You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘RPOJ’ tag.

   Greetings nature lovers, today we get to observe in the wild an all to common animal – the delusional oppressed male.  Deep in the basement man-cave, writing furious man-words about how terrible men have it, and why women bitches have it so darn good.  I think dissertations like the one about to follow are reason enough to be wary of the hermetic bubbles that can form in internet land, where critical thought is extinguished and replaced by the toxic group-think that masquerades as reasonable thought.

Our featured whinger extraordinaire is Red Shambhala and his very… umm… nuanced view of feminism and the female role in society. 

““I’m a feminist who loves rough sex“, “I’m a queer little“, “How I reconciled feminism with my first step into the dark side of BDSM”, “Why I’m Both Sexually Submissive AND A Feminist” – put feminism and BDSM into a search engine and you will quickly be greeted by numerous articles about stronk feminist womyn who have stopped worrying and loved to learn the whip.”

Fascinating premise.  BDSM, or the replication of male violence and female submission for fun?!? isn’t a particularly feminist act, nor like much of the rest of liberal feminism, worth examining past the idea that any ideological stance that centres men and their feelings can not rightly be called feminist.  So Red Shitolya is already off to a bad start.

“Meanwhile, Return of Kings et al. are more than eager to similarly praise BDSM as something women “secretly” want (but just do not want to admit) and men should therefore do towith for them.”

Unsurprising, as BDSM reinforces patriarchal ideals, why wouldn’t misogynists be all over such propositions? 

“What these seemingly disparate groups have in common is that they are primarily concerned about what women want.”

Doubtful.  RoK and liberal feminists may both support the current status quo, but exhibit markedly different levels of clueless foolishness that detract from the work of feminism proper (e.g. the emancipation of females from the strictures of patriarchy).

   “Obviously, liberals and conservatives, left-wingers and right-wingers cannot exactly agree on what precisely it is the fair sex allegedly wants, but they do share the same gynocentric framework, namely in posing the question, “What do women want?”, and then attempting to answer said question.”

To be treated as fully human in society is a great place to start.  And what exactly the fuck is a gynocentric framework.  Referring to a topic isn’t “centric” anything.  Biologists talking about their work are not being bio-centric.  Of the many tells Male Rights Activists give, this is one of the most obvious – the inversion of the power structure in society.  Somehow females, the class that holds less power, is taken less seriously, and is abused more in society has all the power and is always up to “no good” and wants to enslave all men to their dastardly agenda.  By “no good” I mean opposing the current patriarchal status quo of course.  But the very notion that dudes exist in a society that they made and directly benefits them in a myriad of ways is quite past the event horizon of most MRA’s; as appreciating tangible facts is quite outside their wheelhouse. 

   “Antifeminism, however, should not be about giving a different answer to the frustrated query “What do women want?” but, rather, about asking alternative questions: “What do men actually want? And why the hell do we only care about what women want?”

What we have today in society is what men want, you feckless douche nozzle.  Losing your place privileged place in society and actually have to treat everyone with respect is not the shit-your-pants apocalyptic nightmare you envision.  Not even close. 

“The current omnipresence of gynocentric thought, however, should not leave one with the impression that focusing exclusively on the desires of females has always been unchallenged.”

The level of unhinged quickly goes past 11.  Back here in reality, the world is still dominated by male thought, male writers, captains of industry, academia, art, and literature.  We are drowning in the dudeish perspective and it fucking sucks.   The half of the world that isn’t represented by said male view needs to see itself portrayed in literature, culture, and business.  The few inroads into male dominated fields represent a clear and present danger to MRA’s like the Red Shitola, and as always their fears are based on the dark nightmare fuel that is regurgitated through the manosphere.  

“There are both secular as well as religious alternatives to subordinating everything to the vapid whims and wills of women. Christianity, for instance, teaches that “man is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.” (1 Corinthians 11:7). “

This book that says its a sin to wear clothing of mixed fibres is now an authority on how a modern society should work.   *shaking head*  

   “Likewise, the book of Genesis tells us that Satan, the great deceiver who attempts to leads humanity astray, tempted Eve by talking her into believing that she could be like God. Meanwhile, Adam was similarly tempted and convinced that he should follow the proud female’s advice.”

And the burning bush is full of wisdom of the ages.  Citing the bible to back your claims is a risible practice at best, and to be honest boring as heck. 

“Even from a non-Christian perspective one has to admit that both men and women are indeed often tempted to put women in the place that is traditionally reserved for the only God in Abrahamic religions.”

Our heroic dude-bro, cites two examples the exact opposite of what he states in the following paragraph.  Consistency, what the fuck is it? 

“Consider, for instance, how many pagan religions worship motherhood goddesses and how the evil US Empire is able to justify its imperialist wars by claiming that they only murder in order to “liberate” women.”

What are you talking about, you’re not making any sense.  Does anyone else here think that our beloved Red Shitola is a avid follower of Alex Jones?  He’s making about that level of sense … 

 

“Be that as it may, according to the holy texts of Christianity, the punishment for sin was not only death but also that the women’s desire is now “contrary to her husband.” Before the fall, the female gladly fulfilled her roles as the submissive helper she was created for by the Christian’s God – after the fall, she is now boisterous and unsubmissive, her desire is now “contrary” to her husband. Hence, a female refusing to submit is both sin and the result of sin.”

When people ask about how religion reinforces patriarchal notions and the patriarchal status quo I should just reference this Joker and his man-boner for the good ole days where you could just straight up kill disobedient women.  The notion that we need to combat this fierce imbalance the world over rather than propagate it, must seem like some fanciful feminist dream conspiracy.  Of course, the nearer one comes to reality, the more out of touch it seems to delusional dudes such as Red Shitola. 

    “This is not to say that I support Christianity or believe the teachings of Jesus to have the power to repair Western society, but there might be an occasional diamond to pluck from the dunghill of Abrahamic religions. “

Oh hey, all that stuff I said about religion and stuff, I don’t actually believe it anything.  But if a credulous source happens to fit my world-veiw, I’ll endorse it with aplomb.  Because fuck critical thinking and analysis, they too must be part of gynocentric thought frameworks…

   “If memory serves, it was Fyodor Shcherbatskoy (1866-1942), the great Russian Indologist largely responsible for laying the foundations in the Western world for the scholarly study of Buddhism, who once replied that he did not approve of his contemporaries’ literal attack on the Christian churches, but, rather, considered Torah, Bible, Talmud and Qur’an to be “cultural treasure chambers.” So, maybe the saints and sages of the past do have a thing or two to teach us about women.”

You know how I just said that religion was crap?  Just after saying it wasn’t crap to begin with?  Yes, well religion once again isn’t crap.  I think the feminist overlords broke into this guys computer and changed the dictionary meanings of ‘convoluted’ and ‘nuanced’ because you can feel the all the (erroneous) mental work that has gone into this tepid series of contradictory paragraphs.  It’s like he’s occasionally seen good writing but then somehow mistook his rubegoldberg-esque pap for that good writing and declared it a masterpiece.   Another solid victory for Dunning-Kruger. 

“To return to the main point, BDSM is essentially a faux-surrogate for actual dominance and actual submission. Instead of a sweet, warm and submissive helper whose cheeks blush upon receiving a playful slap on her bum, men now have to deal with ugly, boisterous feminists who want their boyfriends to spit in their faces, whip and abuse them, and simulate rape like conditions.

Wait, what?  You are blaming women for the pornified violent BDSM culture?  Of course you are, as women are always to blame for the shitty things men do and say. 

“For whatever reason, internet virgins sometimes seem to believe that women being into BDSM is a sign of femininity, but the opposite is true.”

How do you even get here from what you’ve said?  This is masterclass in pulling random shit of ones ass and calmly stating it as ‘fact’. 

“The more feminist a female is, the more pain and humiliation she needs in order to still feel like a woman in the bedroom. Likewise, the more feminine a woman is, the less she wants you to hurt and to humiliate her.”

What?  Feminism takes a dim view of the abusive nature of BDSM and realizes the replication of the patriarchal status quo.  This is the notion on display that there is ‘one true nature’ for the women-folk and that those haughty outliers (who dare speak against patriarchy) somehow need to be broken down to enjoy the true awesomeness of being part of the oppressed, submissive, servile class.  Fucking disgusting this pornified dudes fantasies on display for the world to read.  

“To sum up, the faux “dominance” of consensual sadomasochism is outright pathetic. “

  Because we need the real life version because that somehow is ‘better’ for all involved. 

So. Much. Misogyny. 

This is not to say that BDSM and fetishes are generally sick, “degenerate”, sinful, wrong and yada yada yada. Men should be aware, though, that women want to reduce men to the status of dogs; dogs that look dark and dangerous and threatening when they bark, and are yet on the leash of the female, who only has to snap her fingers once to make him roleplay as a “master” in the bedroom, and then snap her fingers twice in order to transform him back into her little beta boi. Men deserve better than that.

Taking a position must be a hard thing to do in the manosphere, because the level of contradiction is off the scale. 

    You tepid underwear stain of a human being; men are not oppressed in society.  Understand that men design, maintain, and propagate this system we live in for their benefit, why would they want to maintain the status-quo if it wasn’t good for them. 

   Your connection with reality is tenuous at best.  Please stop writing and wasting precious electrons your self-abrogating tortured prose.  The delusional MRA funhouse framework you exist in is an affront to rationality and clear thinking.  In short, you are making the world a worse place to be in and you don’t even realize it. 

   And that friends is the truly scary part.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The RPOJ comes for thee.

It has been way to long since the last RPOJ post.  My apologies faithful readers.

Today’s lovely winner is Anthony writing on his blog ‘How to be Happy’ – with the catchy tagline ‘Personal philosophy driven by experience and reason’.  My suggestion is to clarify his tagline a bit, I’m thinking along the lines of ‘How to be happy’ – ‘Just get a mirror so you and I can admire the stupid bloviation drizzling straight out of my asshole. ‘

Anthony while explicitly stating that there are no judgments being made, proceeds to glorify and argue (and thus judge) for a host of negative stereotypical roles associated with females.  Surprisingly uncommon practice for dudes…

—–

“First of all, I’m fully aware that some men out there date women who are just as, if not more, successful and career-focused than they are. And I think that is perfectly fine. The goal of this piece is to explain why some people act a certain way—not to condemn anyone or state how things should be.”

I’m guessing that your piece is going to be outside the realm of sociological interviews and surveys; thus you will be taking your opinions and generalizing them to men as a whole in an attempt to make your shit smell marginally sweeter. (kinda like focusing on the corn kernels, but that might be a touch on the gross side)   

    I’m not sure what is worse, dealing with actual dirtbag MRA’s who state their misogyny straight up, or the pseudo intellectual poltroons that try to obfuscate their dire man-wank arguments in bland generalizations and stolid prose. 

“I want to address the question: Why are some men (I’d say, more than half) less attracted to women who are very career driven?”

My question is why all the damn covert ops?  These are your (thinly veiled) preferences, and in reading your article, it sounds like the ‘ideal woman’ for you is the insipid patriarchal standard woman version 1.0 – Demure, supportive, submissive and preferably pregnantly barefoot in the kitchen while being totally dependent on you and thus a slave your manly whims.  

   You sir, at your earliest convenience, fuck right off.

*Phone ringing*…

*Arbourist answers:*  What are you saying?  I’m jumping to conclusions before presenting the evidence?? – oh jebus its so painful to read this shit and deconstruct it.

*Arbourist still talking on phone:* Pulling shit out of my ass?  Fine.  FINE.   Let’s go see what Douche-stick McClown-Nozzle (‘Anthony’) has to say and demonstrate the slightly rancid smell and lousy arguments that typify his MRA’s codswallop.

 

“Why are some men (I’d say, more than half) less attracted to women who are very career driven? I think lots of women assume it comes from jealousy, insecurity, or sexist beliefs. I’ll try to present a more nuanced explanation, based partly on my own sentiments.”

Manslator:  Tut-tut! You women and your frilly pink woman brain judgments.  It will take the intellectual prowess(?) of a man to break this hard cookie of a conundrum down and show you how nuanced the answers really are.  I mean ascribing insecure sexist behaviour to men is really quite unreasonable.  Instead, let’s focus on how women’s actions are making men do bad things, because as we all know women are responsible for what men do… 

“Having children has become de-emphasized over the years, but I still believe it’s a strong motivator of serious relationships.  After all, it is a natural thing, an ability we share with other animals, and so it’s deeply rooted in our psyche: like the urge to have sex.”

Ah yes, because natural means ‘good’ right?  Measles are natural, Polio is natural yet somehow we don’t automatically make that rhetorical jump of Polio (being natural) is good because it is in nature (which is inherently good, somehow.)

    Sex is a natural act but, participating in said act are two human beings with feeling and preferences.  Some people may not like having sex it doesn’t mean they are unnatural, or wrong, it just means they are autonomous human beings with preferences of their own.  Stop moralizing on the basis of what is ‘natural’. 

“Of course, if a man plans to have a family, it’s important to him and probably not something he’ll compromise on. Plus, even if he’s not sure, but he might want one, he’s going to want a woman open to the possibility.”

Given a man’s contribution to having children is quite insignificant to the female input involved, finding a woman who wants to endure pregnancy, labour, and child rearing seems like a good plan. 

“So, suppose I am interested in kids. Suppose also that I work hard and have a stable career (after all, most successful women are attracted to men at least as successful as them). Then, I would naturally be wary about dating women who have careers that require similar or more effort than mine. The fear is that, once we have children, both of us will be too busy to give them quality time: to make their meals, help them with homework, take them to events, etc.”

You cheeky fucker.  You didn’t just dress up the patriarchal notion of women being the ‘proper’primary care givers, with concerns about (what about) the children?  Cleaning the house, cooking food, interacting with children can be done by either sex (*mindblown!*).  The notion that women should be the primary care givers and thus expected to give up their personal ambitions to raise your brood is on page one of the ‘How to Patriarchy’ manual.

   Hold on.  I might be jumping to the worse case scenario here.  Let’s wait, and see.  Perhaps Professor Dipshit von Clownstick (‘Anthony’) is going advocate for the solution of equally sharing the work between parents or a similar arrangement in which both parties make compromises in order to parent their children. 

“You might say it’s not fair to expect the woman to do be the one to care for the kids. But it’s not about fairness, it’s about compatibility. If I want a family, but I have a PhD and I’m doing research everyday and I’m passionate about it, I’m naturally going to look for a woman who has a less demanding job, so someone will have time for the kids.”

Being proved right is going to my head. 

Assumption one:  Male careers are more important than female careers. 

Assumption two: My passion for ‘x’ makes it a physical impossibility for me to take care children.

Conclusion:  Anthony needs, not a equal female human being, but rather he needs a Den Mother who has less lofty aspirations and importance in the world.  To receive sperm and raise his whelps while Anthony engages in the manly man business of being a real, successful human being. 

Also Concluded:  I am much in love with ‘natural’ patriarchal stereotypes that place my interests above those who are unlucky enough be born with a vagina. 

“And if I meet a girl who’s just as absorbed in her work as I am, I’m not going to hate on her, but I’ll be less open to a long term relationship. I want someone who complements me, not someone exactly like me.”

Because having to do equal time on the second shift is completely unacceptable!  I have the man-parts that naturally disqualify me from such unsavoury scut-work.  (*near terminal eye-roll*)

“Finally, there is the fear that a career-focused woman will wait before having children, or put her job before her family.”

Oh you mean put her interests first and achieve for herself instead of being the submissive self sacrificing walking womb that you desperately desire.  Anthony, your take on the humanity of female-folk seems rather dim.  

“Personally, I find women who place their personal material success before their family life unattractive. Again, I am not judging them; it is just how my attraction works. And I believe a lot of men (and women) feel the same.”

Men place material success ahead of their family all the damn time.  In some places in the world, where your patriarchal (wet-dreams) stereotypes are not as strictly enforced, I’m deeply sorry (not sorry) that you have to deal with these uppity women and their notions of autonomy. 

    Also, was I not totally right on scrying that “a more nuanced explanation” would equal -“pulling my own sexist stereotypes out of my ass and generalizing them to look more palatable” 

Boom. 

“As I said, it seems common that successful women like men who are at least as successful as they are. The problem is, men with intense jobs like someone who balances them out, not someone exactly like them.”

Manslator:  I want a domestic servant and someone who prioritizes my needs over their own. 

“For example, imagine I’ve had a long day doing research, and I’m a bit stressed. I’d rather come home to a wife who could ask me about my day and have a meal ready and diffuse my stress with a carefree attitude, than a wife who had an equally stressful day and wants to vent about it. “

Because women should not talk about their stress, man-stress is much more important, because men say so. 

“Also, if I am naturally a very busy person, it will be hard to schedule quality time together if my partner is just as busy.”

JFC.  I haven’t looked at any more of Anthony’s blog, but I can bet he’s also an egalitarian, at least as far it means – “I get to do what I want as my boundaries are sacred, *you* on the other hand, are going to have to schedule yourself around me and the other inconveniences of adult life. 

“I can’t generalize, but I can say that in my limited experience, on average, I’ve found women who are more career focused to be harder to get along with.”

  Really?  I just can’t see it.  Women who have to put up and compete against misogynistic men in the work place don’t have time for your vacuous patina of woman hating pablum?  

  Shocking.

“I think some women have experience with men doubting their competence, and so they react by always trying to prove themselves, even to men who aren’t trying to start anything. “

Just wow dude.  You have no idea do you.  It seems like you’ve talked with, or at least talked at with women and the point they were making grazed you as it flew over your head.  Everything in patriarchy that women do is called into question.  Women usually have to work twice as hard, just to stay even with their male counterparts. 

   Perhaps just for instant exercise that withered area of your brain that is in charge of empathy and imagine what it would be like if you were not in the default category of male human, that your competence was questioned at every turn. 

   Might make you a little defensive and quick to react no? 

“It makes a guy constantly on edge because he is afraid she will start an argument.”

Getting called out on your shit isn’t a pleasant experience.   Oh my fair summer child, the patriarchy is strong with you. 

“Also, in my experience, successful women can be more likely to find faults in their partner and be critical, rather than accept him as is.”

Having standards and not putting up with his shit – ’tis a sin according to Anthony.  Of course women acting like full human beings and not submissive birthmares seems to put all the bees in Anthony’s bonnet.  Women with high standards and low tolerance for bullshit seem to be quite literally Anthony’s kryptonite.  Tough cookies to you Anthony, but believe it or not females are fully human beings with similarly important dreams and aspirations that, *gasp* may not centre around what a dude wants. :) 

 

These are not good for women and men in society, let’s do our best not to replicate them. No thanks to Anthony mind you…

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Surprise, yet another Cesspool on the interwebs!

Surprise, yet another Cesspool on the interwebs!

This post from the garrulous hodgepodge of turds known as ‘ihatesocialjusticewarrors’ manages to test the very boundaries of quantum physics – the stupid here is so super-dense that the Planck constant just may not apply. The original buffoonery can be found at ihatesocialjusticewarriors.com. The dumb is strong at this site, consider yourself warned. :)

“There is a widely held belief that feminism is a movement for equality between men and women. This is inaccurate and a misconception.”

Whaaat? These two sentences are true. Feminism is the movement to liberate women from the detrimental constraints of patriarchal society. Might we have common ground between DWR and ‘IHATESOCIALJUSTICEWARRIORS’?

???

 

Wait for it.

“Feminism is actually a form of sexism.”

And *boom* goes my head into the desk.

“Feminism views women as inherently inferior to men, no different than the traditional ‘sexists’ they are actively engaged in fighting against.”

Not. Even. Close.

Feminists are in the business of analyzing, deconstructing, and critiquing the patriarchal society that women are forced to live in. The goal of feminism is to eradicate the patriarchal superstructure that society is based upon; the very same patriarchy that damages both women and men.

Women are treated as inferiors in society because the patriarchal status quo, not because of any inherent inferiority.

Happy to clear that up for you.

“Feminism doesn’t encourage women to be as efficient as men, but rather they attempt to adjust policies to accommodate women. This isn’t equality. Instead it’s making the determination that being a woman is a handicap and special rules need to apply.”

What does being ‘efficient like a man’ look like? It looks like you are implying that men are the default normal setting in society and, that if women could just be more ‘man-like’ they would do better. Of course, the idea that default human = man, is the sorta of bullshit that feminists have been fighting against since the founding of the movement.

Adjusting policies? You mean supporting structural changes that move toward levelling the playing field? We certainly cannot have any of that.

The common thread running through so much of the feminist backlash is the wacky idea that equality is somehow achievable with the current state of affairs. The problem with this analysis (other than its made of certified grade A bullshit) is that it ignores the structural reality of society. Society is heavily tilted toward favouring men. How could it not be, as men are the primary architects of society, so why would they not craft it in their favour?

Axiomatically speaking, no egalitarian solution can be reached until patriarchy has been dismantled.

It is known that being female *is* a handicap in society. Females are not taken seriously, not given bodily autonomy, not paid as much, and for the most part relegated to the sex class to be objectified by the ‘default humans’ a.k.a men. Not exactly carnival fun times for the double XX caste.

“If feminists truly believed that women were equal to men, then there would be no motivation nor reason for them to implement, or to push to implement, special rules or adjust any of the policies that govern workforce requirements or productivity.”

Because not challenging the status quo will somehow fix the status quo…

1. Observe differential treatment on the basis of sex.
2. Do nothing about it.
3. …
4. Profit! – Sweet sweet egalitarianism for all!
C. *thud* *gasp* Need ASA stat, head sore from repeated desk impacts.

“Let’s face it, feminism is just a different form of sexism.”

Maybe in your imaginary world reverse racism(?) exists as well,  but back here in reality feminism really isn’t sexist, as it attempts to directly address sexism in society and fix said problem.

“It’s also misogynistic in that it attempts to put unrealistic demands onto average women and it denies the very nature of what a woman is and how nature designed her.”

face_palm

Just *love* the biological essentialism to justify misogyny, so fresh, so original.

Aww f*ck, it is all about the fluff pink lady brains isn’t it? Along with the migrating wombs and bouts of hysteria – women had better just shuffle back to the kitchen before more male egos are hurt and privileges are threatened. It’s not patriarchy that is holding women back, but rather biology that makes females inferior…

*thud thud thud thud*

“Feminists hate women and want them to be men instead. There, somebody finally came out and just said what we were all thinking.🙂”

Feminists want to see the structures in society that mandate differential treatment based on body type erased. Feminists have no desire to become the oppressor class, rather they seek to redress the fundamental imbalances in society.

    And there you have it gentle readers, your dose of deconstructed ass-hat misogyny for the day.

strawfeministThe working title for this post was accurate, but a bit wordy: Dude Superciliously Imagines What Females Think then Blames Females for His Imagining of their Problems.  We tightened things up a bit and figured we’d add more verbosity in the introduction.

The Dude over at Talonrest is a master of erecting stupid assertions (go there now for the bullshite-in-the-raw), applying them to the group he hates (feminists, women, double-XXers, etc.) and then castigating feminists for acting (as he portrayed them to act) so damn shallow and stupid.  Talon’s glaring problem is that his argumentation only briefly entertains connections to reality.

Talon DudeMcDudinstein is all about abandoning any semblance of rationality preferring to sashay headlong into meandering fields of straw arguments and butt-cogitations that manage to both besot and flagellate the reader not only with their insipidness, but astonishing lack of grounding in anything resembling fact.

Different format time folks, let’s deal in paragraph sized chunks to see if we can really appreciate what dear Talon is trying to say.

“Behind all the feminist posturing about being independent and empowered a big fear for many millennial young women still remains the impending big 30. That’s when the facade starts to crack and they realise that they didn’t have this all figured out.

You will see signs of it start to happen in the late 20s as the strong independent millennial woman who has been living it up in the years of her prime attractiveness starts to realise that the party won’t last forever and that she is no longer the center of the universe for the high-quality male attention that she used to take for granted.”

This is really a grand example of what happens when dudes ‘analyze’ the experience of females through the fucked up lens of patriarchal expectations.  Those expectations are:

    1.  A female’s worth in society is directly correlated to the physical attributes men find attractive.

    2.  Male ‘attention’ is a valuable resource because, implicitly speaking, females cannot achieve in society without male help/attention. 

    Both points are the kind of nefarious bullshit women struggle against everyday.  The grand quest to be though of as human, rather than desirable fuck-object starts here. 

    The fight to be a subject that is capable of action, rather than a object to be acted upon is fundamental to the feminist movement and happens to be one of the tenets many radical feminists organize around.   (The radical notion that women are people too – et cetera)

     “It happens gradually, but one day she suddenly realises she has been receiving a lot less attention from men. The waiter at Starbucks is no longer extra-friendly to her. People start expecting her to pull her weight at work and no longer cut her as slack despite her pulling the usual charm offensives. She looks at that new young pretty intern that just joined her workplace getting attention from everyone and suddenly realises that she can no longer compete.”

Misogyny comes in so many flavours, here we see the restated notion that female worth is derived from male attention.  Female people have the same extrinsic and intrinsic value as human beings – and this is the key truth that Talon, our shit-nozzle of the day cannot comprehend.

“It is telling that most of the social media posts worrying about the impending big 30 come from my empowered, independent female acquaintances, along with the usual self-assuring polemics about how they “still got it” and are wiser and stronger with age. But you get the distinct impression that they are just posturing and attempting to make sense of a very confusing situation.”

Women are not confused about the situation as they have been socialized from the beginning to be pleasing objects of desire for men, and are also aware of the penalties for non-compliance.  Aging-out or fatting-out of the prime attention of zone of dudes can be bitter celebration for many women as it marks the transition from constantly creeped on fuck-toilet to mostly ignored invisible non-person.  Choosing your patriarchal shit sandwich has never been so empowering…

  “What’s more interesting is that my female acquaintances who have settled down in their 20s and have gotten on with life in starting a family and working on building a functioning, fruitful and healthy marriage don’t exhibit any sort of the same angst on social media.”

The Second Shift doesn’t leave much time for facebook.  Raising a family mirrors of the inequality women face in society, as women are responsible for most of the work that goes into rearing children and the domestic hell that goes along with said task.

“Meanwhile their strong, empowered counterparts are trying to get into fad yoga, getting cats and hopping onto the next fashionable frivolous activity that comes along in an attempt to prolong their party years. But it’s clear for all to see that their best years are behind them, and they are just trying to relive the heady days of their early 20s, except without the devoted male attention and valuation that they used to take for granted.”

Because the male-gaze is awesome.  

Maleagaze

No head? Check. Fetishized parts represented? Check. =Male Gaze achieved.

“This is the brutal reality of female nature that many millennial women don’t realise- they time they have in the sun is actually quite limited. Young women who keep themselves even passably attractive enjoy a lot of social leverage based upon their biological youth. This, along with modern pop-culture feminism that encourages “empowered” behaviours without caveats that leads to them having a distorted idea of their own value.”

I’m pretty sure this ‘social leverage’ is what douche-canoe misogynists like Talon bang-on about all the time.  All the submissive beauty rituals that differentiate females from the accepted standard of ‘normal’ (male) must be lauded and elevated so that somehow they become desirable to perform.  Hey ladies, perform all these pointless rituals to appease the male gaze, but on the same time we’re going to shit on you your for doing all these frivolous time-wasting things.  Patriarchal double standards for women are the norm in this society, and this is just one of many.   

Striving to be valued as full human being is society is hardly a ‘distortion’.  Ass-hat.  

“They assume they will always be attractive and that the red carpet from men will always be out for them. They don’t realise a lot of the “you’re beautiful” polemics will actually be coming from themselves after they pass the big 30. There are always thirsty Beta men who are willing to snap up the leftovers after the party stops for our “empowered” woman when she ages out of the market, but she is unlikely to find this men very appealing.

The “empowered” woman stuck with lower tier dating options. Cue a lot of self-convincing that they are not snag a Beta they can’t feel attracted to because they are trying to cash in before all of their attractive fade and eventual resentment that the “empowered” lifestyle didn’t deliver them Mr. Big at the end of the day.”

 

*sigh* – Because all women are about snagging the ‘prime’ ‘alpha’ male.  One of the neat things about making arguments is that one cannot arrive at truth when one of the premises you’re basing your arguments on is false.  In this case, patently false – classifying men, like wolf packs, into Alpha and Beta males – is based on discredited shit research that got almost everything wrong about wolf society.  I’ve talked about this before on the DWR before so I’ll quote myself to on how wrong the MRA classification system is:

MRAbullshit

This chart is LOL-tastic.  Witness the extent of self-delusion our MRA friends mentally fap over. It’s horrible-scary-fascinating all at the same time.

“Schenkel’s observations of captive wolf behavior were erroneously extrapolated to wild wolf behavior, and then to domestic dogs. It was postulated that wolves were in constant competition for higher rank in the hierarchy, and only the aggressive actions of the alpha male and female held the contenders in check. Other behaviorists following Schenkel’s lead also studied captive wolves and confirmed his findings: groups of unrelated wolves brought together in artificial captive environments do, indeed, engage in often-violent and bloody social struggles.

The problem is, that’s not normal wolf behavior. As David Mech stated in the introduction to his study of wild wolves (Mech, 2000), “Attempting to apply information about the behavior of assemblages of unrelated captive wolves to the familial structure of natural packs has resulted in considerable confusion. Such an approach is analogous to trying to draw inferences about human family dynamics by studying humans in refugee camps. The concept of the alpha wolf as a ‘top dog’ ruling a group of similar-aged compatriots (Schenkel 1947; Rabb et al. 1967; Fox 1971a; Zimen 1975, 1982; Lockwood 1979; van Hooff et al. 1987) is particularly misleading.”

So, as the studies cited indicated, these assertions have been shown to be erroneous for over twenty years.  It is known that accuracy (wit, intelligence, charity, …) and MRA’s don’t mix.  If you can stomach the manosphere you will see this error perpetuated with metronomic regularity.

“A Red Pill masculine man worth his salt will know that these “empowered” women in full on approaching or post-30 panic will not be good prospects for a relationship. Their years of “empowered” feminist living would have stuffed their minds full of ideas that give them an entitlement mindset to commitment that is way beyond their value proposition. In addition, it is highly likely these “empowered” women would also not be having any maternal feminine aspects that are considered desirable wife material.”

Yes, having their minds stuffed with ideas that they are full human beings and not just objects of male of desire, the nerve of 30+ women.  Oh, and keep in mind when you hear ‘maternal feminine aspects’ please read ‘patriarchally approved ritualized submission to men’.

     […] – Skipping repetitious meandering prose. 

“Meanwhile, the Masculine man who has been focused on improving himself would find that his options in the dating marketplace would have opened up dramatically. While the early years can be tough for a man, the later years will only get better if he has spend the intervening years improving himself.

The Masculine man is shaped through adversity and develops the important life skills and experience that allows him to have a true value proposition in the Dating Marketplace.”

toxicMasculinity is about exercising your will over others.  Masculinity is toxic.

“The “empowered” woman on the other hand, has coasted through her life based on her youthful biological attractiveness and feminist “empowerment” ideology that made her overestimate how valuable she was just for having a vagina. She is less likely to have gone through the same adversity and rejection that a young man has in his struggle to be valued and hence is out at sea with a clue on what to do once she can no longer rely on her looks.”

Oh my goodness.  Pro-Tip:  Being Born with a vagina means a ticket to second class status in society.  Not being heard, not being seen (other than as a sex object to be possessed), not being represented.  These are all part of the female experience.   Fuck-Nugget is trying to compare males facing rejection to the shit-show that is living life as female, as it appears to him to be a valid comparison (fml).”

“They are the ones that become the true matriarchs- the women who contribute their valuable life experience and maternal instincts towards nurturing the next generation of functional, fruitful adults, not the aging feminist spinster taking fad yoga and adopting multiple cats trying to live in a real life parody of Sex and the City.”

Yes ladies, if you adopt the submissive patriarchal ideal things will be right with the world, negating your personhood will payoff huge dividends as you’ll be expected to raise the next generation of patriarchally screwed up women and men.

   Whoo-haa.

This is why it’s important to have a long game mindset in your Masculine journey, don’t be like the thirsty Beta who can’t think 5 years ahead and is always clamouring for female attention, making him the prime target of the panicking “empowered” woman seeking a chump willing to take any woman to settle down with. Focus on improving yourself and success, along with high quality feminine women worth your investment will naturally come.

*sigh* – Stupid ‘sage’ advice for the conclusion.  Avoid those females with notions of personhood and wait to attract the perfect slave befitting your station.   :(

   This shit makes me tired.  The amount of horrible is off the scale, and yet it dribbles forth with disquieting regularity from dudes who think they have the great game of life down and are grasping the bull by the horns. 

   I hope, by quietly pointing out that our MRA friends are not grasping the horns, but rather are elbow deep into the rectal fissures of said bull, that people can see how the societal system known as patriarchy fucks with people on an individual level, leading them to the dehumanizing conclusions we see on display here today.

Arb out. 

derpyjpg   The feminist tag in the wordpress reader keeps sending me these reality defying, stomach churning, polishing of turding, decidedly bad-will gifts.  Aggrieved man children are now, during this very second, writing inspirational insipid posts about how terrible it is to be a man and how getting back to patriarchal standards is the *only* thing that will save society from degenerating….(to what state – egalitarianism? the horror).  I can’t review the entire post, a tip of the hat to Talon’s Rest for making the notion of word diarrhea come to life, the fail is much too thick for that, let’s delimit our topic to one putrid subheading:

“The Birth of The Manosphere and Neomasculinity”

(Well since it is known that men cannot give birth, thus we can assume that the ‘birth’ of the Manosphere and Neomasculinity entered our world with a wet plop and we can now examine these floating nuggets of wisdom in the sombre light of day.) 

    “However as the body of Red Pill knowledge and thought expanded, Red Pill men started to explore issues beyond simple inter-gender dynamics to get success with women and realised that Red Pill truths had plenty of implications for everything from culture, to soceity, and eventually civillisation.”

(Fuck, I don’t know about you, but I’m breathless already.  This is such an artful way of saying entitled dude shitlords got together for a whinge-festival about how fucking sad-pants they are that women are being treated less like fuck-toilets and more like human beings.)

“This led to a formative set of ideas that rose to encapsulate what we know today as Neomasculinity, an idealogical framework that combines Red Pill truths on biological human nature, traditional wisdom and masculinity […]”

(Biological human nature?  What in heaven’s name is that?  Are some dudes still fapping on about the giggle fest that is ‘classic’ sociobiological roles – man=hunter woman=gatherer – thus we should emulate primitive society because it’s right(?) type thinking.  Sociologists have this other theory – socialization – that you may want to consult before wheeling out more ‘hard hitting” (un)truths.)

  (Traditional wisdom and masculinity?  OH! You mean patriarchy?  The shit system we live under that both women and men suffer under?  That is the traditional system you are referring to, you complete and utter lack-wit.  Celebrating the oppression half the human race as the method of maintaining your position in the dominant class…way to go douche-canoe.  )

“to aid men in making their way in the modern world where regressive progressivism has all but destroyed old-school patriarchal masculinity, seeking to help the masses of men left aimless and confused by it’s destruction.”

(Good old school patriarchal masculinity is shit.  So is the current school of masculinity that is floating around.  You see, my half-witted friend, masculinity is a condition that can only exist if there happens to be an inferior class to kick the shit out of, in this case femininity.  Nothing says ritualized submission like femininity.  To pine for a return where these values are more strongly codified makes you a horrible person, as in, Ebola just called and wants to talk about you about an image makeover. )

  “Unlike the MGTOW who believe in opting out and giving in to the decline, the PUA who recede into nihilistic hedonism, and the MRA who futilely seek to reform an unreformable system,”

(Oh my stars!  MRA’s wanting to reform the system…the lolz just keep coming!)

“Neomasculinists believe that the best way to go about giving the modern man a future is to build tribes of strong masculine men from the ground up,”

(What is up with putting caveman ethos on a pedestal?  Building strong tribes works so amazingly great just look at the harmony in Syria, it’s a productive love fest for all involved and an example to be followed for the betterment of humanity.  Sectarianism is actually good for us…  (!))

“resisting the spread of degeneracy as social insurgents against the numerically superior regressives as first, and later as a dominant social force when the tide of strong masculine men finally reaches a critical mass.”

(You never define degeneracy.  Moving toward a world without patriarchy means the end to the explicit and implicit oppression of women.  We can give egalitarianism a chance instead its current status as ‘clueless liberal dude pipe-dream’.  I cannot even fathom how you managed to make out the dissolution of patriarchy as degeneration.  Or could it be that you’re scarred spit-less that your once iron-clad entitlement to the best of everything in society is under threat?  Naw, couldn’t be that, the masters are always happy to give the slaves a helping hand up and share the wealth…)

“The aim is for masculine men is to be the best that they can be, and to slow, or even reverse the slow slide of their civillisation into degeneracy. If the slide cannot be reversed, these masculine men will then seek to gather their tribe to build a new one.”

furiosa(LoL.  Shitlords must be shitlords to stop the corruption of a society moving toward a more egalitarian future.   Hurrah!  Bonus points for ‘reforming’ society after it all goes down trope .  Who gets to be Mad Max – oh fuck bro, no can do anymore – the more important question now is who is Furiosa!)

“As a countercultural movement these ideas were largely found their place in the internet on blogs, chat forums and social media. This collectively became known as the Manosphere, a place where male interests and issues can be discussed by like-minded men.”

   (In other words, arrogant man-babies gather to take the piss and moan about the evilz of women and their sooper-sekrit feminist movement that is hell-bent on the destruction of man. )

The manosphere – the gift of sad hilarity that keeps on giving.

 

 

 

 

stupidpeople  I’m not sure what the author of the review was thinking…   Actually, on second thought I might have an idea – this is the liberal left dude deciding to be ‘edgy’ and take on an issue that feminists, especially radical feminists, like to rattle on about.  One would hope that with a title of a book like ‘Why Rape Culture is a Dangerous Myth – From Steubenville to Chad Evans” one might, at the very least raise a cursory skeptical eyebrow at the presumptive nature of the work.  Perhaps this is just my own bias showing through, but I think that it would be a good idea to least familiarize oneself with the topics at hand before presenting a review that would have worth to someone outside the liberal circle of ‘progressive’ dudes who think that they ‘get it’ and can speak with authority on the topic(s).

So there are two dimensions to this review of a review, the tone deafness of the review and the astonishing amount of cluelessness posited by the author of the book in question.  Both will be tackled as the cocksure nature and faux-authoritative pronouncements being made about the experience of women in patriarchal culture – as interpreted by men – in this ‘review’ sadly illuminates how far we have to go to becoming a decent culture, and one that doesn’t rely on marginalizing half of the population based on their private bits.

 

The RPOJ comes for thee DC.

The RPOJ cometh for thee.

The Red Pen of Justice has been under wraps for a very long time now and has been agitating to let loose once again on the blogosphere.  I cannot deny the RPOJ discontents anymore, so gentle readers, suit up, sit back and prepare for a radical feminist analysis of the important words going on over at David Marx:Book Reviews.

 

“It has sometimes been said that sex and intimacy can mean what we ultimately want them to mean; which, for all intents and self-gratifying purposes, can more often than not entail the go-ahead (regardless of one hundred per cent consent). The ‘go-ahead’ that is, amid a resounding variant of ways in the eyes of the law, not to mention society at large.”

  WordSalad*Blinks* On first reading I have no idea what the fuck he is saying.  Let’s look again…  Okay, this requires further parsing.

“”It has sometimes been said that sex and intimacy can mean what we ultimately want them to mean; […]”

Who said this and when?  I think this defaults to what David Marx thinks on this particular topic, as no references are made to any relevant sociological source.   This could be interpreted as David, with artless academic-ese construction, trying to authoritatively make a point.

My eyebrow raised because it looks like David is making the case for non-consensual relations somehow being a-fucking-okay because we can define consent out of the occasion.  Funny how a review about the purported mythological status of rape culture is actually affirming its existence. 

“The ‘go-ahead’ that is, amid a resounding variant of ways in the eyes of the law, not to mention society at large.”

Sentences missing objects/clauses don’t make sense.  Charitably, I think David means that the ‘go-ahead’ or consent is somehow related to what is agreed on in society. 

“Either of which can, and often does trigger dire and detrimental consequences.”

I’m done playing parse the sentence fragment – make your best guess here – thanks Dave for being unfathomable in your writing style.  

“That we live in a society, where so-called honour killings (usually by men) are on the unfortunate rise; and a vacuous dirt-bag of Tunisian descent feels it’s in his right to attack a mother and her two daughters with a machete at a summer resort in France – because, in his eyes ”they weren’t wearing enough clothes” – is a both a sad and a very, very serious indictment of today’s moral fabric.”

  Almost always by men, as they are upholders of honour/subjugators  of women.  Why mention that the killer dude was Tunisian?  One should try to curtail the impulse toward xenophobia and racism in a serious review.  And how is this one incident a serious indictment of anything other than horror we all know and love as organized religion; the big three and the various tributaries of fail almost always reinforce the patriarchal status-quo.  Name the problem Dave.  

“The fact that such vile and callous behaviour is entwined with varying degrees of religiosity, only accounts for the latter being something of an idiosyncratically laughable indictment.”

   So you spend the words to make a point and then dismiss it as ‘idiosyncratically laughable’ in the next paragraph?  Coherence is a thing Dave, more of it would make what you’re trying to say easier to understand. 

“Yet as Luke Gittos points out in Why Rape Culture Is A Dangerous Myth – From Steubenville to Ched Evans: ”The argument that we live in a rape culture encourages a deeply harmful notion of inherent vulnerability, which adds to a worrying problematisation of intimacy in wider society. This is likely to have a significant effect on the young, who are often taught that intimate relationships are potentially dangerous”

  What?  A Jaw dropping non-sequitur after a word salad of an introduction, this review has legs! 

Let’s look at the content after you massage your jaw for a bit, I should have warned you gentle reader, limber up those oral hinges it only gets worse from here.

“”The argument that we live in a rape culture encourages a deeply harmful notion of inherent vulnerability, which adds to a worrying problematisation of intimacy in wider society.”

The fuck it does.  The argument we live in a rape culture threatens the status-quo notion that women should always be sexually available to men.  Rape culture threatens the normative idea that women are not really fully autonomous, that they do not share the same rights to their personhood and autonomy, rights that men, under patriarchy enjoy by default

Problematisation?  Is problematic too ordinary a construction for you?  Jeezus.  A dudes ability to fuck females with impunity is not synonymous with ‘intimacy’.  Luke Gittos is riding high on the Misogyny Train, and a decent review would call his shit out for what it is. 

    Tell me Dave, how is treating a woman like she has rights and a full human being a fucking problem with regards to intimacy?  It’s only suffers from ‘problematisation’ if you are in favour of the current toxic environment that women are forced to inhabit. 

“If such is the case, which, throughout various parts of the world it most certainly is, does this mean intimacy and ultimately love, should be denied?”

If love and relations can only be had with the shitty patriarchal overlay that shafts both men and women, then yes it should be denied.  But you are not arguing that, are you Dave, your faffing on with Gittos about how denying women their agency (consent) is making it hard for dudes to feel intimacy.   This is a primal man-baby argument – if we can’t have sexy times *my dudely way* then everything is wrong with the world and the feminist sponsored end times are here. 

“Immediately prior to the above, Gittos also writes: ”Recent decades have seen the expansion of the law around rape to cover many new areas of sexual behaviour. The impact of the hysteria around rape has been the shutting down of debate around this expansion and the demonisation of anyone who seeks to question it.”

Hysteria?  Man-children really can’t help themselves when it comes to patriarchal tropes. But let’s get back to what he’s saying – the broadening of laws to protect the integrity and autonomy of women is making his boner sad.   Gittos (emphasis on ‘git’) is also sad that he gets shit on for harkening back to the good ole’ days where beating and raping your wife was just the norm and everything was hunky dory – if you happened to be in the same class as Gittos… 

    “That the ”hysteria around the rape has been shutting” down it’s ”debate,” is surely cause for alarm, which to a certain degree, these 140 pages do tackle head-on. But, as Graham Matthews recently wrote in Will Self and Contemporary British Society: ”The language used in rape cases is of the utmost importance since, according to Lyn Higgins and Brenda Silver, ‘whether in the courts or in the media, whether in art or criticism, who gets to tell the story and whose story counts as ”truth” determines the definition of what rape is.”

Why in a review of the GIT are you talking about Will Self and Contemporary British Society?  Is foisting non sequitur after non sequitur on your reader a stylistic choice?  It’s a bad one, let me assure you. 

   “There again, as Luke Gittos has categorically stated in Why Rape Culture Is A Dangerous Myth’s Introduction: ”this book is not about rape. It is not about the hideous criminal offence that takes place every day, and is the subject of arrests, court cases and prison sentences up and down the country […]. This book is about the contemporary panic around ‘rape culture’ that […] often bears little resemblance to the reality of rape.”

Translation:  The idea that rape culture exists and is working in my favour is unpalatable to my sensibilities, thus the problem must be with the hysterical women and their risible claims…  *facepalm* 

    “The argument of the book is that intimate life is suffering under the panic around rape and rape culture. This panic has arisen in the context of a society which is less sure of the parameters of intimate life than ever before. “

Oh consent is necessarily a roaring tempest filled with vapours purposefully designed to confuse the man-brained.  The idea that women are struggling toward agency is an affront to needs of the ‘peen and patriarchy and must be done away with because my male right to unfettered access to female bodies is at stake – and this unfettered access – is what is important.  

   “As old narratives of intimate life die away, what has replaced them is not a new, individualised sense of what intimate life is, but a ream of laws, regulations, guidance and expertise about how we should conduct the most private aspects of our lives. This presents a serious challenge to the status of individual judgement about intimacy and, accordingly, the future of intimate life in general.”

I thought it couldn’t get worse, but Dave also seems to aspire to the swaggering, self-aggrandizing pile of mule-feces  that Libertarianism is.  Where white males are the only ones who can have the *true* feelings of oppression while simultaneously wielding power in society.  If you cannot handle intimacy with a female that has autonomy and full human being status – then the only females of the blow-up variety will fit your particular bill.  So go forth, find your inflatable Sally, and kindly fuck the hell off.

“Herein lies something of a literary juxtaposition, surely?”

*rolls eyes* – Dave, sounding smart and being smart have never been so clearly demarcated. 

tautologycat“For as pronounced and well analysed as this resoundingly tough and rather taurine book is, rape will always remain what it fundamentally is. Rape.”

A fucking equals A?  This is the epic conclusion mic-drop you’ve assiduously been setting up.  Step aside Machiavelli, Word fucking salad Dave is in the house!  You are brought this review to close with a tautology?  I have another for you, hold on it is earth shattering level of awesome –  “stupid people are stupid people”.  

   And do you know ‘taurine’ means?  It is a goddamn amino acid.  Another meaning, common in the 17th century is ‘of or like a bull’.  So is this a bullish book on rape culture, or did your thesaurus go to the dark side and led you astray with it? 

“Regardless of judicial interpretation, sexual intimacy or, dare I say it, ”individual judgement.”

Did you eat alphabet soup and are just burping this shit up and then writing it down? 

And also: Subjects, what the fuck are they? 

The double shot of tautology and quasi-coherent sentence structure ends this review with an unsatisfying, stultifying dribble that offers offence not only to feminism, but the English language as well.  

 

RPOJ out. 

sirens_call  I cannot identify what it is with dudes and radical feminism.  There must be some strange extra-sensory siren call that attracts dudes and dudely opinion to articles, blogs, and heck even just mere information about women speaking unequivocally about their experiences and analysis of society.  Of course the attraction is just one part of this warlocks brew, the most infuriating part is that the dudes once attracted, have the overwhelming desire… nay with seemingly single-minded animus to grandiloquently extrude their man-centric opinion blithely into feminist conversation.  At the very same time,said dudes, expect to be taken seriously with all the gravitas and respect they usually receive while intoning their manly wizdom.

Concomitantly,  dudes assume that their experience is just the same as everyone else in society(??) and thus, without research or understanding, make pronouncements that, to the finely tuned lobes of radical feminists, sound like Grade A, First Tier, patriarchally laced bullshit.   Once called on their bullshite phase two sets in, displaying in full glory the fragility of the male ego and the ensuing stampede, to either Godwin,Flouce or have a full blown mantrum as they exit from the thread.   Let me assure you gentle readers, this cycle of male-fail is a most dependable and curious clockwork…  But I digress.  The RPOJ has leapt into my hand quivering in anticipation of the justice about to be dispensed.

Today friends we delve deep into the world of dudes explaining Radical Feminism AND misandry – all in one post – who would have known it was soooooo easy.  Let’s put on our swashbuckling pantaloons and join The Brain in the Jar; hmm…lets tighten that up a bit and go with Shit for Brains (SfB); and watch as he puts on his Mansplaining boots and beats all your favourite strawfeminist arguments to death.

The original post by ‘Brain in a Jar: Of Radical Feminism and Misandry’ ,in all its glory can be found here.

—–

“Whenever I bring up the subject of feminism, I always hear about those crazy extremists who really are all about hating men. I’m sure they exist.”

  Well if you only talk to other dudes and MRA’s why of course you are going to get a nuance free view of feminism and feminists.  Looking beyond your own bias is hard, and who the fuck wants to do that?

“There plenty of crazy ideas out there, and misandry is actually saner compared to them.”

   Awww! Lookit SfB put on this big-boy-boots of equality and deep understanding, to show how amazingly aware he is of what he’s prevaricating on about.

“Women are also parrt of the dating game, so the terrible of reality of people wanting to have sex with you but not be in a relationship must have taken its toll on some. The thing is, these people can never refer to an example of such a radical feminist.”

  Editing, what the fuck is it?  Also, did you catch the subtle(?) hostility toward women?  I mean isn’t it totally obvs that women are in the position of power when it comes to dating and relationships? (*eyes rolling into back of head*) That whole male violence/rape culture stuff those feminists prattle on about sure clouds the issue about those bitches not knowing their place and bowing to my ‘peen.

“They also don’t see that misandry and feminism, even the radical version, are two seperate things.. You can point out misandry all you want, and if it makes sense I’ll get behind you. It’ll never be a solid criticism of feminism or radical feminism.”

Read the rest of this entry »

This Blog best viewed with Ad-Block and Firefox!

What is ad block? It is an application that, at your discretion blocks out advertising so you can browse the internet for content as opposed to ads. If you do not have it, get it here so you can enjoy my blog without the insidious advertising.

Like Privacy?

Change your Browser to Duck Duck Go.

Contact Info

Need to send me email? I have a infrequently monitored email account. Reach me at : arbourist at outlook dot com.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 338 other followers

Progressive Bloggers

Categories

August 2017
M T W T F S S
« Jul    
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  

Archives

Blogs I Follow

The DWR Community

Emma

Politics, things that make you think, and recreational breaks

Easilyriled's Blog

cranky. joyful. radical. funny. feminist.

Nordic Model Now!

Movement for the Abolition of Prostitution

The WordPress C(h)ronicle

These are the best links shared by people working with WordPress

HANDS ACROSS THE AISLE

Biology, Not Bigotry

fmnst

Peak Trans and other feminist topics

There Are So Many Things Wrong With This

if you don't like the news, make some of your own

Gentle Curiosity

Musing over important things. More questions than answers.

ANTHRO FEMINISM

A place for thoughtful, truly intersectional Feminist discussion.

violetwisp

short commentaries, pretty pictures and strong opinions

Revive the Second Wave

gender-critical sex-negative intersectional radical feminism

Trans Animal Farm

The Trans Trend is Orwellian

Princess Henry of Wales

Priestess Belisama

miss guts.

just a girl on a journey

writing by renee

Trigger warning: feminism, women's rights

RANCOM!

Happily Retired

twanzphobic since forever

• • • • it's mocktacular! • • • •

Godless Cranium

Random musings of a godless heathen

freer lives

A socialist critique of the transgender phenomenon

Centering Women

A radical feminist page made for women only

radicalkitten

radical Elemental feminism

yumicpcake

A fine WordPress.com site

Feminist Twitches

Gender, Culture, Food, and Travel

RANCOM!

Happily Retired

Madam Nomad

Notes on the Journey

A Radical TransFeminist

when I said "fuck the patriarchy", I didn't mean it literally

Women's Space

Re-Member the Past, Seize Today, Dream the Future

The Colour of Pomegranates

Screaming into the Void

Finally, A Feminism 101 Blog

Frequently Answered Questions

Cloak Unfurled

Life is a journey. Let us meet at the intersection and share a story.

gendercriticaldad

Fallout from my Peak Trans

Dead of Winter

Bitter Cold Truth from a Bisexual, Gender Critical, Almost Conservative Catholic

RADICAL THOUGHTCRIME

feminist heresy in an age of gender worship

Women’s Liberation Radio News

WLRN: A Radical Feminist Media Collective

UVic Womyn's Centre

bring back the women's centre

Joys of Joel

The Poetry of My Life through My Writings and Journeys

Sex and Gender

A Beginner's Guide

Coalition of the Brave

A Voice against the Darkness

Root Veg

dig deeper

TERF is a slur

Documenting the abuse, harassment and misogyny of transgender identity politics

Revolting Europe

On Europe, the left, labour and social movements

OffGuardian

because facts really should be sacred

shrikecentral

The Killer Songbird

%d bloggers like this: