 comments:

  1. The only thing I learned from watching one of those gonzo gang bangs was that sometimes it is a good idea to have ice on hand because apparently things get a little too warm.

    ReplyDelete
  2. These men are supposed to be going their own way, so why do they care if women watch porn or why they do?

    The truth is that some women like porn and some don't. They all like different kinds and for different reasons. Women are just as varied and unique as men. If these men actually got to know real women, they could stop pulling hair brained theories out of the air on how women are.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well lets look at the supply and demand of "porn." Right now virtually all porn is directed at mens "consumption" of said product.

    I know, I know, you gender feminists will be beating the drums saying women love porn it just hasn't been offered to women. We have to conclude that the corporate elite have decided they don't want to tap into a multi-multi billion dollar market. The reason....Patriarchy.

    Now bring on all those comments proving women love porn more than men, (backed of course by links that are plucked off the web proving your loyalty to porn), swearing to whatever goddess you believe in. Because after all, gender is a construct not reality.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Um, dude, why the fuck would I pay for porn? Dean/Castiel forbidden-lust buttsex is FREE.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yaaay Ozzy, I knew I could count on you to come up with something fantasically wonderful and free like Dean/Castiel forbidden-lust buttsex to put me in my place. And it's even better than just a playboy centerfold, it's forbidden.

    I knew I could count on you to find what is no doubt the ultimate depravity and praise yourself for enjoying it. You go grrrl, you're the raunciest and proud of it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The idea that one can only watch porn on a computer displays a rather stunning lack of imagination.

    Just sayin'

    ReplyDelete
  7. Just stopping by to highly, highly recommend the book Sex at Dawn.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The idea that women watch porn because they can use the information therein to manipulate men displays a rather stunning level of imagination - absurd x 1000.

    The fact is that there is plenty of porn for women, women are sexual and visual and watch it because they enjoy it.

    ReplyDelete
  9. NWOSlave-- That is nowhere close to the ultimate depravity. That's not even the ultimate depravity I've jerked it to. Have you spent much time on the Internet?

    My point is that "women don't like porn" and "millions of women spend their free time writing about fictional characters having sex" (not to mention "the romance novel industry") cannot actually all exist in the same universe.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Yes, NWOaf, everything anyone says here is designed to put you, and only you, "in your place." Because it's all about you.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I think Cboye's advice in a previous thread is well-taken, and relevant to NWOaf's obnoxious braying.

    The advice was, if I recall correctly, Don't let the misogynists define the terms of the conversation. IOW, if the contention is that "women hate sex," don't try to counter it by saying, "Oh but I LOVE sex!" Ask him to explain what exactly led him to the conclusion that women don't like sex.

    ReplyDelete
  12. But Ozzy, in a previous post I said that romance novels and such WERE womens porn. I said that the dialogue was given to them and they visualized the scene. Where as men looked at the pictures and filled in the dialogue.

    You said I was wrong then, but now you're saying I was right then and wrong now. Hmmm, does this mean that a womans truth is whatever she feels at any particular moment in time? And that truth can change depending upon her feelings?

    ReplyDelete
  13. How do these guys last through the day carrying so much hate?
    My father once asked me to think of all the things the my problems had in common when, as an eight year old, I spent a week trying to get him to fix all my problems.
    He finally clued me in that the common factor was me.

    I see that people like NWO and guys quoted here never had anyone explain what it means to be an adult.

    ReplyDelete
  14. There is porn made with women in mind NWOslave-and I am sure you have watched it before.

    Unless of course you are also an asexual in addition to a terrible mathematician, workaholic who never works, illogical thinker, and ignorant historian who believes his fantasies is historically accurate.

    ReplyDelete
  15. How did I become all these things Elizabeth, "Unless of course you are also an asexual in addition to a terrible mathematician, workaholic who never works, illogical thinker, and ignorant historian who believes his fantasies is historically accurate."

    My math is terrible, my history is faulty, I work but don't work? Please elaborate.

    ReplyDelete
  16. It's all things you have said about yourself during the course of your postings here, NWOaf. We are indeed confused--I can only imagine how confusing it must be to be you, and try to keep all these things straight.

    ReplyDelete
  17. So strangesally, I said, "Unless of course you are also an asexual in addition to a terrible mathematician, workaholic who never works, illogical thinker, and ignorant historian who believes his fantasies is historically accurate."

    I said all these negative things about myself? Not very likely, in fact I'm quite a history buff, my math is excellent, I'm not asexual, I work to survive, I think quite logically. And of course I'm not a misogynist, which is really just a word tossed about to silence anyone who disagrees. Of course what really angers you is that this shaming tactic doesn't silence me, and that just sticks in your craw, doesn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  18. Why do you people continue to rationally explain things to him? Are MRAs from the sites Dave quotes equally courteous to their unwelcome visitors? From the excerpts I've seen here, the only way to communicate is to evenly say that males* are incompetent pieces of shitstained pig guts who spend hours jerking off to porn and trolling feminist sites because they're too simplistic to ever think of anything but women. Malepenises are in a panic because feminism has taken from them the only thing they were ever good for--sperm--and now their tiny male brains are frantic to find a new way to apply themselves, but of course as they are evolutionarily** designed to only ever think of sex and women the poor little things are back to square one. Soon we will establish sperm banks on every corner, successfully create and preserve artificial sperm, and completely obliterate the Y chromosome.***

    *males as opposed to men
    **exaggerate application of evo psyche
    ***the equivalent of sexy robots

    I think I covered most of it.

    ReplyDelete
  19. NWOslave? What exactly is your point? You asserted in a different comment thread, and I'm paraphrasing, that almost 100% all porn is consumed by men and almost 100% of erotica/romance novels are consumed by women. Many posters pointed out that you were wrong. There are women who enjoy erotica that is, in all likelihood, wildly different from the type of peasant girl/ship captain bodice rippers that you're referencing. Lots of women and men consume erotic fiction. Lots of women watch porn.

    Do more men watch porn then women? Probably? But that isn't being disputed by the posters on these forums. That idea isn't even being challenged by MGOTW comments that this post highlights.

    So what is your point? Do you not believe that women consume porn? If not, why not?

    ReplyDelete
  20. I am sure you think you are all the things you said you are NWOslave.

    I did point out that you were an illogical thinker though. *does the Peanut move*

    ReplyDelete
  21. NWO: I know, I know, you gender feminists will be beating the drums saying women love porn it just hasn't been offered to women.

    Things like that are why no one here will take you seriously. It has nothing to do with being an MRA: it's because you assume bad faith, and then project what you think feminists will say, rather than actually letting them reply for themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Oh, I just HATE it when I get some misogyny stuck in my craw. It's just there, all day, whining about the matriarchy and making unproven assertions about women's sex lives and custody laws. I try to swallow, but it just sticks there, wriggling.

    Eventually I have to drink about a quarter cup of oil just to flush it out, and that usually gives me diarrhea.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Law 1240: Projection? I know a few young guys who “learnt” how to have sex from porn. (One of my friends slept with a virgin who shaved everything because that’s what they did in porn, and told her that her boobs “shouldn’t look like that.”)

    Of course, they then had to be taught by a real live person that Sex Does Not Work Like That, thereby blowing that theory out of the water, but you know. That’s the real world.

    ReplyDelete
  24. @DesertRose, I love this quote from you..."Malepenises are in a panic because feminism has taken from them the only thing they were ever good for--sperm--and now their tiny male brains are frantic to find a new way to apply themselves, but of course as they are evolutionarily"

    A few points would be 1) Malepesises are in a panic, well I doubt female penises are in a panic. 2) tiny male brains are on average 11% larger that womens, this being the case what does that make a womans brain?

    Heres another qoute from you..."Soon we will establish sperm banks on every corner, successfully create and preserve artificial sperm, and completely obliterate the Y chromosome.***" Ahh the inherently loving woman. If recall the other day I wrote a piece quoting your great leaders wanting to obliterate men alltogether and you fine fairminded feminists denounced it as old timey stuff and you didn't agree with it at all because they were "radical." Yet here is one of your own advocating just that. Yet I'm a misogynist while her post contains no misandry.

    So one question, which of course you won't answer. Isn't the post of DesertRose one giant hunk of misandry?

    ReplyDelete
  25. NWOaf, wow. I guess I should have said that those are things you have REVEALED about yourself over the course of your postings here. I did not mean to imply that you were stupid enough to go around insulting yourself by saying, "I am terrible at math," although I certainly shouldn't put it past you.

    ReplyDelete
  26. You know, I suspected he would take it out of context but I didn't think he was stupid enough to do it in the same exact section where everyone can conveniently scroll up to see the original.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Strangesally...Do you "feel" I'm terrible at math or have I erred on a mathmatical problem? By the way, thank you the compliment of not being stupid enough to go around insulting myself. Do I have any other redeeming qualities that you "feel" I deserve?

    ReplyDelete
  28. Desertrose, It's a little hard to take obliterating the y chromsome out of existence out of context. At least thats what my tiny man brain thinks, perhaps you "feel" differently.

    ReplyDelete
  29. NWOslave, it was explicitly a parody of what MRA say about women. Add "terrible at reading comprehension" to SallyStrange's list.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Noted Rachel, I have now had poor comprehension skills added to my list of flaws.

    Any takers on wether DesertRoses entire post was pure misandry? Perhaps one of you might interpret what my poor comprehension skills have missed? Or was it "satire?"

    ReplyDelete
  31. Please don't delay on a response because my incompetent piece of shitstained pig gut self must maintain a certain amount of time jerking off to porn.

    Of course men jerking off to porn is bad no doubt. AKA loser, can't get any, pervert, ect. Yet as Ozzy states "That's not even the ultimate depravity I've jerked it to." Which of course is very good. Man "jerking off" is a loser. Woman "jerking off" is wonderful. Here I had thought feminism was all about removing these stigmas in our genderless society.

    ReplyDelete
  32. "Of course men jerking off to porn is bad no doubt. AKA loser, can't get any, pervert, ect."

    Where are you getting that idea? Certainly not from any of us.

    ReplyDelete
  33. A lot of women like different kinds of porn. Just because one of them likes talking dirty doesn't mean I can refer to her as a slut outside the confines of sex.

    I have a friend who makes female friendly pornography. There is a lot of it around, it's just that men probably wouldn't want to see it. (Hint a fair few women like gay porn just as we like lesbian porn and a lot of women prefer artistic stuff with attractive men and the idea of love rather than sex as a driving force. The ugly gurnings of a man humping a bored looking eastern european woman's bum is less attractive than say something from X-Art which they prefer). That being said some women do like "our porn". It's a grab bag of taste and preference really.

    And desert rose is pure anti you. I don't see her threatening me in any way shape or form.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Well Law I got that idea from what DesertRose wrote, "are incompetent pieces of shitstained pig guts who spend hours jerking off to porn"

    Now admittedly my reading comprehension skills are quite pitiful but this statement seems to denote a negative action. Do you agree?

    ReplyDelete
  35. Funny how I seem to answer sooo many questions yet none of mine are answered. So I'll try again. Was DesertRoses post at April 21, 2011 1:06 PM a giant hunk of misandry?

    If none of you think it was than an explaination of why not would just make my day.

    ReplyDelete
  36. "Well Law I got that idea from what DesertRose wrote, "are incompetent pieces of shitstained pig guts who spend hours jerking off to porn"

    Now admittedly my reading comprehension skills are quite pitiful but this statement seems to denote a negative action. Do you agree?"

    No, since I have no idea exactly what she was talking about since you didn't provide any context. Any man who spends HOURS jerking off to porn, if it affects his life negatively, should see a therapist and might have a sex addiction. Any man who relies on jerking off to porn because it's his *only* sexual outlet due to a failure with women obviously has social issues, none of which is the fault of women.

    It appears that DesertRose expresses contempt for any men whose hatred of women, and thus their social failure with women, drives them to seek sexual outlet in jerking off to porn, ergo she feels contempt for men who hate women, not men who jerk off to porn.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Was DesertRose's post an example of misandry?

    No.

    Why not?

    Because it was a piece of satire.

    Do you need a definition of the word "satire," NWOaf?

    ReplyDelete
  38. The Official Position Of Ozymandias, Self-Appointed Queen of Non-Crazy Feminism:

    Jerking off is awesome.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Oh, and Avicenna: that fits in quite well with my own experience. Also, men with their shirts off are available in many mainstream publications (c.f. any Hugh Jackman film) which may reduce the necessity for visual porn, although that's just a bullshitty hypothesis with no data to back it up.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Law, I've expressed no hate for women yet her post definitely expressed a deep hate for men. Please show how anything I've written has shown comtempt or hatred of women.

    Her post was at 106 PM, read it in it's entirety so that you might put it into perspective. Illuminate me on how I misinterpreted her post as voilent hatred of men.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Oh OK Sallystrange it was "satire." Thank you! I thought I'd copy and repost it replacing woman and man and male and female.

    Why do you people continue to rationally explain things to her? Are feminist from the sites Dave quotes equally courteous to their unwelcome visitors? From the excerpts I've seen here, the only way to communicate is to evenly say that females* are incompetent pieces of shitstained pig guts who spend hours jerking off to porn and trolling MRA sites because they're too simplistic to ever think of anything but men. Femalevaginas are in a panic because MRAs have taken from them the only thing they were ever good for--eggs--and now their tiny female brains are frantic to find a new way to apply themselves, but of course as they are evolutionarily** designed to only ever think of sex and men the poor little things are back to square one. Soon we will establish egg banks on every corner, successfully create and preserve artificial eggs, and completely obliterate the double XX chromosome.***

    Ahh yes now I can see the "satire" of this fine piece. Ya might want enter into the Vagina Monologues.

    ReplyDelete
  42. "Please show how anything I've written has shown comtempt or hatred of women."

    Um, I wasn't even talking about you. OR anything you've said.

    That aside, I don't expect to be responsible for anyone else's words or ideas. I can't answer for what other people I don't know and have never met believe or think. Ergo I have no intention of interpreting DesertRose's post for you or even taking the time to go find it. All I can do is guess what she meant about the jerkoff comment in the context of this site, and for all I know I could be wrong.

    That said, there's nothing wrong in general with men jerking off to porn. That's my stance and probably the stance of pretty much everyone else here as it is the stance of the larger part of society save a few religious fundemantalists.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Yeah - that was what DesertRose did in the first place. She took her idea of a typical MRA anti-man screed and changed the genders.

    Man, you are so dense it's a wonder you reflect light at all. Tell me, are there any gravitational anomalies in your neighborhood?

    ReplyDelete
  44. Excuse me, that should read "a typical MRA anti-woman screed."

    ReplyDelete
  45. "Please show how anything I've written has shown comtempt or hatred of women."

    Uh, I wasn't even talking about you. OR anything you've said.

    ReplyDelete
  46. law1204, you forgot: everything that goes on here is all about NWOaf.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Again thank you Sallystrange. When a woman write hatred of men it's "satire" she's basically "always" writing a mockery of what the typical MRA writes and is therefore excused from any accountability. When an MRA writes a deregatory post about women it's "never" satire and the typical MRA "must" be held accountable. Gotcha, no MRAs have any legitimate grievances, they're just afraid of losing privilege.

    ReplyDelete
  48. NWOSlave: You know, saying true things in a funny voice doesn't make them any less true.

    ReplyDelete
  49. I don't see anyone criticizing masturbation to pornography, as long as it's done in moderation. It's natural and healthy. It can be problematic if someone chooses to do that rather than be intimate with their significant other. I would call that a red flag for the relationship. On the other hand, it can be a good foreplay activity for a couple to enjoy together.

    ReplyDelete
  50. I guess this thread proves the notion that negative attention is better than no attention at all, and some people will come back again and again for their fix.

    ReplyDelete
  51. How do these guys last through the day carrying so much hate?

    Same thing I ask myself visiting this little slice of heaven. Never underestimate people's capacity for spite, I guess.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Kendra...Hpw can masterbation be problematic instead of being intimate? I do believe the official stance of feminism is being A-sexual is "good." Therefore if someone "chooses" not to be intimate, this "choice" must be respected and should have no bearing on a relationship. To say otherwise would go against the feminist tenet of sex shouldn't be expected of a woman in marriage.

    ReplyDelete
  53. I'd just like to take this opportunity to state that everything I have written so far here is satire, and thus exempt from all judgment and scrutiny. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Again Ion, please show me the "hate" that I've posted. All of you keep throwing a myriad of derogatory adjectives at me specifically. How is it that I am hateful, unintelligent, misogynist, poor skills in comprehension and satire, ect, ect, ect.

    How is it that I'm all these negative aspects while disparaging no one, while all of you are amazing while mocking me at every turn? Or is this more of that "satire" that eludes my dense personality?

    ReplyDelete
  55. NWO, who pray tell, is a given MRA satirizing when he suggests that infant females should have their voice boxes removed?

    ReplyDelete
  56. NWOslave said...

    Kendra...Hpw can masterbation be problematic instead of being intimate? I do believe the official stance of feminism is being A-sexual is "good." Therefore if someone "chooses" not to be intimate, this "choice" must be respected and should have no bearing on a relationship. To say otherwise would go against the feminist tenet of sex shouldn't be expected of a woman in marriage.


    On the contrary, every person has the right to refuse sex, and every partner has the right to end the relationship because of it. No contradiction at all. It's only problematic if the person who chooses masturbation in preference to sex wishes to continue in the relationship, and the partner is not accepting of this arrangement.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Have "I" said any of those things? Since I haven't this is blaming "me" for something which I have no control. I don't need to make any excuses for actions I haven't committed.

    All of you however, have insulted me directly. Satirically no daoubt.

    ReplyDelete
  58. NWO, I think you're confused here. I was referring to the 'regular' commenters around here, not you. I was also making the point that I wrote a bit of an anti-feminist satire a couple of days ago, with the predictable results of mucho butthurt. But of course anti-male satire is A-OK.

    What I find hilarious is that most people on this blog are just as vicious, narrow-minded and stupid as most MRAs. It's like two camps of fanatics, each accusing the other while believing themselves to be above reproach. Fun to watch for a while, at any rate.

    ReplyDelete
  59. "But of course anti-male satire is A-OK."

    Actually you can look it it this way - what's good for the goose is good for the gander OR, don't do things to other people you don't want them to do to you.

    If you're writing "anti-feminist satire" stop acting like a big whiny baby when women do the same to you. If you can't take it, don't dish it out. Mmkay? Remember that next time the urge to tell a "get back in the kitchen and make me a sammich" joke strikes you.

    ReplyDelete
  60. What, no apologies for the poor slave whose done no wrong?

    What I'd really like is a working definition of misogynist, (not the websters version). If I disagree with any position of any feminist does this automatically make me a misogynist?

    ReplyDelete
  61. Wtf? How is that answering what I said? That doesn't even make sense. Jesus, I'm starting to think Scott Adams was on to something. So your point is that women do write satire against men because... men do it too, and they shouldn't "whine" about it? Who's whining? Goddamn, this is like talking to a robot who's only programmed to say a dozen different phrases depending on a few keywords it recognizes.

    At least you don't have to worry about "make me a sandwich" jokes from me. I don't believe women belong in the kitchen. Because the world's greatest chefs were and are men :)

    ReplyDelete
  62. Hmm. I guess the Old Testament was written by Andrea Dworkin then, too? After all, it prohibits voluntary ejaculation into anything other than one's wife's vagina.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Almsot every trashy girl Ive met claims to be into porn but when you look at her internet history its all retarded girl games on flash websites and shit. You know they arent covering their tracks by deleting browser history because that would involve understanding computers.

    Not that this is unusual for MRAs, but the above says a little more about the commenter, and how he spends his time alone in the computer lab after hours, than he probably intended.

    NWO, I know your time is valuable and reading is hard, so I respect your right to simply skim David's posts for keywords to go apoplectic over (here, for example, we learn that the words "women" and "porn" will generate "women's irrational hatred of porn is proof that they're frigid sex-hating bitches," regardless of what the post was actually about), but if you choose to go that route, please try to restrict your comments to less than 40% of the thread. It's just so much extra scrolling, you know?

    ReplyDelete
  64. I do believe the official stance of feminism is being A-sexual is "good."

    Provide evidence for this, please.

    ReplyDelete
  65. My posts are getting eaten like there's no tomorrow.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Ah, NWOaf. You are in the process of proving DesertRose’s point. Let’s review what that actually was, since you are showing us that you are incapable of understanding it, or perhaps unwilling to.

    Why do you people continue to rationally explain things to him?

    It’s a good question. Why do we continue to try to explain things to you? Speaking only for myself, I do it for the benefit of other readers, so they can be reminded of precisely how brain-dead you are. In any case, her question is actually rhetorical, meant to point out that MRAs (not “men”, try to hold that thought in your head, that we are all capable of distinguishing between “men” and “MRA type dudes”, who are a subset of men.)

    Are MRAs from the sites Dave quotes equally courteous to their unwelcome visitors? From the excerpts I've seen here, the only way to communicate

    I admit, this could be a little tricky to follow if you haven’t yet reached the 7th grade reading level. But basically, here we have another rhetorical question, meant to point out that MRAs are typically not as accommodating to people who challenge their views as the posters here are. In other words, we are likely to take you at your word, assume you are arguing in good faith, answer your questions honestly, and provide evidence to back up our assertions. Until you show that you’re not arguing in good faith, that is, or that you’re not interested in honesty or evidence. Continuing with the quote…

    From the excerpts I've seen here, the only way to communicate is to evenly say that males* [Sally here: please take note of the asterisk] are incompetent pieces of shitstained pig guts who spend hours jerking off to porn and trolling feminist sites because they're too simplistic to ever think of anything but women. Malepenises are in a panic because feminism has taken from them the only thing they were ever good for--sperm--and now their tiny male brains are frantic to find a new way to apply themselves, but of course as they are evolutionarily** [again, please note the asterisk and follow it] designed to only ever think of sex and women the poor little things are back to square one. Soon we will establish sperm banks on every corner, successfully create and preserve artificial sperm, and completely obliterate the Y chromosome.***

    Did you notice the asterisks, NWOaf? Because if you don’t understand the convention of using asterisks to point people’s attention towards the corresponding asterisks below, which provide further information and explanation as to what is meant, you could be missing a lot. This whole paragraph is an obvious spoof on the silly and idiotic ways in which MRAs (not “men,” remember?) generalize about women (here there’s no caveat; MRAs really think they’re talking about ALL women).

    And below, the asterisks, where DesertRose lays out exactly which MRA terms she is spoofing:

    *males as opposed to men
    **exaggerate application of evo psyche
    ***the equivalent of sexy robots


    Really, that wasn’t all that hard. In my next post, I will address the content of what NWOaf wrote to me.

    ReplyDelete
  67. I do believe the official stance of feminism is being A-sexual is "good."

    I do believe the official stance of feminism is live, let live, and always remember that someone else's sexuality is none of your fucking business, unless that person is your willing sexual partner. Also, you don't get to define what other people like or do not like.

    ReplyDelete
  68. Now, let’s address what you had to say, gentle, scholarly, NWOaf.

    Again thank you Sallystrange.

    As John Hodgeman says: “You’re welcome.”

    When a woman write hatred of men it's "satire"

    A woman? As in any woman? No, there you go again, generalizing unnecessarily. I was only talking about DesertRose. Not all women. Just DesertRose. Do you need me to repeat that a few more times for it to sink in?

    she's basically "always" writing a mockery of what the typical MRA writes and is therefore excused from any accountability.

    Writing a satire doesn’t excuse anyone from accountability. The disconnect here is that you want DesertRose to be accountable for something she didn’t do, that is, espouse hatred for all men.

    When an MRA writes a deregatory post about women it's "never" satire

    I didn’t say this. It’s certainly possible that MRAs are actually trying to satirize misogynists. Or feminists. Who knows. I certainly would not be so stupid as to say that this “never” happens. Only children think in ALWAYS/NEVER black-and-white terms. However, if MRAs are actually trying to satirize feminists when they post things to the effect that all women are this way, or all women are that way, they don't seem to be announcing it, even after the fact. And satire fails if the author does not truly understand the subject of the satire. Like you--you just said that you think that the "official" position of feminism on sex is that no sex is the best sex. See, if you tried to write a satire on feminists and feminism based on that basic misunderstanding, it would fail utterly, because of your failure to understand feminism.

    and the typical MRA "must" be held accountable.

    Everyone is accountable for what she or he says. If it's satire, then you are accountable not only for the content of what you wrote, but also for its success as satire.

    Gotcha, no MRAs have any legitimate grievances, they're just afraid of losing privilege.

    As has been said a million times over again on this blog and elsewhere, MRAs have a few legitimate grievances. However, the fact that they think that attacking feminism is the best way to address those grievances reveals that they are not thinking clearly about those grievances, and are misinformed. Since attacking feminism is not actually the best way to equalize custody laws, get shelters for male domestic abuse victims set up, or increase the number of men working in typically female-dominated fields like nursing or teaching, we can conclude that the MRAs’ tactics contradict their stated goals. We then speculate as to their actual goals and motives—feeling threatened because of the loss of male privilege is a likely candidate.

    Any more questions?

    ReplyDelete
  69. Ion-it was poorly written satire at best. That is why it was taken seriously and why people reacted negatively to it.

    What NWOslave is doing here is being a troll-not even as good a troll as Tit is either.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Anyway, I thought the official position of feminism was "Cowgirl."

    ReplyDelete
  71. sallystrange707 said...

    Anyway, I thought the official position of feminism was "Cowgirl."


    Reverse Cowgirl is also nice...

    ReplyDelete
  72. So your point is that women do write satire against men because... men do it too, and they shouldn't "whine" about it?"

    No. My point was to not treat people the way you don't want to be treated. If you like to make anti-feminist "satire" stop being a goddamn crybaby when it comes back to you. You can't treat people like shit and expect not to reap exactly what you sow. And then when you whine about it and blame other people for doing back to you what you did, you just make yourself look like an even bigger douche.

    I've seen it a hundred times - people who crow incessantly about "taking responsibility" are ALWAYS the last to do so.

    "Who's whining?"

    You are.

    "Goddamn, this is like talking to a robot who's only programmed to say a dozen different phrases depending on a few keywords it recognizes."

    Do you generally write such empassioned responses to preprogrammed machine outputs?

    "Because the world's greatest chefs were and are men :) "

    Actually many of the "world's greatest chefs" are assholes who abuse their employees and not a few of them are fucking bankrupt as well.

    ReplyDelete
  73. So your point is that women do write satire against men because... men do it too, and they shouldn't "whine" about it?"

    No. My point was to not treat people the way you don't want to be treated. If you like to make anti-feminist "satire" stop being a goddamn crybaby when it comes back to you. You can't treat people like shit and expect not to reap exactly what you sow. And then when you whine about it and blame other people for doing back to you what you did, you just make yourself look like an even bigger douche.

    I've seen it a hundred times - people who crow incessantly about "taking responsibility" are ALWAYS the last to do so.

    "Who's whining?"

    You are.

    "Goddamn, this is like talking to a robot who's only programmed to say a dozen different phrases depending on a few keywords it recognizes."

    Do you generally write such empassioned responses to preprogrammed machine outputs?

    "Because the world's greatest chefs were and are men :) "

    Actually many of the "world's greatest chefs" are assholes who abuse their employees and not a few of them are fucking bankrupt as well.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Shaenon, Again, thx for the mockery, (reading is hard). Sweet. I never said women hated porn, I stated and Ozzy has confirmed that womens porn is reading it. Although on a previous post she said the opposite.

    My point is whats with the gender is a construct bit. I hate to once again be misogynist by stating men and women are different. If men like to look at porn and fill in the text and women like to read porn and fill in the pictures, whats the big deal? I thought feminists were all into celebrating "diversity." Yet when any diversity between men and women is mentioned you're all like yes we do, we love it even more than men. Whats the point? Men and women are different and no amount of social engineering will change this, and nothing good will come of it.

    ReplyDelete
  75. NWO Slave, in response to your question, I think it is important for individual couples to work out sexual issues for themselves. What works for one couple may not work for another. The important thing is that the people in relationships are sexually compatible.

    If one partner is less sexual or prefers masturbation over real sex, then they would not be a good spouse for someone with a strong libido. Neither partner is wrong, they're just wrong for each other. If two people have similar libidos, then that is good. If two people are asexual, they are good together. It's when their libidos are vastly different when it's problematic. One person will resent the lack of sex, while the other will feel pestered into having sex they don't want.

    If one partner is sexually off track due to pregnancy, breastfeeding, medication, or illness, then the other partner may need masturbation to be happy. Those are temporary situations, though.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Spam filter!

    There were some nice long posts caught in blogger's infernal spam filter but they are up now. Scroll up and read them!

    ReplyDelete
  77. Also, men with their shirts off are available in many mainstream publications

    Or any randomly chosen episode of the original Star Trek.

    ReplyDelete
  78. "If men like to look at porn and fill in the text and women like to read porn and fill in the pictures, whats the big deal?"

    If it's not a big deal, why do you need so badly to believe it? Nothing good will come of you telling women what they do and do not like - seems to me you'd have little way of knowing.

    ReplyDelete
  79. If men like to look at porn and fill in the text and women like to read porn and fill in the pictures, whats the big deal?

    The big deal. That truth matters, and this just isn't true. Statements like "Men like X and women like Y" just aren't. There's more diversity within each group than there is between the groups.

    Men and women are different and no amount of social engineering will change this, and nothing good will come of it.

    Men and women are indeed different (see above for caveat about differences within the group exceeding those between the groups). So why are you trying to social engineer us? Stop trying to tell me what I like.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Law, I'm not telling women what to like or not like. You're denying the reality of what women like and don't like. You're trying to change people into something their not, I'm content to leave well enough alone.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Sallystrange, when you said, "There's more diversity within each group than there is between the groups."

    Well thats wrong, there is no way there is more diversity within groups of men and women as opposed to men and women. This is reality denial and social engineering.

    ReplyDelete
  82. > What NWOslave is doing here is being a troll

    No, he's being trolled by DesertRose.

    But let's not all troll at once. We can take turns.

    ReplyDelete
  83. "Law, I'm not telling women what to like or not like."

    You are telling them what they do and do not like as if it's some kind of fact. Nothing of the kind! And I can only imagine the motivation behind your desperate need to peg men and women into some sort of predetermined gender roles.

    "You're denying the reality of what women like and don't like."

    There is no such thing as "what women like". The only fact that makes a difference is what each individual woman prefers.

    ReplyDelete
  84. NWO, I'm going to try and explain it to you okay?
    1. on women and porn:
    some women like written porn, some like visual porn, some like both, and some like neither one. Women aren't a monolith. We are people who each have different opinions and desires.
    2. on desert rose's comment:
    no that is not misandry because she is paroding (albeit not well) the tropes that the mra's think women ascribe to
    3. on watching porn as a masturbatory aid:
    there is nothing inherently wrong with mastubating regardless of whether or not one uses porn or not
    4. on mismatched libidos:
    each individual couple gets to decide when and how often they have sex. Now if partner a would rather watch porn and masturbate than have sex with parnter b and that is not okay with partner b than partner b is justified in ending the relationship. The genders of both (or more as the case may be) partners involved is irrelevant. If you are in a sexual/romantic relationship and something changes in the libido or desire of one or more partners that is unacceptable to those involved they can choose to break off that relationship and pursue one in which they are more comfortable
    Does all of this make sense? If not I will try to explain it again in a different way

    ReplyDelete
  85. Oh, boy. Reading through NWO's contributions to the, er, discussion here I couldn't help but think of Bill Pullman in this famous scene in Ruthless People:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqUZ04UWRk4

    ReplyDelete
  86. Sallystrange, when you said, "There's more diversity within each group than there is between the groups."

    Well thats wrong, there is no way there is more diversity within groups of men and women as opposed to men and women. This is reality denial and social engineering.


    O RLY? I have scads of historical and scientific data backing up my position. Don't you worry, I'll provide it. But first, what do you have? Please, tell us what evidence has led you to believe that men and women are so very different from each other, that those differences eclipse the amazing amount of variation we find in personality, taste, sexual preference, politics, intelligence, etc. between individuals within a gender.

    The onus is on you, buddy. It's time to put up or shut up. And don't whine about my evidence. Don't WORRY about my evidence. I've got it, just not right at my fingertips. It'll take me a while to assemble it all because I'm about to leave, and also because there is so MUCH evidence, it'll be hard to decide which bits to post. So, where's your evidence? We are all on tenterhooks here.

    ReplyDelete
  87. Okay, let me see if I can sort this out.

    First, NWO argues that all women are identical to each other, as well as that all men are identical to each other, because people's personalities are determined entirely by biology AND NOTHING ELSE. Hell, not even by biology, but solely by gender.

    Next, NWO suggests that because people's personalities are set in stone by gender AND NOTHING ELSE, such things as social conditioning and societal pressure (i.e. social engineering) are totally irrelevant and have no impact on what people like or dislike, or what they tell others they like or dislike.

    Next, NWO complains about social engineering supposedly interfering with biology. What are you so worried about, NWO? If social engineering is absolutely incapable to make even a dent in someone's supposedly hard-wired preferences, I really don't see why you are so opposed to it.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Amused, you could figure all that out? I'm impressed. You make him sound so cogent.

    ReplyDelete
  89. NWO

    I don't like porn at all. It's fake and frankly boring. I'd much rather read erotica of I was so inclined.

    Until this moment I was quite sure I was a man but I guess I'm not. (please take my comments literally to mean that I have changed sex)

    P.S Regarding your math skills. I was the one who stated you had none. It was in response to you declaring that taxes would have to triple in order for men to receive the same services as women.

    Please explain that.

    Also explain to us how you can be here all day and still work a 17 hour day?
    I'm semi-retired son, this is my favorite internet site and the only one I regularly post on and I still only get the chance to post now and again. Either you are sitting on a computer at work (which was my original point, that desk jockeys really shouldn't be complaining about dangerous jobs), or your math skills are very bad. Which one is it?

    ReplyDelete
  90. Oh my God you dumbfuck.

    *slams head on keyboard*
    aiodf;hsjkgfghdjhg

    It has already been explained with more patience than I've got (thanks sallystrange) but I find it interesting that you ask if it's misandry. Let's say it wasn't satire. Let's say I wasn't merely pointing out that this is what a feminist would sound like if she were to be as much of a sexist dumbfuck as an MRA. Let's say I really believed all that shit I typed.

    Why the fuck do you feel I owe you an answer of whether or not it's misandry, when you refuse to EVER admit that the shit Dave quotes on here, the shit of which I just made a parody, is misogyny?

    YES, you idiot--if I believed it it would be misandry. But I don't. I was parodying. Your MRA pals, however, believe all the sexist shit they type. They are not parodying. And that is why they are misogynistic douchebags. K? K.

    ReplyDelete
  91. Ok here ya go the most up to date differences in the brains of men and women.

    Oh and they are massive differences. But really it means nothing because..........if you feel it isn't so you'll simply deny the facts.

    http://www.boysadrift.com/2007Giedd.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  92. I gave you, in this forum, what you'd give us in yours.

    Eat it, bitch.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Heres just a bit more info

    In adults, the average brain weight in men is about 11-12% MORE than the average brain weight in women

    men have 4% more brain cells than women , and about 100 grams more of brain tissue. this may explain why women are more prone to dementia

    while men have more neurons in the cerebral cortex, women have a more developed neuropil, or the space between cell bodies, which contains synapses, dendrites and axons, and allows for communication among neurons .

    Inferior parietal lobule (IPL): it is a brain region in the cortex, which is significantly larger in men than in women. This area is bilateral and is located just above the level of the ears (parietal cortex). Furthermore, the left side IPL is larger in men than the right side. In women, this asymmetry is reversed, although the difference between left and right sides is not so large as in men. This is the same area which was shown to be larger in the brain of Albert Einstein, as well as in other physicists and mathematicians. So, it seems that IPL's size correlates highly with mental mathematical abilities. Studies have linked the right IPL with the memory involved in understanding and manipulating spatial relationships and the ability to sense relationships between body parts. It is also related to the perception of our own affects or feelings. The left IPL is involved with perception of time and speed, and the ability of mentally rotate 3-D figures .

    Limbic size: females, on average, have a larger deep limbic system than males. This gives females several advantages and disadvantages. Due to the larger deep limbic brain women are more in touch with their feelings, they are generally better able to express their feelings than men. They have an increased ability to bond and be connected to others . Females have a more acute sense of smell, which is likely to have developed from an evolutionary need for the mother to recognize her young. Having a larger deep limbic system leaves a female somewhat more susceptible to depression, especially at times of significant hormonal changes such as the onset of puberty, before menses, after the birth of a child and at menopause. Women attempt suicide three times more than men. Yet, men kill themselves three times more than women

    So when I say men and women a more different than men are to men and women to women. Well I say that because it true. I don't deny reality, do you?

    ReplyDelete
  94. Did you even read that paper? All it essentially says is that boys and girls are different sizes and therefore have different sized brains and may develop at different paces.

    But - "Differences in brain size between males and females should not be interpreted as implying any sort of functional advantage or disadvantage."

    Boys have a penis, girls have a vagina!

    ReplyDelete
  95. Well DesertRose it seems due to you biology you expressed your feelings by calling me a sexist dumbfuck. Apparently one of the disadvantages of having a deep limbic system is the lack of emotional control when someone disagrees with you. But of course you'll tell me it has nothing to do with biology even though it is female biology that has dictated your reaction. Weird huh?

    ReplyDelete
  96. NWO why are you talking about men and women when the study was clearly about boys and girls? They were discussing how to keep data in studies consistent longitudinally without defaulting to the generic "8-10%" and instead keeping age and development clearly in the picture as important factors for studies going forward.

    They clearly state that the study is of adolescents on the first page, and they also make clear that mass should not imply functionality.

    ReplyDelete
  97. Again Law you deny relity if you actually read the paper with the corresponding graphs no one thinking critically could deny the massive differences. Not only in "when" developement takes place but how far and when developement tapers off.

    But of course you didn't read the paper, you couldn't have read and grasped the entire paper in the 11 minutes since I posted it until you hit return on your post. You simply will not admit the huge differences between men and women. Quite honestly, this only reinforces you unwilligness to admit reality if it runs counter to feminist ideology. Your "feelings" trump scientific facts.

    ReplyDelete
  98. Well NWOslave it seems due to you(sic) biology you shoved aside your pointedly embarrassing incomprehension by swerving past the points. Apparently one of the disadvantages of having comparatively high levels of testosterone is the inability to keep your pride from clouding your reason when someone points out what a sexist dumbfuck you are. But of course you'll tell me it has everything to do with biology even though you'd probably still be as much of a dumbfuck if you were a woman. Weird huh?

    ReplyDelete
  99. Her reaction has nothing to do with her biology. Don't blame your bad behavior on her.

    Notice how none of the factors listed on the home page includes feminism, BTW.

    ReplyDelete
  100. Lets look at the Inferior parietal lobule, which is substantially larger in men than women. This is the area of the brain used for math, 3d spacial rotation, moving thru time and space.

    This is the reason why men have invented virtually all art, music, philosophy, inventions, ect. There was never any oppression that held women back from doing these thing. Men are just really good at it. But instead of admitting this and saying hey thats great this really helped everyone out, you'll make up some false reality of women being oppressed.

    ReplyDelete
  101. NWO, Law provided a direct quote. Can you please illustrate, with quotes from the paper, how that quote is clearly out of context and inaccurate? That's the scientific rebuttal. Otherwise you're reacting just as "emotionally" or more so.

    ReplyDelete
  102. NWO, you're a sexist dumbfuck. And an idiot.

    And I'm male. Can you explain how my male biology has caused me to dislike you?

    ReplyDelete
  103. So her calling me a sexist dumb fuck is my bad behavior. Too sweet.

    ReplyDelete
  104. NWO: Blah blah blah, wishful thinking on your part. Limbic system, shmimbic system, one thing is certain: as much as you may kick and scream, you are NOT the same as Albert Einstein. And that's all it is, really, on the part of men who foam at the mouth about gender essentialism: Einstein envy.

    Gender does NOT account for "vast" cognitive and psychological differences between individuals. What DOES account for truly vast cognitive and psychological differences is socioeconomic background. Therefore, although both you and Albert Einstein had penises, Dr. Einstein had a lot more in common, intellectually and psychologically, with the two Mrses Einstein than you could ever hope to have in common with him.

    On this forum as well, it is quite clear that you are both more emotional and intellectually far weaker than most of the female contributors here. Gender has nothing to do with it, and it's not your fault. Maybe it's your genes. Maybe it's your poor diet growing up. Maybe it's because you were encouraged to play contact sports (as the more "manly" activity) instead of reading books, with the combination of repeated head injuries and lack of intellectual stimulation leading to your sad state today. Maybe it's pollution in the local ground waters. I don't know. But one thing is clear -- claiming biology makes women more "emotional" is merely a "sciencey" way to arguing that women are sub-human animals and to label their logical and well thought-out ideas "emotions" while mischaracterizing your emotions as "logic". As I said -- wish fulfillment.

    ReplyDelete
  105. NWO, the problem with what you're saying is that most of the actual function of the brain comes from the connections made between cells and between areas of the brain, not by the thin layer of uppermost cells that we have been able to register with EEG and similar technology. Math in particular is a really interesting field of research because the calculations that we thought were done in one area seem in fact to be spread through various parts of the brain.

    I don't have access to most of my research at the moment, but it's truly fascinating and progressing in leaps and bounds at the moment. Referring to a 2007 study that was about limiting the conclusions being drawn about sex by disregarding age and weight data... well it's not going to get you far on this topic.

    ReplyDelete
  106. @Elizabeth

    There is porn made with women in mind NWOslave-and I am sure you have watched it before.

    Unless of course you are also an asexual


    some asexual people watch porn. some asexual people masturbate. being asexual doesn't automatically mean non-sexual.

    ReplyDelete
  107. If I hammer all day, everyday, the area of my brain responsible for hammering will grow. This does not mean I was predestined to hammer.

    If men and women behave differently and are treated differently, their brains will develop differently. Brain differences do not provide evidence of innate differences.

    ReplyDelete
  108. Well thats easy Mike, 1)Have you ever been taught the differences in brain structure between men and women? 2)Have you ever been taught that men and women are basically the same in the thought process? 3)Have you ever been taught men and women have identical mental capabilities?

    Your answers will be no to 1 and yes to 2 and 3. Your siply responding to you conditioning. The real question is why would the public education system not highlight the differences and cater to the different learning processes of men and women. The answer of course is unequal results runs counter to feminist ideology of "we're all equal" and "gender is a construct."

    ReplyDelete
  109. Fun fact for NWOslave: the limbic system controls sexual arousal! So, by your own shitty logic, the slight average size difference between limbic systems in the brain means 100% of women like sex (and by extension porn??) more than 100% of men.

    ReplyDelete
  110. I simply don't understand your aversion to men and women, each as a whole, having strenghts and weaknesses.

    ReplyDelete
  111. Well Jeanette if thats the case I won't argue. I don't deny reality. Although porn for women is different than porn for men. I won't deny that reality either.

    ReplyDelete
  112. NWO, did you miss my comment about porn, I'll reiterate what I wrote
    some women like visual porn, some like written porn, some like both and some like neither. Women are not a monolith. We each have different opinions and desires because we are human. The above statement also goes for men. Some men like visual porn some like written porn, some lie both and some like neither! Isn't individuality great?

    ReplyDelete
  113. Your siply responding to you conditioning.

    Oh, so now you are claiming that people's thinking IS molded by social conditioning? You spent this whole thread arguing that all women think identically and all men think identically because gender is 100% responsible for people's thinking. NOW you do a total 180 and complain about "social conditioning"?

    I simply don't understand your aversion to men and women, each as a whole, having strenghts and weaknesses.

    First of all "each as a whole" is an oxymoron.

    Second, I don't have an aversion to acknowledging my strengths and weaknesses. I do have an aversion to bullshit. I also have an aversion to being accused to having weaknesses that I actually DON'T have or having my strengths unacknowledged on the basis of gender, just like I have an aversion to being lumped with people with whom I have nothing in common except a vagina. My weaknesses and strenghths are mine as an individual, not "ours". I do not care for taking credit for what others have done, nor will I answer for other people's failings. I am an individual, not a walking vagina.

    And once again: Einstein's strengths are not your strengths. Stop flattering yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  114. Yes Sandy, brain differences do provide evidence for innate differences. If every single genius and math wizzard has a larger Inferior parietal lobule, and this is substantially larger in men than women this is an innate difference that has an effect on those qualities needed to perfom certain mental abilities.

    To deny this is to deny reality. It's like saying someone is a musical genius got that way by practice. When that is not the case. I could practice music every day for the rest of my life an never write a piece of music that is even passably good. Think the movie Amadeus.

    ReplyDelete
  115. But NWO - you said behaviour is determined by biology, not social conditioning. And we both have male brains, so I should agree with you. But I don't.

    It's confusing.

    ReplyDelete
  116. Yes Bridget, I get it, women are not a monolith. Gender is a construct. We're all the same but different and no one has any abilities not sanctioned by the State. Apparently my thinking is muddied and I'm in need of further indoctrination.

    ReplyDelete
  117. I...really?? Okay, I don't usually do this, but here are some things you might have asked yourself before accepting my conclusion uncritically:

    1. But, Jeanette, how can you conclude that because a system that regulates sexual arousal is larger in size it means that individual is more capable of sexual arousal than the smaller one?

    2. How big is the gap between genders? Is there significant overlap? What are the exact percentages we're talking?

    3. Maybe it is just a trend. Maybe women have ON AVERAGE bigger limbic systems but this is not true in all cases. An example of this would be height.

    4. Please provide evidence that while larger, the limbic system in women is actually more active than that of men.

    And those are just the most obvious....number two is, in particular, something I think you need to examine.

    ReplyDelete
  118. Mike, first off you're just parroting what you've been conditioned to say. Deep down you know it isn't true as do all the rest of the commentors. Which is why they get so angry, they know there are innate differences and it sticks in their craw. It's like two opposite programs running at the same time, one is the public indoctrination program and the other is the biological program. You just won't admit it.

    ReplyDelete
  119. Yes Jeanette, you're right that I'm wrong that you're right. And round and round it goes where it stops nobody knows.

    ReplyDelete
  120. Yes Mike, you've been condition to believe that you can be conditioned when in fact you cannot be conditioned despite what you've been conditioned to believe.

    ReplyDelete
  121. NWO - You mean like how all atheists really believe in God but they just pretend not to, out of a childish need to rebel?

    ReplyDelete
  122. NWO, this has nothing to do with the state. I'm an anarcho capitalist for crying out loud.

    ReplyDelete
  123. But why will Mike not admit it, NWO, if his male brain is so perfect and above social conditioning that it does not barricade the sciency truth of sciency sciencyness from acknowledgment? Please, enlighten my inferior female brain.

    ReplyDelete
  124. Yes. And my superior male brain too, as I am still confused

    ReplyDelete
  125. Grammatolatry: I realised that after I posted it, mea culpa.

    Although I do think that is the way NWOslave would view it as.

    ReplyDelete
  126. Mike Booth, your circular logic has bested me.

    Bridget, you have never lived in an anarchist country, nor have you ever live in a capitalist country. Here's a little secret, America isn't a capitalist country. Not since anyone here has been alive.

    ReplyDelete
  127. Yay for Mike's circular logic, a product of his superior male brain!

    ReplyDelete
  128. nwo, I'm well aware that we don't live in a capitalistic society. That doesn't mean that I don't adhere to the political philosophy of such.

    ReplyDelete
  129. NWO, I realize arguing with everyone here must be stressful. I'm thinking you might want to take a break with some porn. So here's some porn designed with male viewers in mind. Clearly, with your male brain, you and your male limbic system will enjoy this porn for men!

    You're welcome!

    ReplyDelete
  130. DestertRose, knowing the truth and admitting or saying the truth are two sepearate things. Thats why someone came up with the word lying.

    ReplyDelete
  131. furthermore, my name is briget not bridget. Spell my damn name properly

    ReplyDelete
  132. Wow dave that was harsh, What'd I ever do to you? Are you trying to blind me?

    ReplyDelete
  133. NWOSlave: Since you are claiming among your hard-wired biological strengths the ability to create "art, music, philosophy, inventions, etc", how is it that you personally haven't created any great art, nor music, nor any technological inventions, nor achieved any scientific breakthroughs? How come you are apparently unable to do any of the things that you claim every man is capable of doing by virtue of your biology? And since you are, in fact -- not in theory, but in FACT -- incapable of doing any of those things, why should be pretend that you, as an individual, are equal to the tiny minority of men who actually achieved greatness in some field? Why should anyone thank YOU? Genius is a lonely endeavor. And people like you -- mediocrities who like to force people into neat little boxes -- have, actually, throughout history worked tirelessly to suppress both men and women who create "art, music, philosophy, inventions, etc." because they upset your safe, conservative, narrow little world. Look outside your window. Look at all the great things that are around you. And then realize that 100% of that was created by people who are NOT like you. You are not one of them. You are their enemy.

    ReplyDelete
  134. So that's why I watch porn? Silly me, I thought I did it to get off.

    I wonder what these nutbars would think it means when my boyfriend and I watch pron together. Obviously I'm somehow oppressing him.

    Also, watching porn to learn how to have good sex is like watching fantasy movies in the hopes of learning how to swordfight. All that stuff looks cool on film, but it practice... not so much.

    ReplyDelete
  135. It could have just stopped at the "I'm wrong" part...

    Anyway, great link David! LOL

    ReplyDelete
  136. Oh, is that how Mike's been conditioned to say that he can be conditioned at all when in fact he cannot be conditioned to believe despite what he's been conditioned to say? So, we can be conditioned to say things, but not believe them. And that is how Mike says things of which to say he had been conditioned, but still believes the sciency truth of sciency sciencyness.

    Makes perfect sense.

    ReplyDelete
  137. To deny this is to deny reality. It's like saying someone is a musical genius got that way by practice. When that is not the case. I could practice music every day for the rest of my life an never write a piece of music that is even passably good. Think the movie Amadeus.

    Actually, it's more complicated than that. Malcolm Gladwell, in his book Outliers posits the 10000 hour rule--i.e., that it will take 10000 hours of practice for a person to get really good at something. He gives as examples The Beatles, who spent an enormous number of hours playing in Hamburg strip bars in their early career, and Bill Gates, who had nearly unlimited access to a computer in his youth, at a time when few people had regular access to computers.

    So, yeah, innate abilities matter, but so do hard work, focus, and opportunity. It's doubtful that Mozart would have been a musical genius had he not been steeped in music from the time he was born (his father was a composer). He had extraordinary innate talent, to be sure, but that talent would not have been developed had he not had the opportunities presented.

    Also, using a Hollywood movie as an example is probably not the best way to prove a point about neurobiology. Just sayin'.

    ReplyDelete
  138. ...Except that you said we couldn't be conditioned. At all.

    ReplyDelete
  139. Well Amused I was a machine designer of prototype machinery for 8 years, but as you know all those manufacturing jobs went overseas. Something about quotas and such making the US uncompetitive. Among the machines I singlehandedly designed is the machine that produces the capacitors for every motorola phone in use today. Also the machine that checks for purity in molten steel use in the production of all Ford vehicles, amongst other things.

    ReplyDelete
  140. By the way Amused I had no schooling in design other than a home course in autocad. Just something I'm good at, I guess.

    ReplyDelete
  141. What, it was obviously an attempt to show you what your male brain desires NWOslave.

    ReplyDelete
  142. Capt Bathrobe, did you say Mozart had an extrodinary innate talent. Impossible I tells ya, that would mean biology. And as we all know biology doesn't dictate ability.

    ReplyDelete
  143. Now you are claiming to be an American NWOslave on top of being a Canadian.

    Wow. That makes your ignorant point about the size of the US government doubling 10 years after the vote (and the equally bizarre claim that full voting rights only happened thirty years ago in 1981) even dumber because you ignored what happened ten years after women got the vote.

    Cue blaming women for that mess as well by NWOslave.

    ReplyDelete
  144. No, it does not. It contributes to it.

    ReplyDelete
  145. I'm afraid I'm straight Lizzy. And to be honest I prefer still pictures of naked women. Freaky almost like a biological thingy.

    ReplyDelete
  146. I never said I was a Canadian, just because I know a little more than US law and goings on just makes me diverse.

    ReplyDelete
  147. Nice of you to acknowledge something that most nutters like you do not-that being LGBT is what a person is born with rather then a choice.

    ReplyDelete
  148. But if 1 man is straight,surely they must all be!

    ReplyDelete
  149. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosalind_Franklin

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Curie

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_Lovelace

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypatia

    ReplyDelete
  150. You actually do not know anything NWOslave-it shows when you make such insanely stupid statements like "the size of government doubled ten years after women got the vote" (implying it was women no longer being taxed without representation that caused the expansion rather then what actually did happen.)

    ReplyDelete
  151. Perhaps they are lying about being gay, as Mike was lying about knowing the truth?

    ReplyDelete
  152. Everyone is genetically "straight" DesertRose. Just because indoctrination tells you what to believe doesn't change your biology.

    I'm sure you'll pull the old hermaphradite stuff out to show me how wrong I am. But I'm guessing those folks sure would've like to been born as one or the other.

    ReplyDelete
  153. LOL looks like you spoke too soon Elizabeth.

    ReplyDelete
  154. Damn if I did not do so DesertRose. Awesome logic pretzeling you are doing by the way.

    ReplyDelete
  155. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catherine_the_Great

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_I_of_England

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_Witches

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ching_Shih

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomoe_Gozen

    ReplyDelete
  156. People have been "practicing" gay sex for centuries. How do you know that you're not genetically gay, and have been, in fact, "indoctrinated" by modern society to believe you are straight?

    ReplyDelete
  157. “Well DesertRose it seems due to you biology you expressed your feelings by calling me a sexist dumbfuck. Apparently one of the disadvantages of having a deep limbic system is the lack of emotional control when someone disagrees with you. But of course you'll tell me it has nothing to do with biology even though it is female biology that has dictated your reaction. Weird huh?"

    Actually its funny you should say that because from your other information that you didn’t site from http://www.medicaleducationonline.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=46&Itemid=69 which you copied word for word says the following
    “The investigators found that women possess a significantly larger orbitofrontal-to-amygdala ratio (OAR) than men do. One can speculate from these findings that women might on average prove more capable of controlling their emotional reactions.”
    hmm looks like you’re the one that needs to do more reading. Perhaps there’s a reason you didn’t include that link. According to biology you’re the one who is unable to control your emotional reactions.
    Food for thought

    ReplyDelete
  158. Well I'm not going to go to all those posts Jediwitch but I'm thinking if I remember correctly, Curie was the one who basically translated a man ancient adding machine from french to english. And wasn't Ada a man who had a sex change? Kinda like a social and pysical construct?

    And really, as I said, if in 5000 years of recorded history, everything but what, about 20 inventions of the trillions upon trillions have been by men. How can the be explained by anything but biological differences. No great works of Art, music, philosophy, ect. I mean many of these things only took a pen and paper. Being "locked" in the home should've given women a distinct advantage. Not only that, a good guess would be 50% of all inventions were done in the home. Also since women obtain the lions share of bachelors and doctorates these days why nadda in the way of advancement in the last 40 years? There really can only be one explaination, biology.

    ReplyDelete
  159. Hey NWO, since your skill with machines is inherent as you are a man, how about another one of your manly skills, like art?
    I'm sure that since you're male your drawingswill be head and shoulders above such a talentless goon as Artemisia Gentileschi.
    http://www.bible-topten.com/images/1.15.Judith_Artemisia-Gentileschi-Judith-Beheading-Holofernes-1612.jpg

    ReplyDelete
  160. Wow DesertRose thats so profound, you've really got me thinking now. Once again denial of reality and political correctness reigns supreme.

    ReplyDelete
  161. Put the Kevlar vest on NWOslave, I have a paintball gun. Of course you could use the fire escape to get out of the way, and if it is raining when you jump into your car to get away, the windshield wipers will help you see.

    If it is flooding, use the life raft to escape but be sure to take some chocolate chip cookies.

    When you get back and you need to use your circular saw but get hurt, you can always have the doctor use a medical syringe to numb the pain.

    By the way, these are all inventions by women I am mentioning.

    And not knowing who Madam Curie is, really? Just how dumb are you? Can you even dress yourself in the morning?

    ReplyDelete
  162. Don't forget Pope Joan, Hypatia, Lucrezia Borgia, Hildegard of Bingen, Diotima (of The Symposium) and Ching Shih, who had a pirate fleet bigger than the Chinese Navy and was never actually caught. Not to mention any woman who could not become the next Hypatia or Lady Ada Lovelace because she was busy having and raising children - your ancestors.

    And I'll start watching more porn when more porn actors are actually hot. At least with erotic writing, the actors and actresses can look exactly how I want them to look.

    ReplyDelete
  163. Well Scott, I've played a guitar for those 10,000 hours thats supposed to make me good and I absolutely suck. Biology fucked me.

    ReplyDelete
  164. Well except for the paintball gun. No idea who invented that.

    ReplyDelete
  165. Wow elizebeth is that a few of the 20 inventions in 5000 years of recorded history. I mean really, c'mon what is so hard about admitting men are good at these things.

    It's not like men in the evil patriarchy invented a washing machine and said "Oh no, down to the river with your washboard and bucket wench, washing machines are for mens use only."

    I mean haven't all the things men have invented made your lives easier and more enjoyable? I know, I know, men invented wars and bombs and guns to kill women and their children. Evil Bastards.

    Is it so bad to say, Hey, men are pretty good at this stuff, keep up the good work.

    ReplyDelete
  166. NWO has been musically fucked by biology, and not his lack of practice.

    ReplyDelete
  167. You cannot be musically fucked by biology, as many men are not musically fucked by biology, and you are all the same remember? "Each as a whole"?

    This has been too easy. I'm bored. See ya round everyone.

    ReplyDelete
  168. NWO has yet to show me his drawings in comparison to Gentileschi.

    ReplyDelete
  169. DesertRose your circular logic once again befuddles me. As I said men as a whole have these distinct brain features. So therefore, men as a whole have invented all these fine advancements. Chaching, jackpot.

    ReplyDelete
  170. Instead of my drawings vs Gentileschi, I'll show you DaVincci's instead. Men as a whole, once again.

    ReplyDelete
  171. But NWOslave, I thought that all men's brains were just different from all women's brains.
    So, clearly, as you and DaVinci have more in common than Gentileschi and DaVicni, wouldn't you and he both be better than her?
    Or is it possible that sometimes women and men have skills and traits in common?

    Perish the thought!

    ReplyDelete
  172. Hey Dave, you should thank me for being here. I gotta be honest ya without me here this thread woul've been a dead end.

    ReplyDelete
  173. Capt Bathrobe, did you say Mozart had an extrodinary innate talent. Impossible I tells ya, that would mean biology. And as we all know biology doesn't dictate ability.

    You didn't really read what I wrote, did you?

    ReplyDelete
  174. Circular logic doesn't mean what you think it does you buffoon.

    Also, Elisabeth-Louise Vigee-Le Brun. Why can't you paint better than her since as a man you're inherently good at painting? Why are her paintings comparable to many male artists?

    Okay, now I'm done.

    ReplyDelete
  175. Being "locked" in the home should've given women a distinct advantage.

    See, this is why no one takes you seriously.

    ReplyDelete
  176. The list is much longer then that NWOslave which you would know if you had two brain cells to rub together.

    ReplyDelete
  177. Men as a whole Scott Men as a whole, try and keep up. Repeating myself gets a bit tiring.

    I'll ask you a question now. Since in the past 20 years women have had better education than men, shouldn't at least 50% of all advancements be by women? So in the past twenty years please name all the patents, inventions, ect. If there is any less than 50% of all these things whats the expaination? Don't tell me it's oppression with AA, Title IX, ect, ect, ect. I mean c'mon, you have to do better than that.

    ReplyDelete
  178. And you know they are not how NWOslave?

    ReplyDelete
  179. Sorry, your point doesn't hold up. Repeating it doesn't make it work.
    If ALL MEN have more in common with each other, and nothing in common will women, why would women such as Gentileschi, Kollwitz and O'Keefe (just a few examples) have artistic abilities that are just as good as their male peers, and better than most of the male (and female) population?
    If women's brains all had a structure that made them inferior in the arts, then wouldn't all men be better than all women at art?
    Additionally, since women are supposed to have brains that assist them with language, why are authors such as Steinbeck, Fitzgerald and Shakespeare as amazing as they are? As men, they were clearly at a biological disadvantage!
    Your gender essentialism doesn't hold up.

    It's because of hundred of years of systematic oppression. Fancy that.
    AA, Title IX etc. are there to help women catch up after being barred from education for, you know, the majority of human history.
    You won't accept it as an answer, however, so there's no real point to me answering it.
    Being willfully ignorant really shuts down a conversation, doesn't it.

    ReplyDelete
  180. Well thats easy Elizabeth, google things women have invented in the past twenty years. There have obviously been millions of inventions, advancements, improvements, patents in that time.

    Again all I'm saying is men happen to be good at these things. Men as a whole love women. We don't oppress you. Think about it, why would I do something that would be harmful to the women I love. It makes no sense.

    If a saw a woman who I didn't even know being attacked by a bear or in a burning building, I would literally risk my life to save her. I mean thats a pretty good quality to have as a man, don't you think? It's the same with inventing and building stuff, it's a pretty good quality, right? Well these are innate qualities men have. Women naturally have qualities of empathy, they "feel" another persons pain. They are naturally good with children. Men love those qualities in women and we say it all the time. So if mens natural qualities allows him to ease certain burdens of life, why make it out to be a competition? Why not love those qualities in men? These are innate differences in the genders.

    ReplyDelete
  181. "Men as a whole love women. We don't oppress you. Think about it, why would I do something that would be harmful to the women I love. It makes no sense."

    All of your comments have shown that you clearly do not.
    Gender essentialism is oppression, and you seem pretty well tied to it.
    Wanting to fuck somebody doesn't mean you 'love' them. Adhering to basic human empathy doesn't mean you respect someone.
    I mean, good for you, you'd save someone's life if they were dying. Plenty of people who have good qualities can have bad qualities too, like sexism!

    Also, I am a woman, and I am totally awful with kids. My sister is good with them, but I am not.
    And, while we're at it, every human being (barring sociopaths) have empathy. It's not a woman-only trait.

    Men should not, do not, and cannot have a monopoly on certain traits, good or bad. I'm not trying to make it a competition, I'm trying to make people understand that there are more than two pathetic little shitty boxes and you can only be in one box of qualities.

    I'll bet you don't even understand the concept of genderqueer people, do you? Of course not.

    I also had another comment earlier on, but it seems to be caught in the spam filter. I answered your question about women's inventions in the past twenty years, but I don't think you'll accept the answer.

    ReplyDelete
  182. Again, you made a claim that women have done NO inventing for the past 20 years based on NO information.

    So all I had to find is ONE invention (which I did) and I proved you wrong on your claim. So you are once again, shown to be the misogynist ignoramus who makes claims he cannot back up ever.

    ReplyDelete
  183. Five thousand years ago, the vast majority of cultures were not literary and even most literary cultures did not have any patenting system, meaning that we do not know who invented pretty much everything used in these cultures. Patents are a modern western invention, for the most part (some east asian cultures had a system of exclusive production rights that was different in some significant ways but similar in others). And, surprise surprise, women in Renaissance and Industrial western Europe were generally legally prohibited from owning property or holding patents. Which means that if a woman invented something for use in the home in, say, the 1600s, she would have no patent and would not be widely credited. Once women were allowed to have patents and own property, they did in fact begin to patent inventions of major household items, including making major advancements to stove design and refrigeration, invention the electric water heater, inventing disposable diapers, etc. So, you are wrong. Women have been inventing, they just have not been given credit because the system of crediting inventions you utilize is one purposefully and systematically designed to deny them such credit.

    Art has similar conventions, actually. Artistic fields dominated by women or the poor were considered excluded from the category of "real" art. So, things like the every bit as skilled as (if not more than) the paintings at the time embroidery, lacemaking, and tapestry work done by medieval women was not credited as majestic art.

    PS, the first electric washing machine was in fact designed by a woman named Alva J. Fisher.

    ReplyDelete
  184. NWO, are you saying that you think a woman who saw another person, regardless of gender, in imminent peril, that she *wouldn't* try to help? OF COURSE saving people from peril is a good quality, and I posit it is one shared by most of humanity.

    And "men happen to be good at these things" is NOT all you're saying. You also said "No great works of Art, music, philosophy, ect." by which I assumed you to mean that women haven't done these things. You are not "just" saying that men have good qualities, you are insisting that women lack these qualities.

    And I would like to know why, if it is SO EASY to break into the Manly World Of Art, most famous female novelists were encouraged (or Forced!) to publish under a male pseudonym? I'll take misogyny for $500!

    ReplyDelete
  185. What would you do if you saw a woman being attacked by a man, NWO?

    ReplyDelete
  186. @NWOslave

    Now you're assuming that if I saw a man being attacked by a bear or in a burning building, I wouldn't try to save him. You're assuming I wouldn't like to invent or build stuff. You're assuming I am good with children.

    All because I'm a woman. That pisses me off.

    Because I know that what you say of all women is not true of me. As Sojourner Truth said, "Ain't I a woman?" If those qualities that you ascribe to women don't apply to me, then what am I? An alien?

    Though, frankly, I'd rather be an alien than share a species with you.

    ReplyDelete
  187. Here's a nice little summary of some of the arguments against gender essentialism:

    http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/05/10/faq-but-men-and-women-are-born-different-isnt-that-obvious/

    ReplyDelete
  188. Darksidecat, Alva J. Fisher did not invent the first electronic washing machine.

    http://www.oldewash.com/articles/Electric_Washer.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  189. Mike Booth, why not ask what would I do if I saw a woman being attacked by another woman. I t seems you've fallen into the Man = Bad, Woman = Good indoctrination.

    ReplyDelete
  190. Ecccktually, Alva John Fisher was a man. The patent on file before his is to an unknown person who could have been a man or a woman. BaM! I learned some history!

    ReplyDelete
  191. "Mike Booth, why not ask what would I do if I saw a woman being attacked by another woman. I t seems you've fallen into the Man = Bad, Woman = Good indoctrination."

    I presume he asked because, in general, MRAs tend to be overprotective about male abusers, and are obsessed with a woman v. male war type of perspective.

    I don't think you believe in a gender war though, just an outdated way of looking at gender.

    Also I really don't think indoctrination means what you think it means.

    ReplyDelete
  192. Hello all, thought it'd be a good time to de-lurk and say hi.

    David, love the blog, great stuff. I honestly hadn't heard of the MRM until I started reading, and while some of it is pretty disturbing, you manage to reveal even the worst bits in an amusing light. It's also gotten me to think more about gender issues in a very postive way.

    The comments section is something else, and I might have had more fun reading the arguments that flair up than the actual articles. Kudos to all, especially in dealing with hyperbole, reactionism, and the nonsensical coming in from the other side. I think I might enjoy my stay here. :P

    ReplyDelete
  193. I actually went to that site Capt Bathrobe and shocker of shocker it's just more of the same gender is a construct nonesense. Once again ideology trumps science. Go political correctness!!!

    ReplyDelete
  194. You're the one insisting on inherent gender differences, NWO. Are you able to answer my question?

    ReplyDelete
  195. Yes Scott, my secret goal of protecting male abusers. This stuff is priceless. Is there a shop down at the local mall where I could buy some male abuser protection gear?

    ReplyDelete
  196. Sure I can answer your question Mike, I would jump right in there and either get my ass kicked or win the day. I was trying to avoid using man as the oppressor in my analogy, but I guess it was too good of an opportunity for you to bash men as evil oppressors. My bad, I should have just went right for men being filthy oppressive swine. I'll do better next time.

    ReplyDelete
  197. "Yes Scott, my secret goal of protecting male abusers. This stuff is priceless. Is there a shop down at the local mall where I could buy some male abuser protection gear?"

    I never said anything of the sort.
    What I did say is that MRAs tend to have a view of a war between the sexes, where beating a woman may be considering acceptable because 'if she wants to be equal like a man, she can be beaten like a man'.
    I said you have an unfortunate view of gender. I never said that you want to protect abusers.

    Please attempt to read comments fully before responding to them.

    ReplyDelete
  198. Hey!!! Maybe thats my problem, I should have said men are inherently evil, oppressive swine. Now theres something we can all get behind.

    Hehe, I said get behind. Must be my evil male self rearing it's ugly head.

    ReplyDelete

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

Sociable

ShareThis