Girlz in the Hood

Goddesses, or whores?

A very peculiar ideological battle has broken out on The Spearhead between some of the resident misogynist douchebags and a group of “white nationalists” who have in recent days descended on the site. The Spearheaders’ main beef with these upstanding fellows? Not that they’re hateful racist dicks – sorry, “ethnically conscious.” No, the problem is that they don’t hate white women enough. According to some of the critics on The Spearhead , these guys are apparently “White Knight Nationalists” in thrall to white womanhood.

Spearhead big cheese W. F. Price recently highlighted one anti-White-Knight-Nationalist rant on his site as the “comment of the week.” It’s an interesting, by which I mean appalling, read. “John” makes clear at the outset that he has no real problem with “white nationalism” as such, and indeed complains that

because of “political correctness” it is almost impossible to express pride in the white race without being instantaneously labeled a racist. Nothing like a pejorative to end an intelligent discussion.

No, the problem he has is with white nationalist women and the men who love them too much. These guys, he sneers, are

likely bunion-rubbers, drink the cheapest of beer, fondle their Chinese SKS nightly, and do whatever the “Old Lady” tells them to do while they strut around in front of their friends and the mountain of aluminum empties like little Bantam roosters. Almost as a universal, they hold up the WN females as godesses in spite of the fact that 99% of those “ladies” have had their holes punched and left full of biological waste by more men than there are oil companies that have ever drilled wells in Texas. Frankly, it’s pathetic.

But these supposed “White Goddesses” are not only sluts; John has convinced himself that they are also evil, ugly, hairy feminists too – which would make them honest-to-goodness feminazis, I suppose, though John seems to have less of a problem with the “nazi” half of the equation than he does with the “femi.”

The “female” commentators on WN sites are at least as shaming and self-righteous as those on lefty-feminist sites, and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if half of them had some sort of moustache getting a bit out of control on the upper lip and hairy armpits. …

You may as well go over and hang out at feministing. For a good time call 1-800-BITCH. As a rule they are disgusting hypocrites and beyond disappointing. Hell, the best description is repellent. Yes, repellent.

Of course neo-Nazi women bear about as much resemblance to feminists as, well, the Spearhead does to Feministing. John is making the mistake that seems to be almost universal amongst internet anti-feminists, assuming that any time a woman asserts herself in any way, even if she is doing so within the confines of traditionalist, authoritarian and, yes, patriarchal ideology, she’s a feminist. Nope. Feminists don’t ask to be treated as “ladies”; traditionalist women do. Feminist men don’t put women on a pedestal; traditionalist men do. And white supremacists are about as traditional as they come, in all the worst senses of the term.

John seemed particularly incensed that one woman on a white nationalist website had suggested that her white brethren needed to step up their game, romance wise, claiming that “Ghetto Negroes have better wooing, and flirtation skills, than so many White males.” How dare she!

Here we have a supposed W.N. self-imagined “White Goddess” who has experience with being wooed by “Ghetto Negroes” and she expresses admiration for their flirtation skills. Got her thing tingling, I see. Maybe that “tingling” was satiated a few times by one or more of those “Ghetto Blacks”, yet some “Bush” swilling W.N. “White Knight” will draw his sword and proclaim, “I will defend this sluts honor to my death!”

Some Spearheaders greeted John’s post with bravos; others sniffed that he was being too hard on the poor white supremacists, and using “shaming language” like the evil feminists do. Very few seemed to have a problem with the bigotry of the white pride crowd, just their alleged white knightery. As one commenter, calling himself Reality, reported with astonishment:

I’ve tried to get on those White Pride Sites and immediately started discussing how fucked up the modern white female is and was INSTANTLY banned! I was actually shocked. I thought it would be a no brainer that WN types would (OF COURSE) not want white women to be complete parasitical whores roaming the landscape spreading VD like Johnny Appleseed and fucking men over- I mean how you hope for the white race to make a ‘comeback’ if the white family is falling apart?!? One of the very reasons whites are so demoralized and broken politically and culturally is EXACTLY because of the modern American female. It’s just bizarre- these guys really are idiots (at least in this regard).

Watching this unfolding fight between male supremacists and white supremacists is really something of a treat for those of us not into the whole supremacy thing. I can only hope both sides lose, and as humiliatingly as possible.

--

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.

Two Holes Don't Make a Right, and other somewhat baffling MGTOW slogans

Grace Jones will kick your bumper sticker's ass.

One of the quickest and easiest ways to make yourself look like a complete idiot is to festoon your car with an assortment of bumper stickers – preferably stickers that are belligerent, incoherent, and “funny.” (By “funny,” of course, I mean “funny only to people who share all of your social, cultural and political beliefs, and probably not even then.”)

Alas, the Men Going Their Own Way movement doesn’t have any bumper stickers of its own. Oh, sure, there are a vast variety of just plain sexist bumper stickers out there  (“If I wanted a bitch, I’d buy a dog”),  and you can even buy “I HEART misogyny” stickers on Cafepress. but there’s not much out that deals with the specific stupid concerns of the MGTOW crowd.

The good fellows on MGTOWforums.com want to change all that. Recently a batch of them began brainstorming about possible slogans for MGTOW bumper stickers. Womanhater started the discussion off with a doozy, managing to be both belligerent AND baffling to anyone who hasn’t already taken a sip of the MGTOW Kool-Aid:

Chivalry is Treason!

A promising start. Not all the suggestions that followed quite lived up to this standard. Quite a few were earnest and plodding, not very slogan-y:

When Was the Last Time You Treated a Man Fairly?

Single moms should stay single.

Some men live happy fulfilling lives, the rest get married.

Women and happiness don't go together.

Still, some of the more earnest attempts managed to be attention-grabbing nonetheless:

I don't believe any accusation of rape

Many others simply rehashed basic MGTOW themes:

We Are Men, Not Wallets

Marriage is for morons 

Alimony is Slavery

But a number of the suggestions contained the spark of creative loopiness that keeps me coming back to the MGTOW forums again and again. Take, for example, the surprisingly large number that managed to work vaginas into the equation, generally in a highly off-putting manner:

Give women the finger and not in a good way 

Excuse me, is that fish I smell?

Two holes don't make a right

This last one, while not without its charms, is a little puzzling. If you do the math correctly, women have seven holes, and men have six (or seven, if you include one very small hole). Up to three of these lady-holes (and up to two for men) may come into play in the course of routine sexual activity. (More advanced fetishists may use more holes, as this somewhat NSFW video illustrates; don't worry, it's not a link to a video of someone putting something in a man's seventh hole, because, OW!) I'm not entirely sure which two holes our sloganeer is fingering as the villains here. 

Quite a few of the suggestions seemed almost designed to baffle everyone outside the confines of MGTOWforums.com (and even some within it):

Don't blame me for 1920

Hammurabi was correct about women

Listen to Cato the Elder

For those playing along at home, 1920 was of course the year in which matinee idol Douglas Fairbanks married actress Mary Pickford, known as "America's Sweetheart," even though she was Canadian; it was also the year in which construction began on the Holland Tunnel between New York and New Jersey, thus setting the stage for the horror later known as the “bridge and tunnel crowd.” But I’m guessing the event our sloganeer is really concerned about is the passage of the 19^th Amendment, giving American women the vote, though, unless our sloganeer is quite elderly indeed, I’m not quite sure why anyone would be blaming (or crediting) him for the Amendment’s passage.

As for the other two, well, the Code of Hammurabi, the first king of the Babylonian Empire in the 18th century BC,  “mark[ed] the beginning of the institutionalization of the patriarchal family as an aspect of state power,” as historian Gerda Lerner notes. Hammy (as I like to call him) also invented the idea of “an eye for an eye.” And Cato the Elder? He said some nasty shit about women.You can look it up yourself. I'm lazy.

Other slogans weren’t so much obscure as just plain odd:

If the FDA screened pussy, you'd need a prescription to get it.

I'd rather have guns than gals.

A cow in the bed...but a freak in the courtroom!

And then there was this little riddle:

Q)Why don't women respect men?
A)Becoz a Mousetrap laughs at the Mouse

Uh, what?

Of all the proposed slogans, only one actually showed any real wit, this punny little contribution from Apeiron:

Better dead than wed.

Indeed, this one was so good I suspected it had to have been used somewhere before. And indeed it has been. A quick Google search showed that the UK anarchist group Class War used the phrase back in the 1980s on a poster protesting the marriage of Prince Andrew and Sarah “Fergie” Ferguson. Of course, that temporarily happy couple ended up separating after only six years, and divorced a few years after that.

Maybe slogans can change the world.

Scary thought.

Despite that risk, I would like to encourage the MGTOWers to make up some stickers of their own. Maybe some t-shirts, coffee mugs, and baseball caps as well.  Heck, put these slogans on everything you own. Seriously, anything that makes it easier to identify you, preferably at a distance, is more than welcome.

--

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.

Earthquakes and Ideologues

A scene in Haiti, after its earthquake.

Sometimes The Spearhead, probably the internet's leading angry-man site, seems like a giant interactive game of "pin the blame on the feminists." When uprisings broke out in Tunisia and then Egypt , you may recall, W. F. Price -- head honcho at The Spearhead -- suggested that the unrest in both countries was a male reaction to the excesses of feminism and female power.

Now he's returned with an even stranger article, comparing  the current disaster in Japan with the very different outcome of last year's earthquake in Haiti-- and blaming women in general and feminists in particular for the far more lethal outcome in Haiti.

You might think that the staggering death toll in Haiti -- estimates range from 92,000 to more than 300,000 --  might have something  to do with the fact that it's the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere, with a weak and corrupt government and almost nothing in the way of intrastructure.  And that Japan's relative resiliance in the face of an even more powerful earthquake might have something to do with the fact that it's a wealthy nation -- the world's third most powerful economy, with a GDP per capita about 30 times greater than Haiti's -- with a great deal of experience in handling earthquakes.

But Price has a rather different, and highly peculiar, explanation: Haiti suffered more because it's a  "matriachal" country, unlike properly "patriarchal" Japan. Comparing  "matriarchal Haiti’s and patriarchal Japan’s respective responses to natural disaster," Price writes that

in Haiti the women are still living in open encampments well over a year after the quake, [while] Japanese women are already sheltered, which is necessary, because it is still cold in northern Japan this time of year. ...

Price goes on to argue that Japan is doing better by its men as well. While in Haiti in the aftermath of the quake, the UN and some relief organizations targeted aid towards women -- who tend to literally get pushed aside in the mad scramble for food supplies otherwise -- Price argues that

Japanese men ... have it far better than their Haitian counterparts as well. There are no foreign troops pointing guns at them and denying them food, they are taken care of and respected if old, and given jobs and a place in society if young. Perhaps most importantly, They are given the opportunity to do what men often do best — they are allowed to take care of their families and communities.

Let's set aside for a moment that it is a tad early to be declaring, er, "mission accomplished" in the Japan crisis, especially with the specter of a nuclear reactor meltdown looming. Price is a man with an agenda, and he moves fairly quickly to his grand conclusion: The two disasters, he argues,

give us an opportunity to ask ourselves what kind of a society we want to live in. Do we want, as the feminists would have it, to be helpless, disease infested, homeless and starving if we face hardship, or do we want to have the ability to come together and pull ourselves up from the rubble? For the sane people of the world, the choice is clear.

Yes, that's right. Feminism is the party of helplessness, disease, homelessness and starvation. Anyone who's just made the argument he made really shouldn't be offering any opinions on the sanity of others.

Before we get into a critique of Price's argument, such as it is, let's pause for a moment to ask how his novel thesis was received by the Spearhead regulars. While a few commenters did take him to task for ignoring economics, others took his absurd argument and ran with it. (This is The Spearhead, after all.) Alucin declared,

Feminism is a crime against humanity. What happened in Haiti regarding food distribution will be repeated again and again as long as feminism prevails. Fighting feminism is something good people do on behalf of humanity. The men and women of Japan will get their lives back together again far more quickly than the matriarchal people of Haiti.

The future is patriarchal. It’s just a matter of which form it will take and when the West will re-masculate.

Epoetker took it a step further, adding a bit of racism to the misogynistic mix:

Haiti is a land of men who look like men but think like women. Japan is a land of men who look like women but think like men.

Rebel, meanwhile, found a grim humor in it all:

The Haitian case is proof positive that feminism is exactly like AIDS.
No matter how many die, feminism will be the last thing to die.
It was planned that way.

Whichever way you look at it, the answer is always the same: feminism is a religion of death.
Feminists are death worshippers.

That leaves very little hope for the future.
Life is so short and we worry too much. And it’s so futile.
One day we will all be Haitians. LOL!!

A note: These aren't a couple of weird comments I've "cherry picked" to give a distorted picture of the discussion. In fact, these comments got anywhere from 20 to nearly 70 upvotes from Spearhead readers, and almost no downvotes. There were many other comments, also heavily upvoted, agreeing with these general premises. If you don't believe me, go take a look yourself.

Numerous other commenters, I should also note, offered frankly racist interpretations of "the tale of two earthquakes," blaming the greater scope of the disaster in Haiti on what one commenter called its "largely negro, largely indolent society." While some objected to the racism, many clearly racist comments got numerous upvotes from the Spearhead crowd.  (The comment I just quoted got 60 upvotes and 20 downvotes.)

Getting back to Price's argument, let's try to unpack the various layers of bullshit here. First of all, Haiti is no matriarchy. Yes, women often head up households there. But they don't run the country, by any measure.

Life in Haiti is no picnic for men, but women have it even worse; as one human rights group noted in a recent report, "Haitian women experience additional barriers to the full enjoyment of their basic rights due to predominant social beliefs that they are inferior to men and a historical pattern of discrimination and violence against them based on their sex. Discrimination against women is a structural feature in Haitian society and culture that has subsisted throughout its history, both in times of peace and unrest."

Rape is a constant threat, and, as a recent article in the Los Angeles Times notes, it "wasn't even considered a serious criminal offense in Haiti until five years ago. ... Before 2005, rape was considered an offense against honor, or "crime of passion," meaning it was a minor infraction in which the perpetrator would go free if he agreed to marry his victim."

The earthquake only made the situation worse for women. Rapes are especially widespread in the camps that sprung up in the wake of last year's earthquake. Instead of "tak[ing] care of their families and communities," as Price would put it, many Haitian men have instead preyed on women and girls, sexually assaultng them and stealing their food and other supplies. This is not, to put it mildly, a country suffering from an excess of feminism or female authority.

No, Haiti is in dire straits mostly because of its extreme poverty. Anyone looking at the history of natural disasters can plainly see that they tend to cause far more chaos and misery and death in poor countries than they do in rich ones: In highly patriarchal, and poverty-stricken Pakistan, the 2005 Kashmir earthquake killed an estimated 75,000, though the quake there was an order of magnitude weaker than Japan's.

I'm not sure why I feel the need to remind readers of these basic points; the absurdity of Price's arguments should be immediately obvious to anyone not blinded by misogyny. Sometimes I wonder if Price even believes all of the shit he shovels. Stupidity would be easier to forgive than that level of cynicism.

--

If you appreciated 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. Thanks!

*Yes, that was a Bioshock reference.

Armageddon me some quality wives, widows and virgins!

If you don't have one of these, you're screwed.

The good fellows at the Happy Bachelors forum have gone all survivalist on us. Well, a bunch of them have. Some are posting tips on gracious postapocalyptic living: did you know that you can only safely drink your own urine once or twice in an emergency, because it gets more concentrated with nasty bad stuff as you get more dehydrated? The More You Know.

Others are speculating on what it all means for men like them, and the ladies they think are filthy whores.

Like a lot of those who've convinced themselves that the end is of civilization is near, our Happy Bachelors seemed kind of stoked at the notion of everything going to shit. Because, you see, clear-sighted, no-nonsense dudes like them will obviously thrive in the tough new environment, while wimpy females and those who love them will be forced to beg for scraps from their new MGTOW overlords.

The perhaps appropriately named recluse sees some hope in the economic collapse of towns like Flint Michigan:

[E]xtreme social poverty ... will end frivolous bullshit like catering to the feminists or princess mentality ball busting bitches.

Apparently when mens jobs get harder they begin to get more efficient and genuinely self protective.

This is how manginas can be transformed on a wholesale basis.

Wholesale transformation? Uh oh. I don't know exactly what recluse is getting at here, but it doesn't sound good for the manginas of the world.

Still,  there is hope for you, ladies.! Well, for some of you. Not many, I'd guess. To be perfectly honest, ladies, if you're reading this blog here, you're probably not on the list.

As boogyman explains, after the shit hits the fan,

Quality wives, widows, and virgins will be looked after by good men just like in the Biblical days. Thug lovers, welfare mothers, and feminists will have to fend for themselves (Daddy government will be MIA). The laws of the jungle will sort everything out in short order.

So get that last bit of thug-loving in, gals, while you still have a chance.

--

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.

Tall, dark and hansom

Future evil feminist, developing her evil mind.

Say what you will about those Men Going Their Own Way, but they have proven themselves again and again to be experts on the enigma that is woman. Over on MGTOWforums.com, the commenter calling himself AC101202 may not be able to spell the word "handsome" or use the correct form of "it's," but he knows what women want and why they do what they do. What do they want, what do they really really want? Dudes to boss them around and maybe even oppress them a bit. Because oppression = love. 

Women love being controlled and oppressed. Like children, they are the happiest when they know their boundaries. ... Women are overgrown children, hence why they relate to children so well. Like children they need (and occasionally admit that they like) men who (fairly and non-violently) tell them what their place is and keeps them there, and in the process show that they are protecting them and value them.

Alas, not all women are able to find themselves oppressive bossy dudes of their own. These unfortunate lasses all too often become feminists. And instead of learning beauty secrets from their happily oppressed sisters, or from any of the many fine periodicals devoted to the subject, some of these ladies start trying to -- get this -- improve their lady brains. And that's where all the trouble begins.

Because feminists are mostly physically ugly they cannot attract strong well-off hansom men with their shit together. Because they are usually ugly they compensate for their physical short-comings by working and developing an intellect, and because they are jealous of other better looking females, they seek to restrict their actions by passing anti-prostitution laws, laws that restrict free-speech to keep women from selling the image of their bodies etc... You will rarely ever see an attractive women protesting against cheer-leading, or outside a Hooters. That's because they, unlike the fat pudgy feminists, can profit from selling their image.

AC101202 doesn't spell out all the implications of these developments for nice, thoughtful guys like himself, but I will.  You see, since women only have sex with alpha male thugboys -- those non-thugboys who claim to sleep with women are obviously all lying -- nice guys are also forced to develop their minds (though not, evidently, forced to learn how to spell). This doesn't do them much good, though, given that the ugly smart girls out there that might have otherwise been captivated by their giant brains have all been infected with feminism, and have managed to convince themselves that they don't actually want dudes bossing them around. (Though they do, they really really do.) What can a poor boy do -- except to declare he's had enough of women, and then prove how little he needs or cares about these foul harridans by spending every waking moment complaining about them online.

Poor AC101202 ends his comment with a lament:

To be fair I would be lying if I didn't admit to being jealous of the alpha male bad boys who attract women easily. I wish I had their look and natural charisma. I'm also pretty sure the reason most smart people tend to be physically weak, especially in youth is because genetically they are programmed to compensate for their physical short-comings. However, I would never lobby to pass legislation to restrict people's sexual behavior. I'm quite happy watching this society collapse under the weight of it's own human stupidity.

Continue Going Your Own Way, young man. It is the only solution.

--

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.