Categories
$MONEY$ alpha males creepy evil women I'm totally being sarcastic men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny oppressed men reactionary bullshit sexual harassment sluts

Women! Why must you assault men with your evil sexy outfits?

Women totally slutting it up in provocative waist-cinching attire

Apparently, or so I’ve learned from the manosphere, every single thing that women do is designed to torment men. Yesterday, we learned that women with jobs are leeching off of men just as much as women without jobs.

Further proof of female perfidy can be found in a recent post on the popular manosphere blog In Mala Fide with the provocative title Provocative Female Attire is an Assault Against Men. Guest poster Giovanni Dannato lays it out for anyone who needs convincing:

When a woman walks down a crowded sidewalk in revealing clothing, she is forcing herself on every man nearby.

The woman fully understands the powerful biological drives of men. She knows they cannot ignore her, not even if they want to.

Amazingly, the fact that a woman might show some cleavage does not automatically mean that she wants to have sex with every single man who sees her.

She has chosen to advertise herself to everyone passing by, but she is looking only for a few men. The wealthiest, the most famous, the most powerful men she can attract. …

There’s an old elementary school custom…when you bring something tasty to class, it’s understood that you should put it away unless you intend to share it with others. …

Likewise, a woman who puts her goodies blatantly on display is making false advertisements. Nobody supposes or expects that she could share herself with her entire audience—not even if she wanted to.

That’s right. Women are like gum. Or that pizza Spicoli had delivered to him in class in Fast Times at Ridgemont High that the mean Mr. Hand forced him to share with everyone. And if you gum-pizza-ladies are not willing to share yourself with every horny man (and, presumably, lesbian) who happens to notice you in your slut uniform, you are committing a terrible infraction.

Oh, sure, wearing a totally cute outfit is not specifically against the law, but, as Dannato reminds us,

looking for refuge in explicit written law is inherently disingenuous. …

[W]omen exposing themselves without intent to reciprocate the attention they attract is impolite and inconsiderate – an act of aggression in which they use the power of their sex as a weapon.

So how can men defend themselves against such evil feminine perfidy? By yelling “hey, whore! How much?” or “can I squeeze those titties?” or “Can you give me directions to Pussy Avenue?” Because street harassment – sorry, catcalling – is

a defense mechanism used by lower status men against women flaunting themselves publicly – for the benefit of millionaires only.

What else are men supposed to do?

[M]en are effectively strapped down, gagged, and muzzled while females can flaunt and taunt with impunity. For many men this pretty much sums up every single day of an entire lifetime at school and at work.

And women won’t even admit that when they put on a cute outfit and leave the house that they’re doing it to torment men.

Western Women don’t just abuse their incredible sexual power, they pathologically lie about their inability to understand the effects and implications of their actions. In fact, they seem to derive a sort of sociopathic pleasure from being able to sow unpleasantness and discord without consequence – all while playing innocent. They express their contempt and hatred for men even as they troll the populace for providers. Their enormous power comes without responsibility and they love it that way.

And now these evil women have come up with an even-more-dastardly-than-usual way to torment men “[i]n the most vengeful, derisive, and mocking way they know how.” Yep, you guessed it: The SlutWalks. Large groups of women tormenting men with sexy clothes in unison!

Apparently overwhelmed by contemplation of the sheer feminine evil of the SlutWalks, Giovanni ends his post abruptly at this point.

I admit I don’t have the patience to wade through the comments. If any of you do, please post any of your findings below.

EDITED TO ADD: Ironically, Ferdinand Bardamu (the guy behind In Mala Fide) aids and abets the evil sexy-woman assault on men with his own retro porn site Retrotic. NSFW, of course. And if Dannato’s post is to believed, not safe for straight men generally.

NOTE: This post contains sarcasm.

518 replies on “Women! Why must you assault men with your evil sexy outfits?”

Also, on the Transformers slash, it was obvious that someone would do that, what with the possibilities inherent in terms like “gear box” and “transmission fluid”.

It could be worse than Transformers slash. I’ve encountered “Cars” (as in the Pixar movie) slash. “Cars” TENTACLE RAPE slash.

The internet is a scary place.

Pokeman slash. It exists, and Weeping Cock has it. They also managed to work some pedophilia in there, just because.

(Not with human children, with baby Pokeman. There are baby Pokeman? I was not aware of this until Weeping Cock informed me.)

I’d just like to point out that, when a dude runs by me shirtless and sweaty, or walks by in a three piece suit and jaunty hat, or just a well fitting pair of jeans, my internal reaction is “thank you anonymous sir for making my day!” and then I walk on with a smile. My day is made, and he does not feel harassed by the fact that I think he is attractive. Win win!

…seriously boys. not that hard.

The one with FrankNFurter is the clear winner, but would have been funnier if they’d used the giant scary immortal.

(Can’t remember his name, played by Clancy Brown.)

I know several mid to late 16th cent “catches” which aren’t at all “polite”.

re slash, don’t forget the Han/Lando, the Han/Boba the R2/C3PO, some Luke/Obi Wan, and the Obi Wan/Annakin. We shall ignore the existence of any Jar-Jar, or Jabba the Hut slash.

He could make a life-like, clockwork steampunk doll like some lovely futuristic Galatea, and dress her in the finest softest clothes and teach her to sit with him, and make tea, and when he presses his hand to her cheek the little gears in her mouth will tilt her lips up just so in a sweet smile, and the only sound she’ll make will be the soft melody of the music box inside her chest where a heart should be.

In addition to Bradbury, there’s a 19th-century short story that’s exactly like this: this guy falls in love with this girl because she’s so beautiful and dainty and all she ever says is “ah, ah.” Turns out she’s clockwork.

And when he dies she’ll continue on making tea every evening and sitting daintily on the loveseat and singing with her little music box, and turning the little gears in her mouth, and stepping over his body as it rots into the filthy carpet.

The AI was flawless; she’s just not very into him.

Eurosabra:

“You are wrong neener neener” does not carry much weight here.

This actually demonstrates that Eurosabra isn’t an MRA or at least is in a separate category. Most of the MRAs don’t seem to have attained this revelation

Holly:

every man who needs to should learn unicorn wrangling.

I think they learn Game in the hopes of not being able to wrangle unicorns.

PfkaE:

business wear is not supposed to be sexy.

This will be news to my girlfriend.

Eurosabra: . So, I’ll just say that every man who needs to should learn Game.

Logical Fallacy: Tautology.

Audience Failure: Game has less credence here than assertions followed with neener-neener, as that might show some self-aware humor, with a hint of self-deprecation.

*wears something flashy* Hey, Eurosabra, a guy with your looks and personality must be awesome at Game. *touches his arm, leans in to whisper in ear* Neener neener.

(DOUCHE-COMBO!)

@katz
“The Sandman” was turned into a ballet called Coppelia. It ends happily, with the idiot who fell in love with the doll realizing that he should marry his girlfriend instead.

There’s also a whole section on “The Sandman” in Freud’s “Theory of the Uncanny,” which is one of the few pieces of Freud’s theory that I actually like. Mostly, he just gets things wrong…

You realise that every time you comment here you bore the crap out of us, right, Eurosabra? You’re not even irritating like most of our trolls, just really dull.

The Sandman is also the first internal story in the opera “The Tales of Hoffman.” His two later loves end no better, and he ends up with the only woman he can truly love: a personification of his writing muse.

Okay, I have some involvement with the Mens Rights Movement (mostly as a result of being a male victim of domestic abuse)… but this is just moronic. There are some women who find me attractive, am I harming them when I walk down the street in a nice suit? Perhaps that’s the core of the issue. The author is so unattractive that they view attractiveness as some sort of supernatural power.

Perhaps a function of the fact that I’m not as dysfunctional as I could be? Or that I’m not discussing fantasies or slash with unsympathetic strangers?

Minus ten points for “pecking” or leaning in. You should be close enough that the touch is smooth and natural.

As a lady, I would like to clarify that I never assign points for anything, except that if I find out you’re tallying any sort of “points” on our interactions, that is negative infinity points.

“[M]en are effectively strapped down, gagged, and muzzled ”

I usually have to pay for that sort of thing.

Women can’t control themselves in the least. From the time they hit puberty thru their entire lives, they dress and act like an animal in heat with the express intention of sexually exciting all men within eyeshot.

You don’t actually know any women, do you?

The real fun is about to begin.

Dave finally got calliope music to play every time your post is on the screen?

if a woman devolves down to animalistic state when she dresses and acts sexually to attract the attention of all men. And a man devolves down to an animalstic state when he takes what sexually attracts him. What is the ration of men-vs-women who have devolved down to an animalistic state?

Fucking civilization! How does it work!?

A womans impulse is to act sexually in some way to signify readiness for mating.
Everywhere in the world, that’s how nature works. It really doesn’t matter what animal you are, that’s how it works.

Fucking tusks, and plumage and antlers and elephant seal noses! How do they work!?

@Cassandrasays

Jack who?

Jack Burton!

@Vacuumslayer

All you men out there who are being witty and smart and charming and are NOT fucking me are just being teases!!!

This is why I’m never smart nor funny while wearing a kilt. Women would devolve into an anamalistic state and be all slutting all over me alphabetaomegathree cock carousel.

@Joanna

I’m sorry to all the men in the world that I will never have the proportions of a doll =(

It’s an action figure!!! Oh… wait.

This is why I�m never smart nor funny while wearing a kilt. Women would devolve into an anamalistic state and be all slutting all over me alphabetaomegathree cock carousel.

You laugh, but this part is actually true.

*delurks* *waves*

Long time reader, first time commenter (I think).

I know I’m late to this, but I can’t quite believe no one picked up on NWO’s full assertion at the beginning of the thread:

Women dress sexily at (as he sees it) the great and obvious threat of rape (which they would deserve because leaving the house makes them a slut or something) with the end aim of becoming counsellors.

Now admittedly I haven’t actually looked into how one becomes a counsellor in too much detail, but surely there’s just a college or university course? Surely you don’t have to prove that you’ve personally emasculated fifty men by refusing to let them stick their winky in you?

Not to mention that I, a female, had had both a male and female counsellor to talk to about a problem which was not a sexual dysfunction! Or did we timewarp to Vienna at the beginning of the 20th century when DKM went on his little wank-fantasy and every problem ever is a sexual dysfunction?

That’s because we can’t pick on all the stupid shit troll say. And most of them seem to live between the middle-ages, fictional 1950 and Narnia. Also, the rule is not ‘every problem ever is a sexual dysfunction’ but ‘every problem ever is a woman dysfunction’.

I know I’m late to this, but I can’t quite believe no one picked up on NWO’s full assertion at the beginning of the thread:

I’m sure this is a woman’s fault somehow.

[M]en are effectively strapped down, gagged, and muzzled while females can flaunt and taunt with impunity. For many men this pretty much sums up every single day of an entire lifetime at school and at work.

Can you imagine walking around with that kind of simmering anger and hostility, to think that every day of your life, members of the opposite sex are taunting you just by being near you? Fear, paranoia, megolomania and inferiority complexes intertwined. That’s scary sick.

manboobz, MUST you pretend that sekshooal intercourse is something more than just a physical act involving at least 2 people using each others bodies? The fact that women dress this way is precisely the reason why I shamelessly catcall women on foot or bicycle when I’m cruisin down the street in my ride! ^.^ DONT HATE THE PLAYA, HATE THE GAME!!! LOL

Nameless dude, the game is called “shame the woman for her sexuality and her body”
The rule: if it’s not too much, it’s not enough.
The players: people like you who take pleasure in inflicting pain onto other.
The women are merely a feature of the game.

So I, and many others, will continue to hate – and try to destroy – the game and despise – and try to change or stop – the players.

And what are you, ten? You can’t say ‘sex’ without blushing so you have to write ‘sekshooal’?

“DONT HATE THE PLAYA, HATE THE GAME!!! LOL”

You don’t want me to hate Burning Man? OK, I’m cool with that.

Glass- November 29, 2011@ 3:02 pm–

Gas. May I call you Gas?

Tough cookies, I’m calling you Gas!

When White men, as White men were the recognised leaders of families, churches, businesses, the Armed Forces, and academia, the society by and large functioned. Poverty, to the extent that it existed, was temporary, people expected their children and grandchildren to do better–often much better–then themselves, problems that bedeviled their economy and society were seen,perhaps mistakenly, to be temporary, there was limitless opportunity for anyone who would work and apply himself and his G-d given talents, and it was understood by everybody that intelligence, aptitudes, talents, and educability differed between people, this was natural, in accordance with the order of the universe, and most thinking people were happy with it. There was a place for every man, and every man (and woman) was expected to be in their place. there was far more progress in the arts and sciences in any half century between c.1750 and 1900–in Europe and the USA–than in the entire damn planet for the previous 10,000 years! The twentieth century promised to be the best time of all, before that wretched slime Woodrow Wilson decided to “make the world safe for democrazy”, and ruin and bankrupt the old order for good!

Since your egalitarian loonies took over,not only the USA, but most of the rest of the world, marginalizing most White people,especially White men, what was once the greatest country in the world has devolved, and is devolving into a third world s**thole. We have your damned “equality” with real QUALITY having disappeared, and the only results are the equality of the lowest common denominator!

The irony is that the only people who benefit from the resulting chaos and misery since 1914 or thereabouts is a corrupt and venal New World Order conspiracy of bankers, politicians, and shady media and corporate types who wouldn’t be given the time of day in a REAL country with real values! The scum rising to the top since WWI are people who, when REAL whites governed, would have been on street corners with little tin cups!

Think about that the next time you denigrate White Men, Gas (or is it ASS?)

DKM, may I call you racist asshole?

I know it doesn’t sound like your name, but hey, apparently that’s the level we’re on here.

All I can say is the white race can’t be that awesome if it produced someone of your morals, intelligence, and taste.

Holly Pervocrazy–DEcember 4,2011 @10:34 pm

Isn’t that just like an egalitarian (and feminist, to boot)? Why don’t you pair with G ass and spawn a few children and see what happens?

He (?) sounds enough like you to make the possibility of a good match.

Call me a “racist a*****le? You can call me anything you like, after all, it is YOUR literacy and verbal articulateness being displayed to an audience of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of readers. Besides, I know that “racist” is only progressivese or feminese for “I don’t agree with you, but I haven’t any real arguments against you”.

My advice is to save the ad hominem insults for politicians. They do it all the time to each other, are good for nothing else, and are better at it then we are!

Okay, I’ll say more.

When White men, as White men were the recognised leaders of families, churches, businesses, the Armed Forces, and academia, the society by and large functioned.

…For white men.

Although I’m sure that even in Ye Olde Tymes families and churches were led by their actual members, whatever race they were.

Poverty, to the extent that it existed, was temporary, people expected their children and grandchildren to do better–often much better–then themselves, problems that bedeviled their economy and society were seen,perhaps mistakenly, to be temporary, there was limitless opportunity for anyone who would work and apply himself and his G-d given talents, and it was understood by everybody that intelligence, aptitudes, talents, and educability differed between people, this was natural, in accordance with the order of the universe, and most thinking people were happy with it. There was a place for every man, and every man (and woman) was expected to be in their place.

What era are you talking about here? This isn’t the 1950s. This isn’t the 1850s. This is Happy Unicorn Land. There has never been a time or place where all poverty was temporary and everyone lived in love and happiness.

The irony is that the only people who benefit from the resulting chaos and misery since 1914 or thereabouts is a corrupt and venal New World Order conspiracy of bankers, politicians, and shady media and corporate types who wouldn’t be given the time of day in a REAL country with real values!

You know, even if this were true, what would they have to gain by sowing discord? If I ruled the world, I’d think I’d profit most from the most productive world. If they’re profiting off everything anyway, I don’t understand why these shady I THINK YOU MEAN JEWISH types benefit by making the world worse for everyone.

The scum rising to the top since WWI are people who, when REAL whites governed, would have been on street corners with little tin cups!

Awww, and I thought no one was in poverty in Happy Unicorn Land?

. Besides, I know that “racist” is only progressivese or feminese for “I don’t agree with you, but I haven’t any real arguments against you”

Close. It actually means “I don’t agree with you about the inferiority of different races, but am not willing to explain this up from the kindergarten ‘Billy is a bunny and Bobby is a bear but Billy is just as good as Bobby!’ level right now, because I despair of you ever giving up your bigotry at this point.”

there was limitless opportunity for anyone who would work and apply himself and his G-d given talents

Is Meller Jewish all of a sudden?

Was Woodrow Wilson not a white man?

I’m having a hard time grappling with all this wrong Meller’s placed before us. It’s a heaping pile of steaming WRONG, all for us!

“as White men were the recognised leaders of families” … ALL of them? Even the non-white ones?

“churches …” ALL of them?

“businesses … ” ALL of them?

“the Armed Forces …” Well, OK, probably.

“and academia …” REALLY?

“Poverty, to the extent that it existed, was temporary …” REALLY? For whom? The rich?

Etc., etc.

Holly Pervocrazy–December 4, 2011 @10:59pm

Woodrow Wilson was one of the degenerate and renegade Whites who put his own personal well being and power above the interests of the larger nation, and–in 1917–the world and the White (European) race as a whole! He had a choice to remain neutral, and to remain out of Europe’s hopeless autogenocidal war, and to insist upon a negotiated peace between the Central powers and the Allied Powers; or Britain and France would never see one thin dime of Amercan aid! He also has the choice to avoid sending the Lusitania into Submarine infested waters off Irelandin 1915, and still did nothing!

To the extent that he, like Lloyd George and Georges Clemanceau, were Whitemen, they were renegades and degenerates! They did both their own people, and what was left of Christendom and European civilization, more damage, both then and afterward, then even a German/ Austrian/ Turkish victory, still more the outcome of negotiated settlements, could ever have! As Whitemen in elite positions, they had the responsibility to secure their nation’s future to the best of their advantage, and to work for peace in Europe, not war, and certainly not autogenocidal war with Whitemen killing each other by the millions!

As far as being ‘Jewish” is concerned, Jews suffered disproportionately from the loss of culture and civilization that followed the disasters of 1898 and more so in 1914! I don’t have time to go into the details, but any History of the interwar years between 1918-1945 in Europe (Christendom) would adaquately fill you in!

Bee-December 4, 2011@ 10:51pm

It isn’t necessary for White people to be the leaders of ALL of anything to set the tone of the larger society! Any group that can dominate the elite of a society (or an important part of it) will dominate that society as a whole. I think I am correct in my assessment that White men–as White men–dominated the uppermost 5-10% of those aspects of civilization in Christendom in the years between c.1750-1900 to justify an assertion of dominating the society as a whole, even if nonwhites, or non-Christians also rose to high places in Europe or America in certain places or activities.

DKM, I’d be appalled by your racism but I’m laughing too hard at “there was no poverty from 1750-1900.”

It’s hard to even be offended by events that are clearly taking place in Unicorn Land. Tell me, when white men were all in charge, could people fly? Did rivers run with honey and rum? Were the streets paved with gold?

I think I am correct in my assessment that White men–as White men–dominated the uppermost 5-10% of those aspects of civilization in Christendom in the years between c.1750-1900 to justify an assertion of dominating the society as a whole, even if nonwhites, or non-Christians also rose to high places in Europe or America in certain places or activities.

Well gosh, as long as you think you’re correct …

Actually, I’m not going to argue with you. The way you’re framed the question, yes … white Christian men generally ruled Christendom between 1750 and 1900. And what? Nothing bad ever happened during that time? Everyone was rich and well-fed and educated and no one died or got sick and there were no wars?

Because white Christian men were in charge?

Where did you get this enchanting historical revision, Meller? Was it a Disney movie?

Oh, and why are you spelling god like “G-d,” Meller? Just curious.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.