Oh dear. The Spearheaders are talking about the Slutwalks again. The discussion may be the worst on the subject that I have run across so far. Some of the lowlights:
Keyster seems downright pissed that women actually have the right to say no:
They’re high functioning children with sexual power and they don’t want you to forget it. They’re outraged that just because a young woman dresses and acts in a sexually provocative manner, that she might receive unwanted attention from young men that don’t appeal to her.
She should be able to dress like a street whore and abuse alcohol to the point of delerium and they feel compelled to lecture us on how that doesn’t mean this is an advertisment to be sexually harrassed, sexually assaulted or heaven forbid raped. …
They want the “RIGHT” to dress as sexually provocative as they want to without being constantly annoyed by lowly beta males. They’d prefer you not “sexually victimize” them, unless you’re hot and they’re into you, then it’s totally OK. …
Remember this: She didn’t bother to get dressed up for the likes of YOU. Her hope was a worthy athelete or Hollywood star might notice her and talk to her; not some weak, pathetic loser …
“We’ve got the sexual power, the power of consent, the gate keeper of the holy vaginal crevice. See our bouncing propped up cleavage, our long legs and glorious ass protruding from those heels? You want it don’t you?
….ha, ha, ha…you can’t have it because I SAY SO! Because I have THIS power over you, lowly little man. Bow down to me and beg me a little, I might even let the others see me talking to you, without calling the cops.” …
This isn’t feminism, it’s flaunting female sexual power in the faces of men.
You’re seriously complaining that woman have the “power of consent!?” EVERYONE has the power of consent. No one male or female is obliged to have sex with anyone they don’t want to. That’s, you know, rape. It bothers you that women are the “the gate keeper[s] of the holy vaginal crevice?” Who the fuck else should be the gatekeeper of a person’s vagina other than the person whose vagina it is? The mind reels. But apparently the 50+ upvoters of this piece of abhorrent nonsense aren’t bothered by any of this.
Demirogue, meanwhile, suggests we need to better discipline our women:
While perusing FB last week I came across the newest deviation of this mentality which is going topless. … And they want to cry about rape? They need to cry but only because people said enough is enough and started to belt them on their asses.
Women need to be controlled and on a very, very short leash. They’ve been given every right, every option, every opportunity to be something and what do they do with it? Abuse and manipulate it with reckless abandonment and incessant demands.
Geography Bee Finalist himself thinks the slutwalkers must be retarded:
I wouldn’t worry too much about these Slutwalk sows.
They have no redeeming features. None.
They cannot figure out that if you dress like a whore, you deserve to be treated in a disrespectful manner. Even conservatively dressed mentally retarded women can figure this out and conduct themselves with more propriety and intelligence than these Slutwalkers … .
Knuckledragger blames it on those damned suffragettes:
…we let ‘em drive, we let ‘em vote, and this is what we get.
Ridiculous to even offer attention to another excuse to dress like a whore, goof off in public, and not bring me a beer.
Any man worth his salt should fire any skank who was “sick” from work to attend this nonsense.
SingleDad seems to think that all accusations of rape are made up:
Rape is now the extra tax women charge men if some how their unsatisfied with whatever arrangement was made before or after any encounter in or outside of marriage.
Other lowlights:
Poiuyt agreeing with Anders Breivik’s “observations surrounding this femaleist pandemic,” while adding that he “is to be rebuked for taking the wrong cureative actions to solve it.”
Demirogue (in a second comment) complaining that “overvalued pussy is all [women today] have to offer and only to certain men.”
Anonymous age 69 explaining that “rape laws were intended to protect women of good character, from being sexually violated,” not “to protect promiscuous sluts .”
And more, much, much more. Many of the worst (including most of those quoted here) have many dozens of upvotes. Go read the thread yourself, if you think you can stomach it.
There are no arguments to rebut here; I can only repeat the basic message that the slutwalks are trying to convey: no one deserves to be raped, no matter what they are wearing or how much consensual sex they engage in. Even if they show some cleavage or prefer athletes and/or rocks stars to so-called beta males.
@FF, if the wife is a feminist she is more likely to work to support the family. If the wife is a traditionalist she will stay at home making the husband the sole bread winner. Is that what you support?
Things Are Bad, yeah, those guys on the Spearhead all have the best interests of women in mind.
MediumDave, nice find! I think I’ll have to post about that.
And yes, Karen O is hardly what I’d call ugly.
I was just thinking how much easier life would be/have been if we could just, say, pop into a war, make some really bad points, throw a hissyfit, and then declare victory like NWO does.
Then I realized that’s pretty much what we did in Iraq, isn’t it …
David, did you ever clarify how a 1970s Penthouse article and an unwillingness to litigate equated to an admission of guilt? Also, you claim he was working on a book. Do you have any evidence other than the mouth of an established malicious deceiver or some 70s Penthouse article?
I was just thinking how much easier life would be/have been if we could just, say, pop into a war, make some really bad points, throw a hissyfit, and then declare victory like NWO does.
FF, as I believe I said before, Farrell has only challenged one of the quotations from the Penthouse interview. And only one word of that quote. He has never denied that he was working on that book. If you’d actually read what I posted before you would know all this.
As for the rest, I suggest you read this. Actually read it, I mean. Not glance at it and jump to erroneous conclusions, as you’ve done with my links in the past.
Farrell has only challenged one of the quotations from the Penthouse interview. And only one word of that quote. He has never denied that he was working on that book. If you’d actually read what I posted before you would know all this.
Huh, I think I posted this. Pardon the long quotation, but you seem to have overlooked it:
Steven: What evidence did they have that supposedly you were promoting incest or rape? Was there any evidence of that?
Warren: None whatsoever except that I mentioned both words. The incest thing was very ridiculous because I just made an analogy about workplace sex being incestuous. I said that when colleagues in the same company have sex together, it was like people in the same family having sex together. And they took that and said I was recommending incest. It really shocked me that the producers didn’t read for themselves what was being said. And with the rape, I was showing why the rape statistics are exaggerated, and saying that date rape was much more complex than the way feminists had portrayed it, as men oppressing women.
– source
Now, is it really that unusual for a tabloid rag (if that) to take a few words and blow them out of proportion? And I recall you claiming that the fact he did not seek litigation must have meant that they had the original recordings. That’s a leap of faith if I ever saw one – suing an entity or writer, even for an act of libel so brazen and profound, basically means you have to prove you didn’t say those things. That would be very, very difficult to do if you actually had the interview behind closed doors. A little legal knowledge helps here.
I will admit, though, he does not explicitly say, “I was not writing a book on kiddie diddling.” Then again, I do not go around telling people, “I do not rob orphanages and poison soup kitchens,” but then anyone who assumes that from what a bold faced website and a tabloid magazine claims is probably feebleminded or just plain nuts.
Moving on…
As for the rest, I suggest you read this. Actually read it, I mean. Not glance at it and jump to erroneous conclusions, as you’ve done with my links in the past.
I can read it, yes. I’ll probably end up writing a rebuttal to it because it relies on feminist sources flung out of the jaws of the same cash cow which claims that “1 in 4 college women are or will be raped.” Of course, before you jump on your high horse and gallop away, keep in mind that many of your sycophants claim that they never read what MRAs write. Also, you wanted me to read, in detail, an article from a pornography publication and take it in as fact. If I had that attitude towards the world, I would have just chosen the easy* path and become a feminist.
But yes, I can look over it and write a commentary if you wish, in due time.
*Easy meaning intellectually lazy, not an easier life. It would be hard being such an apologetic doormat to any woman within sight that I was worth $8.5k less per year to industrial society.
The fact that you flung that interview back at me shows clearly that you did not read any of what I posted or linked to before. I did read the interview when you posted it before, and I responded directly to the part of the interview that you’ve highlighted here. Farrell’s comments here are completely dishonest; he’s blowing smoke.
This is the second time you’ve responded without reading. If you are not even going to look at the evidence I present, or even read my comments all the way through, there is no point whatsoever in arguing with you about anything.
Also, FF, the reason we are talking about a Penthouse interview is that FARRELL CHOSE TO SPEAK WITH PENTHOUSE in depth about the book he was writing. He has never denied the interview, and, as I’ve said before, he’s only challenged one of the quotes in the interview. You can pretend he didn;t say these things because they’re in a “tabloid,” but it was Farrell who chose to speak with the magazine. Penthouse may have misquoted him slightly at one point, quoting him as saying “genitally” when (he claims) he said “gently.” (Or they may have been entirely correct; given Farrell’s dishonesty in the interview you’ve cited, I’m not sure I believe him.)
You sure have a funny name given the things you say.
I dunno. I think factfinders name is appropriate, given that he seems to be concerned only with individual facts, never context, nuance or consistency.
“It’s probably better if Rutee or someone like that comes to hand you your ass on the wage gap. You’re innumerate and it won’t matter anyway but she’s certainly done a far better analysis of why you’re full of shit then I can provide.”
Actually I honestly think he’s crazy in such a way that I can’t bring myself to seriously engage with him. It feels entirely wrong.
I mean yes, the wage gap persists even after accounting for all other factors. Academia and Construction, after controlling for *EVERYTHING*, come out most even at 93% and 92%, respectively. But even if MRAs could honestly and with complete accuracy say the Wage Gap had gone away, it wouldn’t erase the hiring and promotion gaps, and I’ll be completely honest; that last one is probably the single largest creator of economic disparity, at least in the US. The hiring gap *can* be context dependent (Notably, that men are hired less into amazingly ‘feminine’ fields like nursing), but even then the promotion gap is in men’s favor. And those fields are in the minority to begin with.
But NWO feels more like he needs actual help; it’s not like hwen Susan Walsh or someone else says stupid shit. They’re just ideologues who can’t science to save their lives or actually work with facts.
@Nobby:
“@Raoul: “If I don’t feel I should have to defer to manlier men when the ladies come along, am I suddenly an MRA?”
Um, what? What does that even mean?”
Does this mean anything to you?
“…even when they prefer athletes and/or rocks stars to so-called beta males.”
Am I misogynist if I have any resentment at all toward those guys? As guys?
I think David is hinting that way.
@Raul
“@David:
“I can only repeat the basic message that the slutwalks are trying to convey: no one deserves to be raped, no matter what they are wearing or how much consensual sex they engage in. Even if they show some cleavage or prefer athletes and/or rocks stars to so-called beta males.”
Not that I think anyone deserves to be sexually assaulted. Or even harassed. But what, exactly, is gained by shoving traditional masculinity in guys’ faces yet again? If I don’t feel I should have to defer to manlier men when the ladies come along, am I suddenly an MRA?”
The point is that it is not your decision who ladies prefer to date. You are looking at this from your perspective, where it’s you verses Alpha Man, and you think we’re telling you to just let Alpha Man do his thing. It’s not about you. It’s about the woman who’s making the decision to date people.
All you have to do is not begrudge them of that choice, and you have all the freedom in the world to pursue people who you want as well. If they aren’t interested, move on. If they are, then there you go.
The dating world is not about men picking up women. It’s a big web of people pursuing there interests, hoping to find someone who reciprocates. That’s all.
BTW, I actually feel guilty when the likes of FactFinder start speaking up for me. I don’t reserve the right to sexually harass. I don’t even do game. But I don’t see how David’s reinforcing traditional attitudes about men helps raise consciousness about women.
I suppose this is abstract gobbledegook to all you folks out in reality.
@Raoul?
Honestly? If other people never brought up alpha rock-stars and so forth, David wouldn’t mention them. He’s essentially saying that “even if you are right, and women prefer athletes and/or rocks stars to so-called beta males, it still doesn’t give you the right to try to force women to do anything, and it especially doesn’t give you the right to rape them.”
“If I don’t feel I should have to defer to manlier men when the ladies come along, am I suddenly an MRA?”
Yeh, like I have to ‘defer’ to women with, say, bigger boobs than me…or blonder hair…or skinnier etc. etc.
A lot of women don’t go for ‘alpha males’, but if women wanna fuck rockstars it’s none of your concern.
If some women do, yippee shit.
I’m not getting the “some” part here. Thus my suspicion of a double standard. If it’s every woman’s right to be a slut, it’s every man’s right to enjoy slutty behavior in a respectful and non-objectifying way. Fair?
See, the problem is that Susan Walsh, for all her exaggeration and posturing, is basically right. Female 5’s and 6’s spend all their time chasing male 9’s, and usually will get at least sex out of it, if not a relationship. They have the right to do that, on a micro level. But on a macro level, it leads to very understandable male resentment, when perfectly normal and attractive men that look like, say, Seth Rogen post-weight loss cannot get a date to save their lives, even amongst women at his “level”. Normal men like Rogen should feel attractive and perfectly content, but the female sexual elitism leads to warped feelings of inferiority. Again, on a macro level, it’s shaming and ridiculous and is one of the contributors to the notion that men are ugly and women aren’t.
@kirby “Honestly? If other people never brought up alpha rock-stars and so forth, David wouldn’t mention them. He’s essentially saying that “even if you are right, and women prefer athletes and/or rocks stars to so-called beta males, it still doesn’t give you the right to try to force women to do anything, and it especially doesn’t give you the right to rape them.”
I guess I’m not engaged enough with the manosphere to appreciate the pointed relevance of “so-called.” To me it seemed he was taking the greek system at face value.
@Raoul and MRAL:
You don’t know women. I think that’s about it. Every single woman I’ve met in my life isn’t the one chasing after 9s and 10s, Alphas, whatever. Every single woman I know is not as you describe. And I know an entire forum of women.
I’m not saying they don’t exist, I can’t say that. But really, have you gone outside? If you’ve had little success in your dating life, can you read the mind of women who reject your advances? Do you know why? No, you don’t. This is the disconnect between MRA theory and the real world.
“See, the problem is that Susan Walsh, for all her exaggeration and posturing, is basically right.”
Substantiate your fact claim, or shut the fuck up.
“Female 5′s and 6′s spend all their time chasing male 9′s, and usually will get at least sex out of it, if not a relationship.”
Substantiate your fact claim, or shut the fuck up.
“when perfectly normal and attractive men that look like, say, Seth Rogen post-weight loss cannot get a date to save their lives,”
Substantiate your fact claim, or shut the fuck up.
“but the female sexual elitism leads to warped feelings of inferiority”
Substantiate your fact claim, or shut the fuck up.
“Again, on a macro level, it’s shaming and ridiculous and is one of the contributors to the notion that men are ugly and women aren’t.”
Substantiate your fact claim or shut the fuck up.
“I’m not getting the “some” part here. Thus my suspicion of a double standard. If it’s every woman’s right to be a slut, it’s every man’s right to enjoy slutty behavior in a respectful and non-objectifying way. Fair?”
The only injunctions have been to not rape and not feel entitled to sex. For fuck’s sake, can you not make every fucking thing about YOU?
Seth Rogen was always a pretty good looking guy, he’s a weird example o_O Tho I often find his material morally objectionable…I’m pretty sure he can get a date.
I dunno MRAL and Raoul, I just don’t see evidence of this ‘alpha chasing’ IRL. Most couples I know are similar levels of attractiveness.
I have definitely slept with guys hotter than I am…I dunno if I should apologise for that? It doesn’t mean I think anyone who isn’t super good looking isn’t worth my time. If a guy’s hot and I’m not looking for a relationship, why shouldn’t I have sex with him for the benefit of random other people? You would like a girl who you think is hot, right? Would you turn down Olivia Wilde because you’d be insulting women like me? Why is it one rule for you and one rule for me? Why are looks so important anyway?
http://stupidcelebrities.net/wp-content/old_pictures/Seth-Rogen-proposes-to-longtime-girlfriend-Lauren-Miller.jpg Evidently Seth Rogen’s girlfriend is a total babe o_o
@Magical Laura:
Despite what MRAL just said, that pic can easily be explained away. Seth Rogen is a famous actor! Who wouldn’t want to get in his pants?
I don’t necessarily agree with what they are saying, but MRAL and Raoul remind me of how much it sucks to be lonely. Been there, done that, don’t want to go back.