 |
| The face (and torso) of evil. |
Kluge, you see, is the former wife of a media mogul, and her divorce settlement in 1990 netted her hefty alimony payments, which are variously claimed to have been either $1.6 million a week, or "less than $1 million a year." The article linked to by the MGTOWers says she was rumored to have collected a settlement of a cool billion bucks and that the reported $1.6 million a week was just the interest on this vast sum. Who knows? It was a shitload of money. Plus a giant fucking mansion. Whatever the amount, Kluge has apparently blown through it all, spending huge amounts on ostentatious luxury crap and burning through tens of millions on her less-than-successful winery. Last month the bank repossessed her mansion.
So: this terrible woman was also a terrible businesswoman. Well, yeah. But to the fellows at MGTOWforums.com, her singular tale is a sign that women in general shouldn't be trusted with money -- or with anything else, for that matter. Chainlightning started off what turned into a veritable misogyny cascade by announcing:
Women should never have access to money. Look at what happened to the US since the 1960s.
Systems1082 saw Chainlightning's "women shouldn't have money" and raised him with "women shouldn't have the right to vote."
It actually goes back to 1920 when women were given the right to vote. They have learned they can vote themselves other people's money.
Stonelifter took it even further, suggesting that some women don't ever deserve the right to live:
i don't understand why men don't engage in more murder for hire
He followed this innocent little query up with a reference to the evil feminist Karl Marx and his followers at "some college in Berlin."
it goes back to about 1870 so so when marx decided tearing down Western civilization was best achieved on many small fronts and women would be one of them. Cultural marxism was tied up into one neat package in some college in Berlin during the 1920's but the idea to have women voting to fuck everything up came to marx at the tail end of his life
XTC pretty much trumped everyone by taking it back to the source: that bitch Eve.
It goes back to the garden of Eden when Eve screwed us all over.
So there you have it. Eve ate an apple, Patricia Kluge blew through money she didn't really deserve to have. Therefore, women are evil.
Um, have you MGTOWers ever heard of Nicolas Cage?
(Note: Before you tell me that Nic Cage earned his money fair and square, I ask that you sit down and watch The Wicker Man, Ghost Rider, National Treasure, National Treasure: Book of Secrets, Face/Off, and Con Air. Then get back to me. I will allow that he did a pretty good job in Kick-Ass.)
(Note 2: By "some college in Berlin in the 1920s," Stonelifter was of course referring to an assortment of Marxist theorists associated with a research institute that started in Frankfurt, not Berlin, in the 1920s, but which achieved its greatest influence after it moved to New York in the 1930s because of, you know, Hitler.)
--
If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly* use the "Share This" or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.
*Yes, that was a Bioshock reference.
I wish people who peddle fear about all those filthy radicals trying to destroy "Western civilization" would be a tad clearer about what "Western civilization" actually means. Democracy? Capitalism? Christianity? None of these are constants in the history of Western civilization.
ReplyDeleteOf course, they're being deliberately vague. By holding up "Western civilization" as some unassailable good in itself they get to deflect attention from the fact that reasonable people can disagree about the pros and cons of things like democracy, socialism, and capitalism without being a threat to all of civilization.
Feminism is the radical notion that women are people.
ReplyDeleteA certain number of female airheads, golddiggers and incompetents are not only accounted for, but actually PREDICTED, under this theory.
In my experience, "Western civilization" means "white people".
ReplyDeleteThis is why everything that is directly south of the US is usually not included, while Europe, Australia and South Africa are.
Well, it's not like men are ever irresponsible with their money. I mean, you never hear about CEO's paying themselves ridiculous salaries while laying off the people that helped them succeed in the first place because the economy's bad, or alcoholics that waste the entire family budget on drinks instead of providing for the kids they helped produce, or lottery winners that end up on the streets a year later cause they blew all that money on a lifestyle they couldn't maintain, or if you do hear about people like that, they're almost NEVER male.
ReplyDeleteMaybe because men are just better at math or something.
That comment left out the "/sarcasm" I put at the bottom of it, but hopefully it wasn't necessary.
ReplyDeleteBernie Madoff lost 70 billion dollars that he did not earn.
ReplyDeleteTherefore, the sensible conclusion is that we should ban men from voting or having money, and it's totally reasonable for women to murder them. Also this is all totally that dick Adam's fault.
Wow, this game is fun!
Funny, IME men are worse than money than women are. In most of the married couples I know, and in my own marriage, the wife is in charge of the couple's shared finances. Not because she's a castrating bitch but because someone has to make sure that the rent/mortgage gets paid and the power doesn't get cut off, and the men are not willing to take this on.
ReplyDeleteI only do a middling job of this myself - I know we could theoretically save more and pay down our debt faster - but we did manage to buy a house as two freelancers in the middle of a recession, so I must be doing something right.
But because some rich lady mismanaged her money and her business, I ought to lose the right to vote and get shot to boot. That makes sense.
Worse WITH money, not worse THAN money. Dammit!
ReplyDeleteI liked National Treasure :(
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, Kickass was awesome.
@iodineshuffle
ReplyDeleteI know, no wonder MRAs and MGTOWs play it so often! Time for the next round: Blame punk rock and/or sock monkeys for the failures of the United States public school system.
I refer you to this.
ReplyDeletehttp://xkcd.com/385/
Man, I was wondering when someone would bring up Eve... personally, I think the snake did us a favor. Enlightenment and knowledge? Hell, I'm glad Eve took the first bite! Eden was a prison and only seemed a paradise because Adam and Eve were too ignorant to tell the difference before the apple. It wasn't a fall or sin, it was uplifting and humans coming one step closer to gods.
ReplyDeleteBut that's the Gnostic in me speaking, I love the countercultural symbolism behind the Eden myth.
I wonder if XTC knows that men have been blaming Eve and using that as justification for misogyny for several thousand years. It's time to get some new material, folks!
No man has ever run a business into the ground. Read a book!
ReplyDeleteI believe that men's activities were behind the Wall Street crash of 1929 - not to mention every one since then. They were busy gambling away tons of money that wasn't their own.
ReplyDeleteSheesh.
@ Carswell:
ReplyDeleteBut they were only doing it to provide the women in their lives with a cushy lifestyle. So it's women's fault, again.
Because it was my *sister* who squandered away 10s of thousands of dollars of their college money on toys and DVDs and wound up in massive debt they can't climb out of ...
ReplyDeleteOh wait. I don't have a sister. Just a brother. Whoops.
Meanwhile, as much as I want to eat a nice dinner out somewhere, I can't justify spending $20 on one meal. But I'm sure MRAs would spin my frugality as being a "penny pinching no-fun feminist." Because you're always damned if you do and damned if you don't when you're a woman. (I'm sure they'd even try to paint my brother's behavior as something positive. Because he has a penis.)
choco,
ReplyDeleteObviously, your brother was just trying to impress gold-digging women, who then proceeded to cruelly ignore him in favor of alpha bad-boys. One can hardly blame him, really.
Meanwhile, your refusal to spend a lot of money on yourself means that you would, of course, expect any man you date to pay for a lavish dinner, after which you will then sleep with the alpha bad-boy waiter while your hapless date washes dishes to pay for your meal. Oh yes, I'm on to you.
Whee! This is fun!
If you hate the MRM so much, who should answer for this?
ReplyDeleteAs a woman …
1. I have a much lower chance of being murdered than a man.
2. I have a much lower chance of being driven to successfully commit suicide than a man.
3. I have a lower chance of being a victim of a violent assault than a man.
4. I have probably been taught that it is acceptable to cry.
5. I will probably live longer than the average man.
6. Most people in society probably will not see my overall worthiness as a person being exclusively tied to how high up in the hierarchy I rise.
7. I have a much better chance of being considered to be a worthy mate for someone, even if I’m unemployed with little money, than a man.
8. I am given much greater latitude to form close, intimate friendships than a man is.
9. My chance of suffering a work-related injury or illness is significantly lower than a man’s.
10. My chance of being killed on the job is a tiny fraction of a man’s.
11. If I shy away from fights, it is unlikely that this will damage my standing in my peer group or call into question my worthiness as a sex partner.
12. I am not generally expected to be capable of violence. If I lack this capacity, this will generally not be seen as a damning personal deficiency.
13. If I was born in North America since WWII, I can be almost certain that my genitals were not mutilated soon after birth, without anesthesia.
14. If I attempt to hug a friend in joy, it’s much less likely that my friend will wonder about my sexuality or pull away in unease.
15. If I seek a hug in solace from a close friend, I’ll have much less concern about how my friend will interpret the gesture or whether my worthiness as a member of my gender will be called into question.
16. I generally am not compelled by the rules of my sex to wear emotional armor in interactions with most people.
17. I am frequently the emotional center of my family.
18. I am allowed to wear clothes that signify ‘vulnerability’, ‘playful openness’, and ’softness’.
19. I am allowed to BE vulnerable, playful, and soft without calling my worthiness as a human being into question.
20. If I interact with other people’s children — particularly people I don’t know very well — I do not have to worry much about the interaction being misinterpreted.
21. If I have trouble accommodating to some aspects of gender demands, I have a much greater chance than a man does of having a sympathetic audience to discuss the unreasonableness of the demand, and a much lower chance that this failure to accommodate will be seen as signifying my fundamental inadequacy as a member of my gender.
22. I am less likely to be shamed for being sexually inactive than a man.
23. From my late teens through menopause, for most levels of sexual attractiveness, it is easier for me to find a sex partner at my attractiveness level than it is for a man.
24. My role in my child’s life is generally seen as more important than the child’s father’s role.
TO the extent that these things are true, and a lot of them are, I can tell you who should NOT have to answer for these things: feminists.
ReplyDeleteIndeed, feminists push for less rigid gender roles, which would make it easier for men to express emotions, be nonviolent, etc etc.
As for women living longer than men, well, women used to die earlier because many of them dies in childbirth. Now that's less common, and women live longer. Should medical science "have to answer for this?" Or should we say, hey, it's great that women can live longer today, and let's continue working to lengthen the lives of both sexes however we can. Demanding "equality" here seems bizarre; men and women have different biology; why should we expect them to die at the exact same ages?
Out of those 24, most of those are restrictions that men use to box themselves in, mostly the residue of patriarchal standards. Some of them are just invented, or easily circumvented, and thus don't constitute institutional discrimination.
ReplyDeleteWhat's funny is that feminists want to break down many of the social standards given in your list. Do you think feminists want men to be expected to be capable of violence? Or to be unable to be soft?
I think many MRAs have confused women who reinforce patriarchy with feminists simply because they believe anything that harms men is feminism. In actuality, any feminist worth their salt will tell you that patriarchy harms men as well as women.
Mr. Long String of Alphanumeric Characters (can I call you String?), your claims are nothing more than a rehash of the usual arguments to the effect of "hey women, patriarchy protects you in these ways, so you should be grateful and accept the disempowerment that patriarchy wants to impose on you." Patriarchal men are all so convinced that women have it easy in patriarchy, and yet women have been fighting for hundreds of years and more to break free from the restraints of patriarchy.
ReplyDeleteA lot of the items on your list are BS anyway, but the ones that are true are, as already stated in other comments, not the fault of feminism. Rigid gender roles hurt people of both genders, because they stifle individual freedom and self-determination. But rigid gender roles are the product of patriarchy.
I do think one item on your list deserves special mention:
22. I am less likely to be shamed for being sexually inactive than a man.
Sexually active women are frequently labelled sluts and whores at best, and beaten and raped at worst. A former girlfriend of mine made the "mistake" of having sex with me in her dorm room and proceeded to suffer horrible harassment for the rest of the semester. At one point she had to scare off a group of guys with a knife, which she actually had the training to use. In that regard she was luckier than many sexually active women.
To claim that the mild ribbing that guys receive for abstaining from sex even slightly compares is inhuman and disgusting. Fuck you, String.
Johnny said...
ReplyDelete"Out of those 24, most of those are restrictions that men use to box themselves in, mostly the residue of patriarchal standards."
Are you blaming patriarchy or men? Methinks it's the latter.
Are you blaming patriarchy or men? Methinks it's the latter.
ReplyDeleteIt's patriarchy that gets the blame, because it's not men alone who reinforce patriarchy. Women do it, too. Despite MRA perceptions of persecution, most women aren't feminists. Indeed most people don't think too deeply about these matters. Watch any given romantic comedy if you want to see modern America's general perception of gender issues. It's not overly thoughtful.
And people who don't think too deeply about a given issue usually just fall in line with the status quo, which in the matter of gender issues is patriarchy.
23. From my late teens through menopause, for most levels of sexual attractiveness, it is easier for me to find a sex partner at my attractiveness level than it is for a man.
ReplyDeleteOh please. That is utter nonsense.
6. Most people in society probably will not see my overall worthiness as a person being exclusively tied to how high up in the hierarchy I rise.
ReplyDeleteNo, I'll only be judged on how I look compared to some impossible beauty standard. If I am too fat, too thin, have tits that are too small, have hair that is too thin, am too tall, am too short, etc. I'll just be told that I need to change in order to be worthy of love.
An entire industry exists just to try and help women be more attractive so that they can be worthy of love. A dozen magazines every month tell women what they have to do to be pretty. Is there something similar for men who aren't of high enough status?
7. I have a much better chance of being considered to be a worthy mate for someone, even if I’m unemployed with little money, than a man.
As long as I'm attractive. Remember that. Only if I was born to meet the beauty standard. And if I happen to be a person of color then I get the extra issue of being considered unattractive because of my skin color. Look at the popularity of skin bleaching creams. Because women have to be fair and beautiful to be worthy. It's our bodies that matter, not our minds.
18. I am allowed to wear clothes that signify ‘vulnerability’, ‘playful openness’, and ’softness’.
Unless those clothes are too short. Or too low cut. Or too tight. Then I'm a slut and deserve to be shamed. And it my clothes are too baggy then I'm ugly and need to dress better to be seen as attractive.
19. I am allowed to BE vulnerable, playful, and soft without calling my worthiness as a human being into question.
If I choose not to be those things then I'm told I'm a bitch or ball-buster. If I am naturally not these things then I am told I must change to fit those ideals.
17. I am frequently the emotional center of my family.
This is not a good thing. My parents wouldn't pay for me to go to a school in another city because they "needed me". My brothers could do this without worry. They were encouraged to go off and see the world. I needed to stay close to home because I was the babysitter, petsitter, house cleaner, and caretaker. Why would somebody want these responsibilities placed on them without asking for them?
22. I am less likely to be shamed for being sexually inactive than a man.
And I'm more likely to be shamed for being sexually active. Woo Hoo, normative gender issues are fun, aren't they?
Feminists want to tear down these ideas. For both genders. The fact women are considered "less than" is the reason these ideas exist. When men show "feminine" traits like emotions they are mocked for being feminine, because being a woman is bad. When women show masculine traits they are shot down for being bitches or ball-busters. They are told that because they are only women they shouldn't try have masculine traits because that is above their station.
If women and men were equals than there'd be no shame in a man acting like a woman or a woman being like a man. People could just be themselves.
In other words, the answer to your problems is feminism!
"To claim that the mild ribbing that guys receive for abstaining from sex even slightly compares is inhuman and disgusting. Fuck you, String."
ReplyDeleteWell, we could also be assumed gay until proven innocent, and assaulted. We could also be labeled a "creep" for not "getting laid," and be forced into a state of involuntary celibacy. This "mild ribbing" often culminates in social isolation and terminates with a man killing himself.
That being said, thank you for your very courteous and insightful comment. As always, feminists are pleasant, reasonable people who are always smiling.
"Is there something similar for men who aren't of high enough status?"
ReplyDeleteYes, loneliness, despair, forced celibacy, and eventually suicide. There isn't really an industry to help with that because are often shamed for seeking outside help and also a yearly income is not masked or adjusted as easily as a body part.
23. From my late teens through menopause, for most levels of sexual attractiveness, it is easier for me to find a sex partner at my attractiveness level than it is for a man.
ReplyDelete"Oh please. That is utter nonsense."
No, and a lot of the men who are "virgins" and you have labeled as "unfuckable losers" can attest to this.
Mr. String-- I agree with most of your list. Sexism, gender roles and patriarchy suck for everyone. To compare "who has it worse" is as silly as any game of Oppression Olympics is.
ReplyDeleteHowever, the only group of people working to end gender roles IS (certain segments of) feminism. We want men to not be shamed for their virginity, to not be expected to be violent, to have worth regardless of our status.
Figleaf's Real Adult Sex has some VERY good posts on male feminism, the worthiness myth and the no-sex class. If you want, I can give you a list of interesting books about feminism that explain some basic concepts.
Come and join us. The water's fine. :)
The antidote to all 24: more feminism.
ReplyDeleteWell, we could also be assumed gay until proven innocent, and assaulted. We could also be labeled a "creep" for not "getting laid," and be forced into a state of involuntary celibacy.
ReplyDeleteYeah, these things could happen. But they don't. Any isolated instances that resemble the above situations are certainly far outnumbered by the women who are punished by men for being a "slut."
This "mild ribbing" often culminates in social isolation and terminates with a man killing himself.
No, not really. The isolation and suicide stem from severe social anxiety, the same thing that prevents these guys from getting laid in the first place. I want nothing but for them to get help.
That being said, thank you for your very courteous and insightful comment. As always, feminists are pleasant, reasonable people who are always smiling.
I make no claims to being pleasant or always smiling. If you want a disclaimer before each of my posts, perhaps we can arrange it.
23. From my late teens through menopause, for most levels of sexual attractiveness, it is easier for me to find a sex partner at my attractiveness level than it is for a man.
ReplyDelete"Oh please. That is utter nonsense."
No, and a lot of the men who are "virgins" and you have labeled as "unfuckable losers" can attest to this.
You know, I thought this sounded like bullshit. I couldn't quite believe that men were having that much more trouble having sex than women. Mostly because of my friend the guys are getting more than the women. I haven't had sex in 5 years. When I tried to join an incel support group the guys all told me that it dodn't count. That I probably could have sex if I just got plastic surgery or something. Not like them.
Anyway, let's go to the numbers.
http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/resources/FAQ.html#frequency
If you look at the stats 90% of men and 86% of women had sex in the last year. So, the whole thing about how it's so much easier for women to get laid then men... bullshit.
While there are more celibate single men than women in the 18-29 groups at 30 and older men have the advantage by a wide margine.
Here's the rate of single men and women who reported no sex last year in the 18-24 group
M- 56.9 W-50.8
OK, so more single celibate men than women in this age group, but not a HUGE difference in percentiles. Now, let's look at single men and women at age 30 who reported no sex in the previous year.
M-39.6 W- 72.3
What do you know. That's MASSIVE. That's huge. That's a lot of women who are single and not getting any sex. And it's the group I fall into. Glad to know that I'm not alone.
Look, it sucks when you're lonely against your will. I get it. I live it too. But that isn't the fault of women. It certainly isn't the fault of feminism. I have no idea why so many incel men blame feminism. What do you think things would have been like for you during the good old days?
Well, we could also be assumed gay until proven innocent, and assaulted.
ReplyDeleteHomophobia is (among other things) a manifestation of misogyny. Disgust towards men who could be so perverted as to assume the inferior feminine role of being penetrated during sex. Ergo, more feminism is the solution here. More equality and acceptance for masculine-identified women and feminine-identified men. More equality and acceptance for all sexual identities and gender identities.
We could also be labeled a "creep" for not "getting laid," and be forced into a state of involuntary celibacy.
If you are, in reality, a creep, then you should be labeled as such. Creeps don't get laid as much as nice people do. There's nothing any social equality movement can do about that. Patriarchy, on the other hand, does promise pussy to creeps as long as they conform to all the restrictive masculine stereotypes against which you chafe. You can choose one or the other--creepy patriarchal sexual coercion (ending the scourge of "involuntary celibacy" by substituting an epidemic of "involuntary sexual activity"), or sexual egalitarianism, wherein creeps don't get much sex.
I also agree with most of Mr. String's list, and don't think he should have been told to go fuck himself. Most of the things he describes are due to an entrenched system that forces men and women into restrictive boxes based on their chromosomes. Feminists call this system patriarchy, and think that it hurts both sexes; MRAs deny that such a system exists. For every way that patriarchy damages women (women who have sex are sluts!) there is a mirrored negative effect for men (men who don't have sex are losers!). I, and most feminists, would love nothing more than to see a world where "men should be X while women should be Y" is an obsolete way of thinking. I just wish MRAs would work towards this, too.
ReplyDeleteI do get a bit annoyed by the complaint that women only want to fuck rich men, and this is somehow due to feminism. In fact, feminists place less importance on their mate's income than do non-feminists.
It also reminds me of the recent study showing that in in societies where income is distributed unequally, homicide rates are high and women are less empowered and educated, women prefer more masculine features in men. The authors say that such masculine features may be correlated with aggression and dominance. I wonder how this fits in with the MRA belief that feminism causes women to only want "thugs" instead of "nice guys." In fact, it seems the opposite- in countries with more gender equality, women prefer less aggressive men (at least as far as facial masculinity and dominance are correlated).
What do you think things would have been like for you during the good old days?
ReplyDeleteBack in the good old days women were obedient and submissive and didn't think they had a right to have standards. This was back before feminists invented the female orgasm.
Can I say how much I despise the idea that women have an easier time getting laid than men?
ReplyDeleteApart from the numbers cited above, it requires a woman to not have standards. True, I could go to any Star Trek convention and be reasonably assured that there will be men there who will be willing to fuck me. However, this completely ignores the idea that maybe I don't want to fuck *them*. I've met many, many men who could barely pull together enough of a hygiene regimen to shower once a week; men who were flat out physically unattractive and men who treated me like an utter object. If a man is treating me like an object when we're both clothed, I shudder to think about the sort of encounter I can look forward to in the bedroom. If he doesn't care about what I have to say in a conversation, he probably also doesn't care if I orgasm or not.
Pro tip, guys: spend as much time on your personal appearance as you would like a potential sex partner to spend on hers. This includes time spent on grooming, cleanliness, attention to clothes and attention to physical attractiveness. Because we have as much a right to an attractive, capable partner as you do.
I don't think some men understand that yes, most women, even "ugly" ones can put up an ad on Craigslist and find someone who wants to have sex with them. However, finding someone who a) they can feel safe with and b) cares about showing his partner a good time is likely to be very, very difficult.
ReplyDeleteI mean, if there were a news story about an unattractive woman who put up an ad looking for sex and then got murdered by a guy who answered, dollars to doughnuts the MRA boards would be full of dudes cackling and making jokes about the "fat ugly slut" who was stupid enough to meet up with a "violent thug."
David: did you see this?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.the-spearhead.com/2011/03/13/a-tale-of-two-earthquakes/
See, the response to the earthquake in Japan has been more orderly because they are led by manly men there. Haiti is matriarchial therefore is was chaos after the disaster.
Yep, the fact that Japan is the #3 economy and Haiti is... not, well that doesn't matter. It's all about manly men being in charge.
"Can I say how much I despise the idea that women have an easier time getting laid than men?"
ReplyDeleteI'd like to agree here and add to the statement. I would consider myself average looking. I do not go for "beautiful" men. I go for average looking guys, in the same socioeconomic class as me usually. Sometimes I *gasp* pick a guy who has a crappier money situation than I do. And no, they're not "thugs," they're unemployed and college educated like me. Plenty of those men still turn me down. Sometimes, no matter how evenly matched you are, a person just might not be in to you anyway.
Then there are plenty of men who, no matter what, WANT that gorgeous supermodel. I would put most MRM men in this category. Constantly bitching about the beauty/money expectations women put on them, but then they won't accept any woman who isn't as gorgeous as Adrianna Lima. These are usually the guys that mock average looking women ruthlessly. Then fucking wonder why know one wants to fuck them. Must be hypergamous women! No asshole, it's because (when you HAD a girlfriend) you made a nasty comment about her boobs during sex and now she no longer wants you to see her naked for fear of getting critiqued again.
@string
"If you hate the MRM so much, who should answer for this?"
The patriarchy. Not feminists. Not women. Not men. The patriarchy and its ridiculous "traditional" norms. I don't even blame the men and women upholding those beliefs, it's what was taught to them and it's hard to break cycles.
A couple of posts were caught in the spam filter and are up now; it you've been following this discussion I'd recommend you scroll up and take a look.
ReplyDeleteAnd just to add one more thought on the "men who can't get laid get mocked" complaint. SO DO WOMEN. And you know who loves to do this sort of mocking? MRA and MGTOW dudes who also complain about celibate men getting mocked. I couldn't even begin to estimate the number of posts and comments I've seen on manosphere blogs mocking fat women, women living alone with their cats, etc etc etc.
I don't even blame the men and women upholding those beliefs, it's what was taught to them and it's hard to break cycles.
ReplyDeleteExactly. It's precisely parallel to other forms of bigotry. It's in our heads, all of our heads. It's part of our culture; you can't help but absorb a certain measure of it. That's why I no longer take it personally if someone tells me I said something racist. Instead of freaking out, "HOW DARE YOU CALL ME RACIST!!?!!11!! I AM A NICE PERSON!!1!" I stop, pause, reflect, and say something along the lines of, "I didn't intend it that way, but I can see how it sounded racist. I apologize, I'll try not to do it again." Good people are racist. Good people are sexist. Good people are homophobic, xenophobic, etc. Having bigotry doesn't make you a bad person, but becoming aware of your bigotry and deciding that you're not going to try to do anything about it--well, then you start to enter into the realm of the deliberate douchebag. But simply having bigoted thoughts or feelings doesn't say anything about your character. The question is, what are you going to do about those thoughts and feelings?
Can I say how much I despise the idea that women have an easier time getting laid than men?
ReplyDeleteApart from the numbers cited above, it requires a woman to not have standards. True, I could go to any Star Trek convention and be reasonably assured that there will be men there who will be willing to fuck me. However, this completely ignores the idea that maybe I don't want to fuck *them*.
But you fail to realize that your overly-inflated "standards" focused on media-driven ideals of the "perfect man" (i.e. ~ underwear model, Harvard MD, millionaire, etc.) are actually what is causing you to not be as happy with your life as what you might otherwise be (apparently, it's getting harder for you to attract those manly-sculpted-millionaire-studs that every other woman wants) if it were not for the overly-superficial societal norms to which you cling.
Like I've read elsewhere - Most women will choose "Five Minutes of Alpha Over Five Years of Beta".
A woman getting laid is not an accomplishment at all. It's like giving a dog a Presidential Medal of Honor because he can lick his own balls.
Drew-
ReplyDeleteYep. Those superficial women always lusting after conventionally attractive men like Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. And the stars of the past like Gable, Bogart, and Spencer Tracy were all muscle bound uber handsome men.
(Hint: Women are attracted to men because of some intangible they posess that isn't just how they look or how much money they make. It's their personality. I know that MRAs hate hearing this because there is no product they can buy that will cause them to have an interesting personality. They would have to go become interesting people first. And it is hard to be interesting when your mind is nothing but the same talking points over and over again.)
Actually, my standards, I think, are fairly reasonable. I want a guy who practices basic hygiene, has a good personality and treats me decently. I've dated men who were significantly overweight but were an absolute laugh riot to be around; I've dated men who made significantly less than I did, or were unemployed, but I enjoyed the way they made me feel both in bed and out.
ReplyDeleteLet me put it a different way - for a guy, getting laid means getting to stick their penis in a woman. But for a woman, getting laid means something different. I'm not even talking about the ev/psych bullshit of wanting to find a mate. The truth is, no matter how attractive or rich a guy is, if he can't get me off, or acts like getting me off is an onerous chore, I'm not interested. Yeah, if all *I* wanted was to have a few minutes of penetration, I could get laid pretty easily. But there's absolutely no guarantee that encounter would be fulfilling for me. If I had to choose between a Calvin Klein model who could care less if I enjoyed myself or a 'beta' who was as invested in my pleasure as in his own, I'll pick the 'beta' every time and that's God's honest truth.
But you fail to realize that your overly-inflated "standards" focused on media-driven ideals of the "perfect man" (i.e. ~ underwear model, Harvard MD, millionaire, etc.) are actually what is causing you to not be as happy with your life as what you might otherwise be (apparently, it's getting harder for you to attract those manly-sculpted-millionaire-studs that every other woman wants) if it were not for the overly-superficial societal norms to which you cling.
ReplyDeleteThank god you're here to mansplain to the poor women of Manboobz how to be happy.
DrewskiDaMan: I have standards for people I fuck. I like feminists, Star Wars fans, long-haired men and large-breasted women, gamers*, scientists and artists, hopeless romantics, guys who like cuddles. Not to mention the obvious good hygiene, niceness to me and willingness to spend Saturday nights playing board games or going to Broadway shows. :)
ReplyDeleteI do not, however, like underwear-model Harvard-MD millionaires. Almost everyone I fuck is broke (yay college!). I don't like guys with muscles (give me a skinny boy any day of the week). I have never fucked a Harvard student or an MD.
My standards are not particularly unrealistic or media-driven. However, I still HAVE them. There is a middle ground between "Do you have a dick? We're good" and "I will only fuck Dr. Blue Eyes 6', PhD." And this ground is inhabited by girls who want someone who'll laugh when they make a Star Wars reference in bed.
*Seriously, pnce you go gamer, you never go back. All the button-mashing lends itself well to a very different kind of button-mashing.
@ Ozymandias:
ReplyDeleteNot to mention, being able to bond over shooting zombies together! I absolutely adore dating gamers, though I tend to prefer larpers.
Okay, let's go through string's list one by one:
ReplyDelete1. Women are more likely than men to be killed by intimate partners. Also, men's increased participation in gangs and the police force accounts for quite a bit of this discrepancy. Besides, women make up only a tiny minority of murders-the men who are being murdered are being murdered by other men, for the most part, not by women. So how is this women's fault?
2. Women have higher rates of suicide attempts. Men have higher rates of sucess. This appears to be because of the difference in methods (men use more firearms-women use more pills, the latter generally leaves a wider window for rescue). Women are diagnosed with depression at higher, not lower rates.
3. Not true if you include rapes and sexual assualts. And, again, women are not often the perps in assault cases with a male victim. Again, how is it automatically a woman's fault if a man beats a man?
4. Yes and no. Women who cry in public are seen as weak, pathetic, and undeserving of respect. However, as people tend to attach such roles to women to begin with, women are given less attention when they conform. A man crying receives more negative feedback precisely because he starts in a higher position.
5. True, but there is little evidence that this is due to discrimination rather than averages in biology (sex differences in life expectancy do not decrease greatly in a class where men do little to no physical labour).
6. This is absolutely untrue. Two words-welfare mother. Poor women are an incredibly and brutally villainized group.
7. The first part is untrue, the second somewhat true. It is not easier per se for a woman to get a good partner. Women's value does tend to be less related to earnings, however, the flip side is that women who earn high wages often face trouble here. In addition, the brutal beauty standards hit women much harder.
8. Yes and no. Women are often discouraged from true friendships and are encouraged to tear each other down. Men's friendships are often praised and depicted positively. At the same time, physical intimacy does tend to be policed between men more than women. So, I will give you half credit on this one.
9. True, but these risky jobs pay far higher wages than other jobs for people of comparable education and social class. Men have access to both lower paying service jobs and higher paying risk jobs like construction. So, yes, the injury rate is higher, but the pay is generally double or more, a financial option which women are not given.
10. See 9.
11. Actually, you have it reversed, if a woman enters fights, her social position and worth are considered diminished. So, while there is a standard here that hurts men, women are hurt just as much by the flipside. The old "men are strong" "women are weak" line is hardly the fault of feminism either.
12. Yes, because people, including those on this forum, tend to see women's percieved "weakness" as a benefit all of the time (<-sarcasm).
13. Not completely true. Virually all intersexed infants are assigned female and their genitals are far more severely mutilated than non-intersex male assigned infants. Besides, men dominate the medical field in massive degrees and male parents almost always have a say in this. So, while some women are complicit in circumcision, men are participating in doing this at higher rates, not lower ones. When men do things to men, it is always the fault of women, that's your theme, isn't it?
14. This is extremely variable. It is not true at all for butch women or for women known to be queer.
15. Isn't this what you said in 14?
16. Bullshit. Women are expected to hide and supress emotions, just not the same ones that men are expected to hide and supress. Check out how women expressing anger are viewed.
ReplyDelete17. True, but mainly because they are primarily the ones putting in the work, but still lack a lot of power decisions in many cases. This is not the case for families where men take a more active role in things like childrearing, my grandmother's uncle was considered the emotional and cultural center of his family, to the point where relatives passing as white returned to the reservation for his funeral. But this man loving raised six nieces and nephews. You want the rewards of being the caretaker, do some of the work.
18. Allowed? Try "forced". Try "forced with minute and ever varying detail that can be used to excuse severe violence against me if I fail to conform". Try "forced to wear shoes that break my feet and permantanly damage my body". Women who refuse are brutally punished, so this is hardly a privilege.
19. No. Women are seen as less valuable for being these things, however, as they are presumed to be these things already, they face less punishment when seen doing them.
20. True. I will grant you this one. But there is a whole corallary of extremely oppressive expectations around women and mothering that should be discussed before you declare that you have it worse.
21. False. Women are punished extremely for failure to conform to their gender roles. Queer women, for one, report higher rates of abuse by people in positions of authority than even queer men. While there are feminist spaces, they are few and far between. Most women do not have an accepted space to defy their gender roles or discuss doing so.
22. Somewhat true. Women who are sexually inactive are shamed ("frigid", "stuck up", etc.), but I would agree less so then men. However, women are punished for being sexually active in a degree so high as to make this amount laughable.
23. False. Other commentors have dealt with this.
24. True, but then women carry a massive burden of expectations of responsibility and work around children as well.
Victoria-- True story: on our first "date," my boyfriend and I did a survival-horror oneshot RPG run by his roommate and he ended up feeding me to Cthulhu and a wolf at the same time.
ReplyDeleteTRUE LOVE.
And can you get this sort of story with Mr. Underwear Model Harvard MD Millionaire? No, you cannot.
@ozymandus, since I have been awol since I got my dragonage 2 on thursday, I will take the gamer line as a compliment. ;) (I already beat it once through, I am part way through my second round and have decided to take a break to rest my eyes).
ReplyDeleteI don't think some men understand that yes, most women, even "ugly" ones can put up an ad on Craigslist and find someone who wants to have sex with them.
ReplyDeleteActually, not so much. Craiglist fast and loose flagging policy means that one of the reasons the W4M section is so barren is because trigger happy guys flag the personal ads of women whose ads do not do anything for them. You can read between the lines of this "helpful" advice for making sure you don't bore or offend the poor men on craigslist
http://www.eskimo.com/~newowl/pages/Craigslist_W4M_Issues.htm
I can't remember if it was here or on Pandagon I learned this. Either way, it's a partial explanation for why the W4M section of many craigslist cities contains 4 ads for porno sites, one or two escort services and the one real woman who hasn't been flagged off yet.
@DarkSideCat
ReplyDeleteI am so, so jealous of you right now! I preordered my copy of DA2 off Steam and stayed up until midnight when it would activate... only to discover that I get caught in perpetual save loops whenever the game tries to save. They patched it pretty quickly, but us Steam users have to wait longer for Steam to pick it up. Who's got two thumbs and is now going to avoid preordering games on Steam like it's got the darkspawn taint? This gal!
@ Ozymandias:
That's the cutest story ever! My boyfriend and I met at the gaming/nerd club in college. We were friends for years before hooking up (and giving lie to the Friend Zone myth!), and he's putting together a Legend of the Five Rings game because I asked him to :)
A couple of comments were in the spam filter; they're up now.
ReplyDeletekysokisaen-- That's really interesting, actually. I didn't know that.
ReplyDeleteDarkSideCat-- My best friend has disappeared into his room to play Dragon Age. I miss him. I can only await with fear and trepidation the release of Portal 2...
Lady Victoria-- Like I said, TRUE LOVE.
kysokisaen, that list is massively fucked up! What a pathetic bunch of insecure losers.
ReplyDelete@Victoria, I have the PS3 version. It is a bit glitchy, but apparantly not as terrible as the PC version has been. My favorite glitch so far involved one of my enemies running into a wall and getting stuck there. It defenselessly flailed its arms as I killed it. Easiest mid-boss fight ever. I also had one where my character was convinced a bare patch of ground was an enemy and I could not move on until I "killed" it. Luckily, it counted as dead once I had my mage throw a fireball at it.
ReplyDeleteIodine has just brandished female privilege as proudly as any feminist ever has. Women are almost never called "losers" regardless of their employment or social status.
ReplyDeleteTerms like "loser," "creep," and "pervert" have become contaminated by their use as a label affixed exclusively to men. I've heard women talk about "stalker eyes" and how much a "poor loser" he was for not buying her dinner. The sooner feminists can acknowledge the male side of the equation and perhaps give men blowing their brains out more air time than skinny models, the sooner MRAs will be receptive to feminist ideology.
Pro tip, guys: spend as much time on your personal appearance as you would like a potential sex partner to spend on hers. This includes time spent on grooming, cleanliness, attention to clothes and attention to physical attractiveness. Because we have as much a right to an attractive, capable partner as you do.
This post seems to imply that women are somehow better partners than men are. Why is it that the burden is always on men to make themselves "attractive" for women, but if a woman is asked to diet - EEEKKKK!
Mr. String, I find Victoria's point eminently fair. If you want a lazy-ass hairy un-makeup-ed androgyne like myself, then feel free to be as sloppy as you like. If you want a gym rat who wears attractive and fashionable clothing, you should probably be a gym rat who wears attractive and fashionable clothing.
ReplyDeleteMr String, how exactly does asking a man to spend the *same amount* of time and energy on personal appearance as the women he wants to date suggest that "women are somehow better partners than men are?"
ReplyDeleteWomen are almost never called "losers" regardless of their employment or social status.
ReplyDeleteThat is half-true. Men are judged more for their career and how many women they date. Women are judged more for being unmarried and childless. They are opposite sides of the same coin. In both cases genders are punished for not living up to expectations. Who is trying to break these expectations? Feminists.
Terms like "loser," "creep," and "pervert" have become contaminated by their use as a label affixed exclusively to men. I've heard women talk about "stalker eyes" and how much a "poor loser" he was for not buying her dinner.
And women are called cat-ladies, clingy, and weird if they are unmarried and/or childless. Again, it's opposite sides of the same coin. Look up from your own pain and recognize that other people have pain also. Patriarchy hurts men too.
The sooner feminists can acknowledge the male side of the equation and perhaps give men blowing their brains out more air time than skinny models, the sooner MRAs will be receptive to feminist ideology.
In one way feminists do deal with the issue of male suicide by trying to break down the gender norms that lead to it. But what exactly do you suggest that the feminist movement does outside of that? Feminists have an agenda of equality between the sexes. Male suicide doesn't exactly fit within that mission statement. Do you hold contempt for the animal rights movement for not doing more to deal with worldwide hunger?
"However, this completely ignores the idea that maybe I don't want to fuck *them*."
ReplyDeleteYes, but that’s exactly the problem - women thinking they have a right to decide who they will and won’t have sex with.
To String, et al, women are pussy dispensers. So, if the dispenser isn’t dispensing pussy on demand, there’s something wrong with it. And what’s wrong with it is usually that it thinks it has the right to decide for itself! Crazy!
The idea that maybe - just maybe - people have *no right* to someone else’s body just because they want to is alien to them. Unless it’s their own body. Then, suddenly, bodily autonomy is an inalienable right.
No one has any right to sex with another person. None. As soon as they accept this, perhaps they will grow up a little bit.
The sooner feminists can acknowledge the male side of the equation and perhaps give men blowing their brains out more air time than skinny models, the sooner MRAs will be receptive to feminist ideology.
ReplyDeleteI think you misunderstand feminism. Feminism is about achieving equality to men where women have unequal status (in law, society, what have you.) As such, it tends to focus on women more so then men-which is why you have attention paid to the skinny models rather then on the high rate of successful suicide by men.
Feminists may be concerned about men's high rate of successful suicides but it is not the thing that we focus on because there are other things we are focused on.
Elizabeth-- That's not entirely true. While some forms of feminism are about women achieving equality to men, others are about breaking down the gender binary for both sexes. No form is necessarily better or worse than any other, and all forms of feminism tend to agree on 90% of the issues, but there is a definite theoretical difference.
ReplyDeleteI agree, Ozy. In fact I have been chastised by other feminists for ignoring the plight of transgendered women. Of practicing "cissexism," the bigotry that defines people with vaginas as "real" women and people without vaginas as "fake" women. I appreciated her insistence that I broaden my mind and change the way I think about men and women. I wonder how much time MRAs spend listening to the concerns of transgendered men.
ReplyDelete@Sally
ReplyDeleteOne of the writers on AVfM is gay, but because most men are straight, we do not give a disproportionate amount of attention to the gay and transgendered. I'm sure if an insightful transgendered man were willing to post his views on AVfM, we'd be happy to accept them. Paul Elam was a psychologist and, as stated previously, was happy to allow a gay man to voice his opinions on the site.
Of course, neglecting the 98-95% or so of men who are straight in a so-called "gender equality movement" is far worse than focusing on men in general and neglecting to single out the plight of the transgendered. In fact, many feminists act out with hostility and become defensive at the mere mention of men's suffering. They also frequently pass the blame onto other "overmasculine" men (ie: the conspiratorial "patriarchy"), ignoring the neglectful mothers, unfair police, and prejudiced or ineffective teachers who mold those men into lives of deviance.
@Elizabeth
Feminists may be concerned about men's high rate of successful suicides but it is not the thing that we focus on because there are other things we are focused on.
And you've just given a very good case for the separate MRM. We actually are focused on men's suicide.
@Walker
ReplyDeleteSo you think I see women as "pussy dispensers." That's fine, it's your damage to work around.
@Sally
I stop, pause, reflect, and say something along the lines of, "I didn't intend it that way, but I can see how it sounded racist. I apologize, I'll try not to do it again."
What if someone said you hate men? Would you have the same insightful moment then, or would you dismiss the claim because men are "privileged" and hence can't be discriminated against?
String-and? Who said you could not be focused on it? Are you saying that feminism should be focusing on it?
ReplyDelete"And just to add one more thought on the "men who can't get laid get mocked" complaint. SO DO WOMEN. And you know who loves to do this sort of mocking? MRA and MGTOW dudes who also complain about celibate men getting mocked. I couldn't even begin to estimate the number of posts and comments I've seen on manosphere blogs mocking fat women, women living alone with their cats, etc etc etc."---David Futrelle
ReplyDeleteHow lame---you know that men get mocked far more, even with those blogs mocking women.
And as far as She Wolf of the SS is concerned, by her logic these women being shunned, well: they also should be "creeps" (her words), and there is must be a reason for her it. That's by her logic.
But you and others here would defended them while mocking "creeps."
missyb9479 said... "In one way feminists do deal with the issue of male suicide by trying to break down the gender norms that lead to it. But what exactly do you suggest that the feminist movement does outside of that? Feminists have an agenda of equality between the sexes. Male suicide doesn't exactly fit within that mission statement."
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't, because feminists don't care about male suicide.
Oooh, ooh, the Female Privilege list! I did a post on that explaining how MORE feminism, not less, leads to the fixing of these "problems", addressing each of these "privileges" separately and explaining it at length.
ReplyDeleteAlso, David, we can no longer be friends/strangers. You've totally ruined it since Ghost Rider is awesome as were Con Air and Face/Off. I don't know how I'll ever be able to respect you again! /wail
(just to be perfectly clear, that was sarcasm! Although i do love Nic Cage (as well as Nick Cave, yums))
It doesn't, because feminists don't care about male suicide.
Wytchfinde: Wow you have an apt nick.
Male suicide succeeds more often, female suicidees attempt more often. Men in general have better knowledge of deadly weapons and what not, which could be given as one explanation.
However, men in general are ALSO actively discouraged from seeking help for feelings of depression. Actively, I say. Why is this, do you think? And really, DO think about this.
Because seeking help (and in fact the very symptoms of depression itself! Co -inky- dinky!) is seen as "weak", and something women do/feel - that makes it BAD and men must never ever ever do that or they'll be punished for being "weak" and therefore "feminine", which we all know is the most shameful thing to be in the entire multiverse.
Feminists are on this, I promise. When the Patriarchy/Kyriarchy is long gone, people will be able to seek help for whatever they need at whatever time regardless of their gender, because the gender binary is bullshit in any case.
Also, why do men get mocked for "not getting laid enough", while women get shamed and suffer actual punishments for being "laid too much"? Could it have anything to do with the patriarchal view that men must dominate women, the more the better, and penetration = domination, while the dominated ones are women by definition (see also: why being gay is seen as bad), but only by one guy?
Feminists are on this too, I promise. Slut shaming and expectations to be a player or be punished are right up there, built into the very gender dichotomy that feminism is fighting against.
Also also, I have NEVER, in almost 10 years of netting and 5 years of actively pursuing feminist blogs, EVER seen ANYONE say that men can not be discriminated against. This includes Jill of I Blame the Patriarchy. As a feminist I personally don't agree with their viewpoint and dispute it, and never met a feminist online or off who do agree with that point.
*please insert before the last sentence: If anyone does say that, I do not agree.
ReplyDeletePower matters when discussing prejudice. Is black nationalism the equivalent of white nationalism? No, obviously not. While it does involve racial prejudice, it does not involve the same power and it does involve more legitimate complaints of severe abuses. It does not involve the same semi-social legitimacy. To claim otherwise is to falsely equivocate and to claim that anti-male sentiment is the same as anti-female sentiment is a similar false equivocation. So, let us take a rad femme who genuinely hates men and is prejudiced against them. Is this a good thing? No, but it is not the equivalent of a man who hates women either, because it is not backed up with the same power and history. Context matters.
ReplyDeleteMe: I stop, pause, reflect, and say something along the lines of, "I didn't intend it that way, but I can see how it sounded racist. I apologize, I'll try not to do it again."
ReplyDeleteDude who lacks critical thinking skills: What if someone said you hate men? Would you have the same insightful moment then, or would you dismiss the claim because men are "privileged" and hence can't be discriminated against?
You implicitly conflated "being racist" or "sounding racist" with "hating black people."
That right there is the core of your problem.
You think, like so many other MRAs, that "patriarchy" is code for "men are evil and women are blameless."
That's like thinking that the statement "I oppose white supremacy" is really code for "I hate all white people; all white people should suffer and die."
Once you get this basic distinction sorted out, you'll no longer be confused as to why it's possible to simultaneously hate the patriarchy and love (some, not all, because people are individuals) men at the same time.
@Sally - I'll try to things simple to avoid confusing you*:
ReplyDeleteIf someone said you were sexist against men, would you listen?
The patriarchy means "rule by fathers." Additionally, many feminists assign a bulk of this so-called "oppression" - you know, not fighting in wars and being seen as more important in a family - to men. How is patriarchy theory anything other than assigning the bulk of blame for the ills of one group on the shoulders of another? If it weren't about men, why is it called patriarchy theory?
Thank you in advance for your courteous and insightful answer. I would expect nothing less from someone of such a pleasant and rational disposition.
*My fault.
Additionally, many feminists assign a bulk of this so-called "oppression" - you know, not fighting in wars and being seen as more important in a family - to men
ReplyDeleteAssign or ascribe? Because most of the feminists I know are trying hard to get women admitted into combat roles in the military, and it's the anti-feminists who are trying to stop it. Hell, there's an outspoken feminists who pops in here from time to time who's also a veteran.
It would be nice to see some MRAs advocate for women being allowed to assume combat roles and dangerous jobs, like mining or construction. I honestly have no idea why they don't. Maybe they just like having this to complain about. Maybe they're scared of women being successful military leaders or construction workers, and would feel emasculated by a female five-star general.
Lastly, wars are mostly started by men and fought by men. It's not like women provoke the wars that they send the men off to fight - more women tend to the anti-war side of the spectrum.
@Lady
ReplyDelete"Lastly, wars are mostly started by men and fought by men. It's not like women provoke the wars that they send the men off to fight - more women tend to the anti-war side of the spectrum."
Just stop talking, please.
"Come back with your shield - or on it" (Plutarch, Mor.241) was supposed to be the parting cry of mothers to their sons. Mothers whose sons died in battle openly rejoiced, mothers whose sons survived hung their heads in shame.
Wow-two whole examples out of what? A thousand? In Europe alone...she is accurate in that very few women have started or sent men off into battle.
ReplyDelete@missyb9479
ReplyDeleteHint: Women are attracted to men because of some intangible they posess that isn't just how they look or how much money they make. It's their personality. I know that MRAs hate hearing this because there is no product they can buy that will cause them to have an interesting personality.
So being an activist for gender equality makes a person's personality not interesting to you? Interesting...
So being an activist for gender inequality makes a person's personality not interesting to you? Interesting...
ReplyDeleteFixed that for ya. Feminists are on the gender equality, including those things that will benefit men. MRA's are in for continued and increased gender INequality - skewed in their heterosexist white cisgendered ablist male favour, of course.
Right, because what drove WWI wasn't the assassination of the Archduke or the tenuous house of cards that was Europe's alliances and treaty network at the time, coupled with Bismarck's militarism. Nope. Not at all. It was entirely driven by the White Feather Brigade, and you can completely ignore the fact that this was started by a dude, too. An alternate reading is that this guy wanted to send off more men to fight, and convinced women to convince men to do it.
ReplyDeleteAlso, who was it again who was/is fighting for female inclusion in the military and combat zones, so that women can ALSO have the "honour" of dying for their country and men won't have to bear that burden alone?
ReplyDeleteWas it MRAs? Yeah, funny that it was not at all.
Such a shocking thing that it was feminists.
Imean, this makes it TOTALLY clear and proves for once and for all that all feminists want is to be perfect princesses, sitting on their asses at home being protected while the enslaved men earn buttloads of money for them and die for their safety. Amirite?
Fucking ANYTHING, actually, since one word isn't enough to describe the stupidity, how does it work?