 |
| "We hunted the mammoth": Always hilarious! |
Also, Scott Adams himself has responded in the Feministe comments section to my post about him. Some highlights of his, er, argument:
Is this an entire website dedicated to poor reading comprehension? I don’t think one of you understood the writing. You’re all hopping mad about your own misinterpretations. ...
In this case, the content of the piece inspires so much emotion in some readers that they literally can’t understand it. The same would be true if the topic were about gun ownership or a dozen other topics. As emotion increases, reading comprehension decreases. This would be true of anyone, but regular readers of the Dilbert blog are pretty far along the bell curve toward rational thought, and relatively immune to emotional distortion. ...
You’re angry, but I’ll bet every one of you agrees with me.
Wow. Just, wow. How narcissistic and delusional do you have to be to even type out that last bit, much less post it on the internet for all to see?
I wonder if Scott Adams would agree with the "we hunted the mammoth to feed you" guy? I'm sort of thinking that he just might.
I agree he lacks the ability to comprehend stuff he reads. And he is being emotional.
ReplyDeleteYou know what...I used to actually buy all Dilbert books and even read Scott Adams blog even though he did come across as a bit of a know it all....I loved the comic and was really disappointed in said blog post but excused it as well maybe he was just trying to play both sides and came across as more douchy then he really was.... But afterinsulting the Femineste website and basically saying that everyone that disagreed with him suddenly had a low IQ...I am no longer a fan...The comic is still good but Scott Adams is not as brillant as he thinks he is...NO WAY!
ReplyDeleteI like how he assumes we are in a mad rage instead of bewildered amusement.
ReplyDeleteThe whole "I'm rational" and "You're emotional" dichotomy is so grating. And given what he wrote, it's clear he was going for an emotional response as much as anything. This is classic "gotcha" gaming on Mr. Adams part, and for him to claim some higher ground based on a "rational reading" is beyond ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteWow, Scott Adams pretty much responded in the same way as Gabe & Tycho did after the "Dickwolves" incident.
ReplyDeleteFirst and foremost, Scott Adams is probably correct in saying most people agree with him. At least most men.
ReplyDeleteMaggie, whether or not that's true, and I don't think it is, he's not saying that to "most people." He's saying that to commenters on Feministe who have specifically stated that they do not agree with him.
ReplyDeleteSorry, Stringy, I may skim your bullshit articles that don't actually prove the point you claim to make, but asking me to sit through some douche bag on YouTube quoting Steven Pinker out of context for 6 minutes is going just a bit too far. I have a life, after all.
ReplyDeleteI find amusing the concept that if an opinion makes others angry, that automatically makes that opinion correct. Turn that shit around, you know? After all, Scott Adams is now angry. That automatically makes him wrong, by his own measure. He's just so emotional, after all.
ReplyDeleteawww see he's just a giant man child who never grew up afterall
ReplyDeleteI haven't read Dilbert in years, but I'm thinking of going out and finding some, just so I can send it back to him. Maybe Value Village has some in the seconds bin?
ReplyDeleteHe really couldn't have picked a worse response. And so quotable!
I can tell by Scott Adam's surprise at the awful reading comprehension of feminists that he isn't used to dealing with them. I've lost count of the number of times feminists hastily read something I wrote and then responded to a point I never even made. Especially amusing was the feminist right here who thought that I said there was no Internet back in 2001.
ReplyDeleteI don't fully agree with what Scott Adams wrote but at least I actually read what he wrote carefully to make sure I fully understood it.
I love how Mr. Adams posted a blog post publicly, and then claimed that it was only for his readership. Does he not know that everyone can see everything on the interwebs, unless you password protect it?
ReplyDeleteThe Internet, how fuck does it work? Must be miracle indeed.
Damn - "Must be a miracle indeed." The stupid is contagious.
ReplyDeleteI think in your case it's a pre-existing condition. See, in Adam's own comment he said, "This piece was designed for regular readers of The Scott Adams blog." He never said it was "only for his readership", just that it was DESIGNED for his regular readers. Anyone with decent reading comprehension would get that.
ReplyDeleteChrist that man is an ass. His final response is that, if those emotional ladies really knew their own minds, they'd realize they agree. Thanks for telling the ladies how they feel, Mr. Adams! After all, there's no possibility that you're just wrong as shit!
ReplyDelete@e-string: "If there is one thing your movement has come to represent, it is a lot of screaming and little productive discourse."
ReplyDeleteThe reader will please be advised that "productive discourse" now includes dick-waving, trash-talking, ranking-out, and mangina-calling.
just that it was DESIGNED for his regular readers
ReplyDeleteYes, and it's on THE INTERNET. For everyone with an internet connection to read and/or mock. He just doesn't like being challenged on his ideas.
Well, I certainly learned something today. The Turner Diaries was designed for anti-semites and racists, therefore rational Jews and non-whites would never be offended by it. But alas, Jews and non-whites lack decent reading comprehension. [End of sarcastic comment]
ReplyDeleteHe just doesn't like being challenged on his ideas.
ReplyDeleteI have been disappointed by the policy of many feminist sites to censor or edit comments which challenge their views (Feministing and Jezebel for example; contrast this to The Spearhead or AVfM where the comment moderation is done for behavioral rather than ideological reasons). David seems to have that "only good has come of modern feminism, you are a woman-hater for believing otherwise" dogma, though I can respect the rare feminist who permits divergent comments.
Well, I certainly learned something today. The Turner Diaries was designed for anti-semites and racists, therefore rational Jews and non-whites would never be offended by it. But alas, Jews and non-whites lack decent reading comprehension. [End of sarcastic comment]
ReplyDeleteTo say that you missed the point would be a massive understatement.
Oh lord you MRA guys...you are the 'rational' side and yet your discussions involve 'government feminist pimp daddies' and women who are weeping over their jealousy of sex robots and women who pretend they were raped for a laugh despite the repercussions.
ReplyDeleteSeriously, like...play some video games, have a chat with a woman without exploding in self-righteousness, smoke a joint, i dunno. Women and men are both pretty fucked without each other, and as it's possible to live in harmony, why not give it a try?
It's possible to live in harmony but it requires that both men and women are treated equally under the law and that laws are enforced against both genders equally. It also requires large-scale rejection of the outdated notion of chivalry and a cultural shift in which men and women are held to equal standards. These are all MRA goals and, when realized, will facilitate more harmonious living.
ReplyDeleteThese are all feminist goals
ReplyDeleteFixed that for you.
Actions speak louder than words, and words spoken in public advocacy speak louder than lip service paid to men's issues by feminists in a comment section.
ReplyDeleteLet me know when feminists actually start advocating for equal sentencing for crimes, real punishments for false accusers, government programs to investigate and address the issues of disproportionate male suicide and incarceration, an end to affirmative action, and giving men an equal choice to opt out of potential parenthood.
I'll wait.
You'll wait a fuck of a long time because 1: you're making shit up out of whole cloth for a lot of it; 2: the few shreds of reality that might be included in your whines are due to male privilege, and 3: get off your lazy ass and clean up your own damned house.
ReplyDeleteAnd your obsession with false rape accusations is highly revealing----and bonus! "An equal choice in potential parenthood." You DO have an equal choice in parenthood: it's called birth control. Use it. And accept---as women have had to for millenia---that accidents still happen. Men don't get rights that biology didn't grant them. YOu want control over womens' bodies after you've already used up your choices with your own. It's like those whines about how women have to do all this shit for men. Get off your ass. Do it yourself. Women don't have to do shit for MRAs. Do it yourself.
LOL, I see you haven't lost your machete mouth.
ReplyDeleteWhat is it with you and telling MRAs to clean their own damned houses? Don't you know that most of us live alone? Who else but ourselves is going to clean them if we don't want to hire a cleaning service?
"Equal sentencing for crimes" I would love to see some actual evidence of of unequal sentencing. Yes, beyond the fact that men make up a majority of convicted criminals because they commit a majority of crimes. If a group that commits 10% of crime made up half of the prison population, now that would be solid evidence of unequal sentencing. Women should not be half of the prisoners because they do not commit even close to half of the crime. There is a tiny amount of evidence that suggests women murderers get less time, but women murderers also tend to commit their crimes in different ways-ways that would also result in lower sentencing for a man who murdered. Firearm use, torture of the victim, killing in the course of another felony-women have those aggravating factors far less often then men. There is no disproportionate punishment here-men commit the vast bulk of crimes and are the vast majority of prisoners.
ReplyDelete"real punishments for false accusers" Perjury and filing a false police report both carry jail sentences if convicted. Except you do not want to give these women actual trials do you? Because then you might have to prove they lied, rather than just assuming any failure to convict or any success in convicting equals lying. Falsely accusing someone of rape carries comparable legal penalties to other false felony accustions.
As to suicide prevention, I have yet to be one a university campus that did not have some discussion of suicide prevention and campus resources built into the orientation. What you want is not suicide of males addressed during general suicide discussion, you want to discuss it seperately-which does make it an issue of doing the work yourself.
"giving men an equal choice to opt out of potential parenthood" You have this. See my other comments in regards to your womb envy for more on that one.
giving men an equal choice to opt out of potential parenthood.
ReplyDeleteAh, condoms don't exist where you are?
I suppose you mean "giving men an equal choice to opt out of fiduciary duty"? Too bad, toots. Don't stick your junk in a woman that you don't trust, or get the snip snip if your money is more important that a human being.
Ah, condoms don't exist where you are?
ReplyDeleteA condom confers the mechanical ability to contain semen and prevent a pregnancy from occurring as long as it doesn't fail; it's not the same thing as having legal equality.
I suppose you mean "giving men an equal choice to opt out of fiduciary duty"?
That too. What's so outrageous about men having the same choice as women?
Too bad, toots. Don't stick your junk in a woman that you don't trust, or get the snip snip if your money is more important that a human being.
Is that....yes, it is! Victim blaming!!!
I'm really getting a kick out of this pattern:
ReplyDelete1: Some vapid feminist says that MRA goals are feminist goals.
2: I point out what feminists would have to do if that were true.
3: More feminists come out to prove why the MRM is needed in the first place.
Too bad, toots. Don't stick your junk in a woman that you don't trust, or get the snip snip if your money is more important that a human being.
ReplyDeleteIs that....yes, it is! Victim blaming!!!
Why no, it's not, because men aren't the victims here. The bit about "don't stick your junk in women you don't trust" bit is pretty important. Of course the problem MRAs tend to have with that is that they distrust women by default.
Lying to a man about being unable to conceive(due to infertility or the use of a chemical contraceptive) may not be a crime but it's still a deceitful act and can therefore have victims. 4string engaged in true victim blaming by faulting the victim without expressing any condemnation whatsoever towards the perpetrator.
ReplyDeleteYes, beyond the fact that men make up a majority of convicted criminals because they commit a majority of crimes.
ReplyDeleteIf that's a satisfactory explanation for men comprising 90+% of the prison population, then why isn't women choosing lower-paying(but more personally satisfying) careers or failing to quality for higher-paying ones a satisfactory explanation for the wage gap? The double-standard here is breathtaking. If the wage gap is worthy of a government-funded investigation then so is the prison gap, if only to figure out WHY so many more men commit crimes.
Perjury and filing a false police report both carry jail sentences if convicted.
I have yet to year of a single woman in a single English-speaking county other than the UK spending even one day in jail for falsely accusing a man of rape. Even in the UK, the maximum sentence I have heard reported is a paltry two years. A proper sentence would be one equal to the one carried by the crime she fabricated.
Except you do not want to give these women actual trials do you?
Of course I want them to get fair trails, which includes the burden of proof being on the prosecution to prove that they were actually lying and not merely mistaken.
What you want is not suicide of males addressed during general suicide discussion, you want to discuss it seperately-which does make it an issue of doing the work yourself.
When the suicide stats are as lopsided as they are, a specific analysis of why men are the ones committing 80% of them is warranted. I suspect that feminists are afraid if what will come out of such a study, however, since it would likely deal the killing blow to their already pummeled case for the existence of "male privilege".
"giving men an equal choice to opt out of potential parenthood" You have this. See my other comments in regards to your womb envy for more on that one.
See my response to it.
Cold:
ReplyDelete1: Some vapid feminist says that MRA goals are feminist goals.
2: I point out what what MRAs would be doing if they were serious about their stated goals.
3: MRAs bitch and whine about being called out for not actively pursuing their stated goals.
FIFY
Here you go Cold.
ReplyDeleteHere is another.
Here is another
Seattle
DOJ report
Of course those are in the US-I saw some from India but no original sources so I did not post them.
I suppose you mean "giving men an equal choice to opt out of fiduciary duty"? Too bad, toots. Don't stick your junk in a woman that you don't trust, or get the snip snip if your money is more important that a human being.
ReplyDeleteI'll be setting up a livejournal account to archive and comment on comments like these. Search for "manboobz," it should be up within a week if work permits.
I will say that ordering a man not to sleep with women he does not trust to avoid child support hardly fits this whole "empathy" bill the feminists have been harping on lately. Using the same logic, the courts should throw out acquaintance rape cases because the woman should not have been with someone she didn't trust.
ReplyDeleteIt's telling that the other feminists actually defended this claim.
Moving on to the "snip-snip" part of this train wreck, why doesn't she lead by example and donate all her money to aid organizations if people are so much more important to her than money? Don't donate them to reputable agencies, however, to get a similar experience just pick a random address and mail it there. I'm sure whoever gets it will put it to good use.
E-string: I will say that ordering a man not to sleep with women he does not trust to avoid child support hardly fits this whole "empathy" bill the feminists have been harping on lately. Using the same logic, the courts should throw out acquaintance rape cases because the woman should not have been with someone she didn't trust.
ReplyDeleteIt's telling that the other feminists actually defended this claim.
Sorry, string, being ordered to support a child you've fathered isn't the same as being pinned down and penetrated against your will. The latter involves a violation of bodily integrity that the former doesn't. Also, a man who rapes a woman he's acquainted with isn't necessarily someone she didn't trust. More often than not, those rapes involve a betrayal of trust. It's a significant difference.
And even that is beside the point. You are free to engage in risky behavior if you so choose, although I will generally have more empathy for the victim of a violent crime than with someone who doesn't want to contribute to the care of his own progeny. It would be wise for men not to sleep with women they don't know well or trust, just like it would be wise for women not to be with someone who isn't trustworthy. What's at issue here is society's reaction when people DO engage in risky behavior.
You display the classic patriarchal entitlement when it comes to sex -- the belief that men should be able to fuck whomever they want, in whatever way they want, without consequences, criticism or damage to their reputation; women, by contrast, are expected to endure any burden in the name of responsibility, because whatever bad thing happens to a woman, it's clearly her fault for letting it happen. And so, people like you believe that limiting men's sexual behavior in any way whatsoever -- expecting men not to fuck children, or women who are drunk, or women who aren't consenting, or to put on a condom or have a vasectomy if they don't want to run the risk of fathering children -- is an onerous burden on men's liberty, while women who want to escape rape are expected to curtail themselves in radical ways, going so far as to refrain from behavior which in and of itself is neither recreational nor immoral. For traditionalists like you, a man's entitlement to have an orgasm on his own terms is so important, it trumps a woman's bodily autonomy: hence all the pushing to giving men the right to force women they've impregnated to carry the pregnancy to term, or to have an abortion, or the right to be free from financial obligations while retaining the right to barge into the child's life at some later time.
If a woman gets pregnant as a result of rape by an acquaintance, she DOES have to deal with consequences: pregnancy and abortion or childbirth. I cannot take seriously any man who treats pregnancy and childbirth, or abortion on the other hand, as if they are nothing. If a rape victim gives birth, she too must support the child. And if she didn't report the rape, she might just find herself on the receiving end of a lawsuit from the rapist seeking visitation. So this while acquaintance rape thing isn't as consequence-free as you imagine.
Elizabeth,
ReplyDeleteThat's the first I have ever heard of anyone going to jail for a false rape accusation outside the UK, but the sentences are still just as ridiculously light as they are in the UK.
Sorry, string, being ordered to support a child you've fathered isn't the same as being pinned down and penetrated against your will.
ReplyDeleteExactly, it's much, much worse. The latter lasts for some number of minutes, the former for at least 18 years. Given the choice it would be a no-brainer for me, and I think a very large number of men agree with me on this.
hence all the pushing to giving men the right to force women they've impregnated to carry the pregnancy to term
ReplyDeleteNo, that's religion. It's not about controlling women, it's about theological belief. Try to see things outside the scope of your pet theory.
or to have an abortion
No, though you seem to have no qualms about a woman forcing a man to be a father and then demanding support.
or the right to be free from financial obligations while retaining the right to barge into the child's life at some later time.
If he doesn't pay child support, he doesn't have visitation rights. I never said he should have visitation rights without child support. Some feminists really need to work on their critical thinking skills, they have trouble getting anything unless you spell it out for them.
Um, Coldie, the problem with you loses is that you're NOT hiring a cleaning service. You're demanding that everybody suck up your dirt for free and furthermore rejoice over the opportunity. Somebody's delusions of adequacy.
ReplyDeleteThe latter endures for some number of minutes, the former for at least 18 years.
Wow. "Asshole" isn't strong enough. Let's compare, shall we? Rape: violent, invasive attack which society blames you for. Paternity: writing a paltry check that doesn't come close to paying for the kid's kleenex, much less anything more substantial.
You're a scumbag. Especially seeing as how, in this scenario, YOU are minimizing rape while standing in the position of rapist. Good job, Coldie, you've exposed MRAs for good.
Rape: violent, invasive attack which society blames you for. Paternity: writing a paltry check that doesn't come close to paying for the kid's kleenex, much less anything more substantial.
ReplyDeleteAnother one for the archive!
You're a lying sack of shit if you dare say that society doesn't blame rape victims for rape. Oh, wait, but you call it emotions and hormones, so there's my proof. I'm going to pre-emptively ban you and urge everyone else to do so as well. Good luck being an asshole.
ReplyDeleteI'm going to pre-emptively ban you and urge everyone else to do so as well.
ReplyDeleteI never knew you cared so much!
I'd tell my friends how to wash their clothes off if their pet brought in fleas and ticks, too.
ReplyDeleteThat's the dehumanizing you feminists hate so much. Don't worry, though, your adorable little tantrum has not gone unnoticed. I must say, though, you are much more pleasant when you are quiet.
ReplyDeleteSo, what motivates this ill-fated plot anyway? I know it isn't some desire to save livejournal like you implied, so what is it? Are you moody and angry and want to lash out at me? Are you worried about the impact quoting feminists could have? You may speak now, and try to be rational.
ReplyDeleteLook at this stupid asshole. He thinks women will keep talking to him after he's revealed himself to be a rapist apologist, a sexist scumbag, and a desperate loser who wants attention.
ReplyDeleteLook at this stupid asshole. He thinks women will keep talking to him after he's revealed himself to be a rapist apologist, a sexist scumbag, and a desperate loser who wants attention.
ReplyDeleteI don't respect your intelligence enough to care about your attention. You are entertaining, but I couldn't care less what you think of me. After all, you're just a feminist.
Good luck on the censorship and shine on!
Cold-so what do you think should be done about those sentences? Do you think women should go to jail for seven or more years because a guy was exonerated?
ReplyDeletee4919, you really think that posting quotes from a feminist saying that being raped is worse than paying child support for a child you fathered -- a statement which is pretty self-evidently true and reasonable to anyone who is not an MRA --is going to win people over to your side?
ReplyDeleteBest of luck with that, then.
So if a woman lies about being on the pill and then has a child without my consent and then does everything in her power to keep me away from said child, it's my responsibility to pay child support. And this should be self-evident. Oh, and somehow that role resembles fathering.
ReplyDeleteI hope you're getting laid for this, or at least raking in some serious dough. It won't excuse you, but at least I'll understand why you do this to yourself.
As feminists are not good at seeing anything that is not spelled out to them, it is not just the child support that is a problem. It is the fact that the mother:
ReplyDelete1. Wins sole custody of the child for being a woman
2. Does everything in her power to keep the father away from the child
3. Then demands payment for a child he never even sees and most likely hates him for being a "deadbeat dad"
If a mother forces a father to have no parental role in a child's life, he should also have no financial role. That's not too hard, is it?
O noes, he posted about you on his Livejournal. Whatever shall you do?
ReplyDeleteSeriously though, guys, you've got a troll problem. I'd hang out here more, but I don't want to talk to this joker every time.
-katz
The last post of yours String makes some assumptions-
ReplyDelete1. the woman will win sole custody because she is a woman in a court action.
2. the Court will prohibit father's access to the child
3. will raise the child to hate the father while forcing the father to pay for the child.
----------------------
If the father wants to have sole custody, that is highly unlikely unless there is some kind of evidence the mother should not have any custody. If he wants joint custody-that is much more likely to get as more and more states are moving to joint custody. If he wants just visitation rights, he can also ask for those.
If the mother is refusing to give access to the father absent a court order, he should go file for that court order and if she fails to comply afterward, the court can hold her in contempt.
He can bring up to the court he is making child support payments and he would like to have a relationship with his child beyond a financial one.
And yes, this requires him to do something more beyond just sitting there complaining.
You're a lying sack of shit if you dare say that society doesn't blame rape victims for rape.
ReplyDeleteNaturally, no citations are provided to show that society blames rape victims for rape.
Cold-so what do you think should be done about those sentences? Do you think women should go to jail for seven or more years because a guy was exonerated?
ReplyDeleteWhen a guy is exonerated, the next step for the prosecutor's office should be to review the case and determine if there is a compelling evidence that the false accuser was lying(as opposed to being merely mistaken). If such evidence exists, that false accuser should get a fair trail for her crime, with the burden of proof on the prosecution.
Upon conviction, the false accuser should get the same sentence that was faced by her victim. In addition, if her victim would have been put on a sex offender registry then the false accuser should be but on an equivalent false accuser registry which would have the same level of public availablity as the sex offender registry.
To argue for anything less than this is to trivialize the harm suffered by victims of false accusations, and is most likely motivated by plain misandry.
So do you also think that someone who falsely accuses someone of a different type of crime-say murder-should also face the same penalty? Even if that penalty was the death sentence?
ReplyDeleteOr is it only false rape accusations that are somehow so evil and wrong that deserve seven years or more?
Um, Coldie, the problem with you loses is that you're NOT hiring a cleaning service. You're demanding that everybody suck up your dirt for free and furthermore rejoice over the opportunity. Somebody's delusions of adequacy.
ReplyDeleteGinmar, I know this is a really tall order for you, but could you at least ACT sane for a minute and explain exactly how I am demanding that anyone clean my place for free?
You're a scumbag. Especially seeing as how, in this scenario, YOU are minimizing rape while standing in the position of rapist.
ReplyDeleteYou're a lunatic. How am I standing in the position of rapist when I have never raped anybody?
Anyone who falsely accuses anyone else of any crime should get the same sentence as they would for committing that crime themselves, as long as it can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that they were lying and not merely mistaken.
ReplyDeleteIf the person filing a false report is being sentenced the same if the original person had been sentenced despite no one having an idea because there was no sentence for that person, you support giving that false report person the death penalty if that was a sentence a victim of the false report could have gotten.
ReplyDeleteAnyone who falsely accuses anyone else of any crime should get the same sentence as they would for committing that crime themselves, as long as it can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that they were lying and not merely mistaken.
ReplyDeleteEither lying or mistaken, those are the only possibilities? How about all the cases in which the victim is neither lying nor mistaken, and the rapist walks anyway?
David, I hate to tell you, but you're just encouraging MRA porn. It's like terror porn, or like torture porn. I won't be tuning in anymore. I quite believe I've seen more than enough.
ReplyDeleteHuh?
ReplyDeleteColdie wants a cite for proving a basic fact, like the earth is round. And then he has a tantrum when he doesn't get it.
ReplyDeleteDavid, I believe what they're saying is the MRAs need to be reined in more. None of this is new and a little goes a long way. Can't you crack down on at least the most egregious misogyny?
Hey ginny, I did a piece on you. I guess that "pre-emptive ban" didn't quite work out the way you thought, huh?
ReplyDelete