Sex-ed for assholes. And non-assholes, too.

Note: Girlfriend pillows are not actual girlfriends.

Men Going Their Own Way have some problems with sex. One of the biggest? Despite their best efforts to totally and completely avoid women -- which some reason always seems to involve spending hours online every day talking about women -- sometimes it will somehow come to pass that hapless MGTOWers will find themselves actually having sex with a woman. As you might imagine, this experience may not be altogether pleasant for either party involved.  Indeed, in my most recent post, I quoted one poor non-virgin MGTOWer who declared that “having sex with a woman is like humping a moist pillow: It doesn't join in and you can hardly tell the difference.”

What this young man has described is not “sex” so much as “really, really bad sex.” Fortunately, it can be prevented! The most obvious way, already hit upon by many MGTOWers, is to not have sex with women at all. If you despise and resent the entire female gender, it is probably best to not get naked with individual members of that gender. The women of the world will be happy to go along with you on this point, trust me.

But on the off chance that some MGTOWers might be willing to dial down their woman-hatred enough to actually contemplate sex with women, I would like to offer some tips on how to improve the experience for everyone.

First, to make absolutely sure that sex won’t come to resemble “humping a moist pillow,” make sure that your sexual partner is not, in fact, a moist pillow. 

This is a simple fix, and one that is often overlooked. 

If your partner is not actually a pillow but a live human woman, well, I will now give the floor to Ozymandias, who recently posted an extremely helpful list of suggestions in the comments here. Here it is again for anyone who might have missed it::

OZYMANDIAS SEX EDUCATION TIEMZ GO!

So all the sex you've had with women, Zaku, has vaguely resembled fucking a moist pillow. I understand and empathize with your sadness about your sex life. However, young padawan, there are methods of solving this.

*Are all of your partners virgins or in high school? Virgins and high schoolers are terrible at sex, particularly if both are inexperienced. I personally was on my third partner before I was any good in bed.

FIX: Find your local cougar, slut or sexually assertive woman.

*Was your partner someone with sexual hang-ups? Slut-shaming often makes women think that enthusiasm makes them "bad girls", and ideas of men-earning-sex often make women think that lying there is their contribution to sex.

FIX: Have sex with feminists.

*Are you simply not that good in bed? This is a common problem among inexperienced men, and can lead to women not enjoying sex because it is not that enjoyable.

FIX: Learn the location of the clit (with an anatomy chart, if necessary). Listen to her instructions about sex. If she's moaning, KEEP DOING THAT. Try to give her at least one orgasm before you stick your dick in (be reasonable, if she's begging "stick it in me", go ahead, but it's a good guideline). Suck it up about the taste and learn to love eating pussy. Make sure you give her adequate foreplay (AT LEAST five minutes). Touch and kiss parts of her besides her breasts and pussy. Most of all, confidence and joy, confidence and joy.  [Editor’s Note: As briget has noted in the comments, if you really, really don’t like the taste of pussy, you can always use a dental dam; google the term if you don’t know what that is.]

*Was your partner very, very drunk? Bad sign. Sober people participate more.

FIX: If she's passed out or puking, don't fuck her.

*Was your partner freezing up, softly repeating "no, no, no", or otherwise clearly not enjoying herself? Then you may have had what is technically referred to as "nonconsensual sex," or by us Femicunt Queens of Nofunnington, "rape."

FIX: Seek affirmative, enthusiastic consent. This is shown by her, for example, ripping off your clothes, chanting "yes", sucking your cock without being asked, etc. If you are confused if she is consenting, feel free to ask "do you want to (have sex, make out, have me suck your tits, etc.)?" If you hear words like "no" and "stop," STOP IMMEDIATELY.

OZYMANDIAS SEX EDUCATION TIEMZ OVER.

Generally speaking, this is good advice for all inexperienced hetero dudes interested in improving their sex lives and the sex lives of their partners. (PROTIP: Improving the sex life of your partner will dramatically improve your sex life too.) With a few changes in wording to reflect different anatomies, as Oz herself points out, this is also good advice for straight women, gay women, gay men, trans men and women, bisexuals, and everyone else who is interested in having sex with some subset of their fellow human beings.

Just to reiterate one point: no one is a sexual expert from the get-go. There’s no shame in sexual inexperience. But it is sort of a douchebag move to blame the entire opposite sex for bad sex if you don’t know what the fuck you are doing in bed.  It takes some time, and some actual giving-a-shit-about-what-the-other-person-likes in order to get good at it. Generally speaking, if you like and respect your sexual partners, gaining this experience and expertise should be a highly enjoyable endeavor. Even if you don’t yet have much in the way of skills, a little bit of enthusiasm can go a long way. Also: you’re allowed to actually ask the other person what he or she likes and doesn’t like. This can prevent all sorts of awkwardness and encourage all sorts of fun sexy times.

Which brings us to another point worth reiterating: if there’s no shame in sexual inexperience, there’s no shame in sexual experience either. Sexually inexperienced women don’t know what they’re doing any more than sexually inexperienced guys do. So, guys, if you want to get with women who actually do know what they are doing, don’t look down on women for having sexual experience. If you’re a slut shamer, you basically have no right to complain if your partners are bad in bed. If you’re one of those dickheads who thinks women all become hags the instant they hit 25, or 30, guess what: you’ve ruled out having sex with the overwhelming majority of the women who are actually really really good at it. 

And while we’re at it: Taking the time to sit down and read about sexual techniques can speed up the process of getting good at sex enormously. If you don’t know how to find the g-spot, well, here you go.  You’re welcome. Lots more useful shit here and here, along with plenty of suggestions for awesome sexy-time book learnin. If you think you’re somehow above reading about sex, well, too bad: that’s what you’ve just been doing! 

If after all this you find that your partner is still lying there like a moist pillow, and you’ve ruled out sexual hangups, sexual inexperience and/or less-than-enthusiastic consent, there are a few other possibilities to look at: 

      1) She (or he) might be having libido problems because of depression – or due to side effects of depression meds – or for some other medical or biological reason. Time to see a doctor.

      2) She (or he) might be asexual. Some people just aren’t into sex. You’ll have to figure out yourselves what this means for your relationship. And that might mean: no more relationship. If you’re really into sex, and partner isn't, neither one of you is doing the other a favor by sticking around. 

3) She (or he) might actually be a selfish asshole. Selfish assholes tend to suck at sex. Try not to have sex with them. And don’t blame their entire gender for it. And if you're a selfish asshole, try not to have sex with anyone yourself.

Feel free to share your own tips (and links) in the comments. Learning more about sex and sexuality = good for everybody.

-- 

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.

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.

Comment of the Day: Child support is worse than rape

Er, not so much.

Sometimes this job is just too easy. Sometimes I don’t have to even bother to check in on my favorite manosphere sites to find hair-raisingly awful quotes to feature here. Sometimes the Boobz are thoughtful enough to leave them in the comments here. 

Take this quote from resident MGTOWer Cold, who currently seems to be spending more time on this blog than I am, comparing rape and child support. (You don’t think these two items are actually in any way comparable? Clearly you do not understand Boob Logic.) 

In response to commenter Amused, who pointed out that “being ordered to support a child you've fathered isn't the same as being pinned down and penetrated against your will,” Cold responded:

Exactly, 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.

Setting aside the appalling trivialization of rape as something that’s over in “some number of minutes,” what does this say about Cold’s attitudes towards children? Paying a couple of hundred buck a month to pay for some of the expenses for a child you fathered – your own flesh and blood – is worse than being raped?

If Cold ever becomes a father, through circumstances which are frankly too horrible to imagine, I feel safe in saying that he will not be winning any “father of the year” awards. 

I can just imagine the following scenario, some 11 or so years into the future: 

EXTERIOR, MOVIE THEATER

Cold’s 10-year-old son: Happy Father’s day, daddy! I’m so glad we’re going to see Toy Story 5! I love Woody!

Cold: Yeah, so does your whore mom, if you know what I mean.

Son: Huh? 

Cold: When you get older, you’ll understand. Did I mention that you mom’s a whore?  One, please!

Son: Um, daddy, why did you buy only one ticket? 

Cold: It’s for me. Get your own. You get enough of my money as it is. I stick my dick in your mom for two fucking minutes, and I’m screwed for life. It’s worse than rape! 

Son:  Um, daddy, I don’t have any money. I’m ten. 

Cold: Well, you should have thought of that when you were a sperm! 

Son:  When I was a what? 

Cold: I’m going in. See you in two hours. 

Son: Dad? What am I supposed to do now?

Cold: Not my problem!  I’m Going Galt! I’m Going My Own Way! You were a MISTAKE!

Son quietly sobs 

Cold: Hey, when we get back to your mom’s place later, remind me to tell her she’s a filthy whore. 

And … scene!

(By the way, Cold actually does claim to be going Galt, if self-admitted tax evasion counts.)

--

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.

The Low Spark of High Heeled Boys

I'm walkin' here!

Pierce Harlan of the False Rape Society has broken past the limits of mere logic, arguing that the fact that a small number of guys at a couple of events have put on women's clothing to raise money for women's causes means that rape culture doesn't exist. That seems to be the main message of a post of his today with the baffling title "Boys in bras, boys in heels, boys in pink -- all to raise money for women's causes: Is this the 'rape culture' we hear so much about?"

Harlan, posting as "Archivist," complains about several recent campus events, in which college guys have literally put on heels (to raise money and awareness about sexual assault) and bras (to raise money for breast cancer research). Harlan isn't thrilled about the causes themselves: he has sneeringly derided sexual assault awareness as "a supposedly good cause" and, while acknowledging that breast cancer research is theoretically a good thing, he's evidently tired of hearing about it.

But he seems even more hot and bothered about the cross-dressing by guys he calls "chivalrous clowns," describing the bra-wearing as "creepy" and deriding the guys "prancing around in high heels." Apparently, as Harlan sees it, these fellows are just doing it to impress the chicks:

young men will do pretty much anything to help, to curry favor with, and to be admired by young women.

It is heinous to suggest that attitudes of sexual aggression and dominance over women are normalized, rationalized, and excused by the alleged beneficiaries of "patriarchy" in our culture. In point of fact, the foolish young buffoons in heels and bras are far more representative of young masculinity in our culture than is the young rapist. 

There's not a lot of logic in this, er, argument, but in an earlier posting Harlan elaborates on the distaste he feels towards the "Walk A Mile In Her Shoes" event, which was held at the University of Montana (clearly a hotbed of radical feminism). 

It would be downright shocking if this or similar events ever prevented a single sexual assault from occurring because: (1) prancing around in high heels and similar useless stunts has nothing to do with preventing sexual assault; and (2) the vast majority of young men who strutted their stuff and who participate in such events are highly unlikely to ever rape a woman.  ...

If we want to curb sexual assault, we need to teach our young people the truth, but the truth doesn't jibe with the current rape meta-narrative that holds only one gender responsible for stopping it. ...

Young people generally do not understand that women experience much greater after-the-fact regret than men do. Sometimes feelings of regret are translated into feelings of "being used," and sometimes feelings of "being used" are misinterpreted or purposefully misconstrued as "rape."

Asking the police, a judge, or a jury to sort out what happened in an alcohol-fueled tryst based on a "he said/she said" account puts an impossible burden on our law enforcement and judicial apparatuses. ...

There is no "rape culture"; there is no "rape continuum."  Rape is committed by social deviants, not the nice boy next door. It is almost a certainty that none of the charming young buffoons who strutted around in women's heels yesterday will ever rape a woman. ...

The sad, politically incorrect fact of the matter is that young women have far more power to stop rape than innocent young men by not putting themselves in situations where rape is more likely to occur. 

There's a lot of bullshit condensed into these short paragraphs. There's victim-blaming, of course: do we regularly attack murder victims for "putting themselves in situations where murder is likely to occur?" There's his weird complaint that actually investigating and prosecuting date rape puts an "impossible burden" on police and the judicial system: should we simply stop enforcing laws against all crimes that are hard to investigate or prosecute? And there's his unwillingness to accept the simple fact that rapists all too often do look exactly like the "nice boy next door." As for his complaint that these events target the wrong people, see here for an argument as to why it makes sense to raise awareness specifically amongst those men who are NOT likely to rape women. 

In the past a few MRAs have asked me why I put the False Rape Society blog in my "boob roll" -- and formerly in my "enemies list." This is why. Spreading blatant misinformation and blaming victims: these are not exactly good ways to actually reduce the number of men falsely accused of rape.

And here's another thought for the MRAs reading this, Harlan included: if you are truly as concerned about testicular or prostate cancer -- or any other male malady -- as you so often and so loudly claim to be, take a few moments away from your constant complaining about feminism and/or women, and actually hold a fund raiser yourselves. In a comment on his latest post, Harlan writes: "My problem is this: how about an event to raise funds for male suicide, etc. once in a while?" You know how events like these happen? PEOPLE ORGANIZE THEM. There is nothing stopping MRAs from organizing such an event on their own. How about it, guys? 

--

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.

Check out my post on "Misogyny in the Men's Rights Movement" on the Good Men Project

My contribution to the Good Men Project debate over the Men's Rights Movement -- talking about misogyny in the movement -- is up now.

Batman on an elephant says check it out.

Ruthless Lady-People: Short-haired, smelly, muffin-eating lady-people

Women not only eat muffins -- they decapitate them!

Over on an angry-man site that would be called The Pearhead if you removed an "S" from its name, a fellow named Alcuin has a few complaints about the ladies. Let's listen in, shall we?

Western women are ruthless. They will destroy a family with a lifestyle divorce, and ruin her husband without thinking of their lives. ...

Ah yes, the old lifestyle divorce. There's little that Western women enjoy more than a nice divorce. Well, aside from accusing men of rape, and playing slutty dressup, and going to work:

They will accuse a man of rape when he did no such thing so they can get revenge for hurt feelings or to cover their own infidelity. They will dress like whores, then accuse men of being perverts and of sexual harassment. They will take all the cushy jobs and complain when men refuse to take the shit jobs, but act like “boys” instead.

But Alucin is just getting started. It gets worse:

They will cut their hair short, get fat, avoid shaving (their legs? their face?), smell, and then complain that men go for Asian women or none. They will take advantage of manginas for years, and give nothing in return for such dog-like loyalty. They will take jobs away from men, and become lazy, useless muffin-eaters.

That's right. You heard him. Women will actually CUT THEIR HAIR SHORT just to torment the men of the world with its shortness! Yet they will REFUSE to shave the hair off their legs! Which are FAT and STINKY! Also MUFFINS! They EAT MUFFINS! I'm not sure if this is supposed to be some sort of lesbian innuendo, or whether Alucin is referring to actual literal ingestion of delicious blueberry muffins, but I don't care. Either way, MEN ARE CLEARLY BEING OPPRESSED!

Why does writing this blog always make me so hungry? First, it gives me a craving for cupcakes, and now for muffins, the cupcakes' more demure cousin, the Cathy to its Patty. .

--

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.

Godwin's Law, upside-down and backwards

Meet Stu. Stu hates feminsts. But he hates manginas even more. You might even say that Stu hates manginas the way Hitler hated Jews. No, I'm not comparing Stu to Hitler. He happily compares himself to Hitler in this comment on A Voice For Men.

Phew, I’m glad you [Paul Elam] said feminist hating is an honorable and viable political act because I certainly hate them. ... The real object of my hatred are those that enable these people. The ones that are actively engaged in creating the environment of misandry that we live in now.

For those people, career feminists and manginas, my hatred would be on par to Adolf Hitlers hatred of a super rich gay jew who was raping his arse. Out of these, I hate career manginas the most. There would be no mercy for these arseholes if I could be dictator for a day, they would soon be living what is left of their lives in extreme misery.

Emphasis added. This comment, Hitler and all, got more than three times as many upvotes as downvotes from the assembled mob site's readers. Of course, Stu's comment is in response to a post titled "The Scourge of Rape. Yeah, whatever," which means that these upvoters are people who enjoyed a post titled  "The Scourge of Rape. Yeah, whatever" so much that they stuck around afterwards to compliment the author, so, you know.

This, by contrast, is the sort of comment that gets downvoted on A Voice For Men, and which inspires the post's author, Paul Elam, to tell the commenter "fuck that, and fuck you. Let me say that again. Fuck you."

EDITED TO ADD: When I posted this piece last night, that second comment had virtually no upvotes; you had to click a link to even see it. I hope at least a few of the upvotes it now has were from the regulars on that site.

Another heartening sign: the critical response Elam's "Rape ... whatever" screed got on the Men's Rights subreddit on Reddit. His response to the criticism is rather telling. I'm generally not a fan of the Men's Rights subreddit, as you might imagine, but there are some decent people who comment there and it is much less hateful than almost all of the other MRA/MGTOW/etc sites I regularly read.

--

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.

A New Low in Victim-Blaming, Part 2: In Mala Fide on Lara Logan

From In Mala Fide

The reaction of the "manosphere" to Lara Logan's reported sexual assault in Cairo has been highly revealing, to put it mildly. And what it reveals about the assorted Men's Rightsers, Men Going Their Own Way, pickup artists, and others who make up the manosphere is pretty ugly.

Take, for example, Ferdinand Bardamu's posts on the subject. On Tuesday, Bardamu, whose antifeminist blog In Mala Fide is widely linked to in the manosphere, spat forth a snide, sarcastic rant that attacked Logan for having the temerity to even set foot in Egypt. He started out dismissive:

Apparently, a CBS lady reporter got raped while covering the revolution in Egypt. For some reason, we’re expected to feel sorry for her.

Then turned up the sarcasm:

Oh, what a symbol of courage Miss Logan is! What a beacon of determination and grit and…no, seriously. I can’t go on.

Fuck Lara Logan. Fuck her and the shit-for-brains idiot who thought it was a good idea to send a WOMAN to report from a war zone. ...

Of course, Bardamu ignores the simple  fact that is is dangerous to send ANY reporter, male or female, into the midst of a revolution -- indeed, the Committee to Protect Journalists has documented more than 140 attacks on journalists in the Egyptian unrest so far; one journalist was shot and killed. Despite this fact, it is an undeniably good thing that some reporters (male and female both) are willing to risk their lives to cover wars and revolutions and other dramatic, dangerous, and important events. No one has suggested that the attacks on male journalists mean that men should not be covering these events. No one is mocking the male journalists who were attacked. (Well, almost no one. Bardamu refers in passing to CNN's Anderson Cooper, also famously attacked while covering the events of Egypt, as a "twinkle-toed pansy [who] couldn’t handle the heat on the streets of Cairo.")

For Bardamu, though, Logan's story is one of a woman foolishly trying to make her way in a man's world:

You send a chick into a situation like the one in Egypt, you might as well hang a sign around her neck that says “FREE FUCKTOY”. I don’t care how many disaster areas she’s reported from, how many awards she’s won, it was going to happen eventually. ...

Sucks that Lara got raped, but she had it coming. [Emphasis in original]

To Bardamu, this case is evidence not only that women journalists should not be sent to cover the Egyptian revolution but that they should not be allowed to leave their home country at all:

[O]f COURSE Lara shouldn’t be sent on another foreign assignment again! She, nor any other women should be allowed to be a foreign correspondent for their own safety.

And then, after arguing that Logan "had it coming,"and that any western woman who has the temerity to leave her hotel room and step out into the streets of Cairo should expect herself to get raped sooner or later, Bardamu then suggests that Logan may be making it all up:

There’s a non-zero chance that she didn’t get raped at all, and that she made the whole thing up to garner attention and sympathy from the weepy, chivalrous masses. ...

I have no evidence that she’s not telling the truth, only a tiny feeling in the pit of my stomach that’s been growing year by year, with every venal vixen who falsely accuses a man of rape because she wants fame, or she feels like a slut after sleeping with the guy, or she’s mad that he slept with her best friend the day after, or whatever else.

Naturally, in the comments, many of Bardamu's fans agreed that women women who trespass into male spaces deserve whatever happens to them. According to "John":

Women do not belong in men’s locker rooms, Mike Tysons apartment at 2:00 a.m., drunk in a bar bathroom with the Steelers quarterback, and they sure as hell don’t belong “reporting” in the middle of a revolution. Women should not go to Frat Parties dressed like sluts and get drunk with the expectation that “nothing will happen.” ...

This woman, Laura Logan, is not just an idiot – she is an adulterous whore. She shares this unfortunate circumstance with tens of millions of others of her sex, and deserves no pity whatsoever.

For some, the case was not just another excuse for "slut shaming" but evidence that the very notion of equality between the sexes is wrong. As Brett Stevens put it:

American women are rape targets worldwide. They are known to be clueless, friendly, and most of all, sexually easy. If a woman chucks her sexual favors out the door at the drop out of a hat, why not just go the extra mile and apply pressure? ... We take these girls from comfy suburbs and send them into war zones and riots and wonder why they get gang raped. Amazing cluelessness, arising from our insane idea of “equality.”

There were other comments even worse than these -- e.g., this one -- but I don't have the heart to post them here.

But Bardamu's retrograde notions were also challenged in the comments -- mostly from those who saw his noxious post linked to on feminist sites and on Twitter, but also in a few cases from actual fans of his blog.

This reaction inspired Bardamu to post a second piece on the Logan story, one even more narcissistic and self-righteous than the first. After taking on some of his critics (most notably Molly of Progressive Blogic, whom he labeled a "premenstrual whiner"), and casually referring to Logan as "an unwilling cum dumpster," Bardamu tried to pretend that it was him, and not the feminists, who had the best interests of women at heart.

Lara Logan had no business being in Cairo, or anywhere in that part of the world for that matter. All of you leftie feminist tossers screeching about “rape culture” have her blood on your hands. How many more have to suffer before your lies are discredited?

Sorry, but a guy who refers to any women, much less a woman who has been raped, as a "cum dumpster" pretty much forfeits any right to be taken seriously on the subject of what is best for women.

About a week ago, Bardamu reported that he'd taken a Psychopathy Test on OkCupid, and had scored an impressive 31 points, which put him in the ranks of the "True Psychopaths."  His posts on Logan -- full of narcissistic rage and utterly lacking in basic human empathy -- seem to bear out this diagnoses all too well.

--

If you liked 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.

Taking victim-blaming to new lows: The Spearhead on Lara Logan

Lara Logan, shortly before the attack

There has been an astounding amount of vile shit posted on the internet about the reported sexual assault and beating of CBS reporter Lara Logan in Cairo's Tahir Square. I spent a depressing hour or so the other night looking through hundreds of comments on the Yahoo news message boards; it was a virtual festival of misogyny, racism, victim-blaming and simple nastiness. A sample (each quote is from a different comment):

don't put some nice white pu55y near crazy @#$% arabs. it's like goddamn king kong

Kinda' like sending a woman reporter into a locker room? Don't ask me to feel any kind of remorse for her. Equal rights demands equal responsibility

it started as a revolution and turned in a black spring break! mwaa ha ha

She loved every minute of it.

I could multiply examples ad infinitum; the last I checked there were more than 1500 comments on the one Yahoo news story I looked at, and most were of this sort. The only slightly encouraging sign? Most of these vile comments have more downvotes from readers than upvotes.

You expect this kind of behavior from the Yahoo message board crowd, which has never been very big on civility, or even basic human decency. Typical anonymous internet assholery.

Leave it to the readers of The Spearhead, though, to take commentary on this sad case to an even lower low. Yesterday, Spearhead head honcho W.F. Price published his own, predictably victim-blaming, take on the subject -- essentially blaming feminists for encouraging women to report the news in the same dangerous places that male reporters go. (When Anderson Cooper was attacked, you didn't hear anyone suggesting that men shouldn't be covering the events in Cairo.)

I think that's a supremely tasteless way to use this tragedy to push an antifeminist agenda. But the comments to his article, roughly 270 of them at last count, are far worse -- rarely bothering with even a pro-forma expression of basic human sympathy, some blaming and even mocking the victim, and most using the case to crudely push an assortment of their own misogynist agendas.  Here are some of the worst; I present them without comment, as they pretty much speak for themselves. I have edited some for space reasons; you can follow the links to read them in their entirety.

Alucin explained about how rape allegedly benefits its victims:

When I studied in university a woman claimed to have been gang-raped. After telling the story, she acquired a certain authority. She was at the top of the feminist hierarchy .... Her word was gold because of her rape.

It was never even verified if she had in fact been raped.

It’s a harsh thing to say, but the woman at university gained immensely from the rape, or her rape story-telling, with this increased stature. She probably wouldn’t have gotten into that very small degree program without the rape story to tell to the admissions committee.

At school, no one, especially a man, could ever challenge her about any subject, however remotely related to rape. ...

Rape against men or women is a tragedy, but I also find it sickening how “survivors” or their “friends and supporters” often use their status for personal gain. ... It’s the same thing when feminists politicize breast cancer. 

Opus added:

I agree with Alcuin: In my experience women wear RAPE like a badge of honour or military medal (as I presume Ms Logan will now do). I, of course, never believe word of it, and I notice most guys these days are equally sceptical. There may be an increasing Rape epidemic but no one I know is a Rapist. Funny.

Confused declared that he didn't give a shit:

No group on earth is more privileged that American/western women.
I won’t waste my time any more worrying about their safety, or lack thereof, due to their choices.

intp took it a step further:

Don’t believe her. Don’t care. I hope the Arab guys didn’t catch anything from her.

That is what the non-stop lie called feminism has done to me. Vive la nihilism.

Rebel offered this highly original take on rape:

I don’t see the point here..

According to feminist orthodoxy, humpteen gazillion women are raped every day. This one is the humpteen gazillionth plus one for that day.

Women are raped if you have sex with them, women are raped if you don’t have sex with them, women are raped even if there are no men around. ...

Every time two animals are copulating, a woman feels raped. There are more rapes on earth than there are hydrogen molecules in the universe.

To women of today, rape seems to be the highest achievement, the Royal Road to Success.

I’m laughing so much I might get a hernia, my belly is aching from the laughter.

Papa Smurf suggested the reported rape was a great career move, and ended his comment with a smiley:

she’ll be a CBS news anchor in no time. great way to get promoted.

I dont know if she genuinely didnt want what just happend or maybe feminism has affectivly blinded her and rendered her stupid. Blonde western women in the arab world are like all you can eat restraunts to fat people. Just help yourselves ;)

Troll King posted a long rambling diatribe against "western women" in the Middle East, of which these remarks are only a small portion:

*yawn*

Typical feminist/western woman(as if there is a difference) acts like her typical bitchy self in a place that won’t tolerate it. ....

The fact is that women, western cunts, think they can go into a culture and act how they want and treat the poorest of the poor not just like “help” or a but like a slave that should be lashed for simply flirting. I bet these rapists look who do this probably thought she would act towards them the same way white women act towards brown and black men on western tv. Like he was a stud....

But, umm, like yeah dude. That is so hurrible I might go and cry a river.

The Contrarian Expatriate took victim-blaming to a new low:

Sounds like she got what she set herself up for. You can yell, “I am woman, hear me roar!” all you want in the Anglosphere, but step into the 3rd world behaving that way and they will pound you (no pun intended) back into your place.

Again, as is generally the case with the comments from The Spearhead that I quote here on my blog, these are not weird outliers in the discussion there. Unlike the comments from Yahoo I quoted above, all of the comments I quoted from The Spearhead got multiple upvotes from readers there, in most cases several dozen; none had more than a handful of downvotes. Alucin's comment about the benefits of rape -- a comment surprisingly similar in spirit to an infamous quote on false rape accusations from Catherine Comins, an assistant dean at Vassar, that still raises hackles from antifeminists two decades after it was uttered to a Time magazine writer --  got more than 80 upvotes. There is more than a little irony here.

--

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.