Categories
antifeminism douchebaggery hypocrisy irony alert lying liars misogyny reactionary bullshit sex shaming tactics sluts

If Rush Limbaugh could draw cartoons …

Oy, Sorry for more Rush Limbaugh-related crap, but this cartoon, by Gary McCoy, was just too appalling not to post.

I’m not even going to get into the slut-shaming, or that the cartoonist is bizarrely trying to fat-shame someone who is not actually fat, but I would like to point out once again that WE’RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT PROVIDING FREE BIRTH CONTROL (even though that sounds like a nifty idea to me). We’re talking about INSURANCE COMPANIES COVERING BIRTH CONTROL LIKE THEY COVER OTHER MEDICAL EXPENSES. You know about insurance, right? That thing that people PAY FOR THEMSELVES, with THEIR OWN MONEY?

Are Rush and his fans really so ignorant and obtuse that they’ve somehow convinced themselves that this is about the government paying for birth control? Or are they deliberately misrepresenting the issue, knowing that most of their readers/listeners/whatever won’t bother to check the facts?

210 replies on “If Rush Limbaugh could draw cartoons …”

Our trolls are like those dolls with the string in back. When you pull it, all they say is “bigot.” Worst. Toy. Ever.

If the MRM was not out there fighting the good fight to bring back legal domestic violence and rape, where would men be?
I mean, now you cannot even punch your spouse without getting arrested, The MRM wants to change all that!
Aren’t all the other men grateful for that?

Well no, because most people do not want to legalize domestic violence, and most people are not rapists.

@rutee….sociology is a fake discipline…like astrology. I wouldn’t care what those clowns are laughing at…sociology – what a waste of an education.

Yes, yes, I read your quaint little blog post that asserted it as well. Funnily enough, you never cited anything before saying it was “Just as bad as creationism”. Spoiler alert: that doesn’t make you look like the biologist in that analogy XD

No, it was a blog post where you tried to say your little hatecrush kimmel was to sociology what ID was to biology. It was cute, because there’s mountains of evidence against Intelligent design and various other forms of creationism, and you had… nothing but your own words. Not a single study except Kimmel’s own, to which you raised no actual challenges.

It was funny, really. He’s more like Neil Degrasse Tyson than he is a researcher, and you still couldn’t nail him on his research. But please, continue your quest for the clubhouse!

Moewicus, i hope u don’t take offense that i don’t respond to your posts. firstly, i find male feminists to pretty icky most of the time…they remind me of people like hugo schwyzer and mickael kimmel…people who obviously despise men. second…as soon as you argue that all men are privileged by patriarchy, you pretty much lost all credibility. the fact that you don’t deny that much today’s feminist thought is based upon the vilification of men as a whole pretty much sums up why your commentary is both bigoted and, for all intents and purposes, useless.

Firstly, learn how to use ellipses. Second, I’m pretty sure I never tried to kill anybody or fuck any of my students like Schwyzer–not that I ever had any students to fuck, but whatevs. Third, “you remind me of people who obviously despise men because you are in the same category” is fucking ridiculous. Fourth, I think I would spot it if feminism were villainizing men qua men. The few times I’ve seen stuff I have found problematic regarding men in feminist thought–and I have, but a few– it has never approached anything like what I’ve seen from the MRM. Fifth, the fact that you’re a woman who prefers not to see the obvious misogyny prevalent in the MRM sums up why your commentary is both bigoted and useless. Oh no wait, that’s an ad hominem argument. Your commentary is bigoted and useless regardless of who you are or what you see, Mags.

@moe…do you mind if I call you moe?

i find it pretty hilarious that you focus in on elipses…when my entire pose uses no capitalization and i pride myself on my bad spelling. i think grammar nazism is about the worst form of argment on the planet…like putting (sic) in other peoples quotes…

I “focused” on ellipses for all of one sentence because that is the first example of a comment of yours that I can remember which abuses ellipses so much. Seriously. Serial commas, semicolons, and simple periods are your friend.

i think grammar nazism is about the worst form of argment on the planet

It’s also not a form of argument: it’s mocking you because, as Thomas Jefferson said, “Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions.” Personally I think the ad hominems and false dichotomies you use are the worst forms of argument, mostly because they’re actual logical fallacies.

when my entire pose uses no capitalization and i pride myself on my bad spelling

Okay, that actually made me laugh. Including the intentional or unintentional irony of misspelling “post”

i find ad hominiems useful when one is trying to stop a conversation with someone. unfortunately, as you can imagine, some people don’t get the hint.

So the girl who posts here for, as she has stated, the sole purpose of annoying us, wants the conversations she starts here to end, presumably because they annoy her.

Makes sense.

i find ad hominiems useful when one is trying to stop a conversation with someone. unfortunately, as you can imagine, some people don’t get the hint.

I find mockery enjoyable when someone presents a laughably easy target. Seriously, go read a book and stop “having” this conversation if you don’t want it.

Preferably a book where you actually learn things. Something you have not been doing lately, it seems.

Uh, moe, i just want the conversation with you to end because you bore me, and i find you annoying. furthermore, as is almost ALWAYS the case, i start out these converstaions very politely…and get immediately attacked by the posters here. Then they take umbridge when I return their snide remarks in kind.

Women use a disproportionate share of healthcare…

How can anyone determine what a disproportionate share of healthcare is? What does that even mean? What is the appropriate portion of healthcare, exactly?

Uh, moe, i just want the conversation with you to end because you bore me, and i find you annoying. furthermore, as is almost ALWAYS the case, i start out these converstaions very politely…and get immediately attacked by the posters here. Then they take umbridge when I return their snide remarks in kind.

I find you annoying and boring as well, but I take pleasure in teasing you and pointing out your use of logical fallacies as you complain that you are treated unfairly and not responded to with actual arguments. Go away if my joy does not suit you.

No matter how nicely you say “Maybe these rape apologists have a point“, it will never be polite, Magdelyn. Also, we’re calling you ineffective and boring, not fuming about how much you’ve hurt our feelings. I repeat; are you illiterate?

Much of feminist thought today is based upon negative assumptions about men…men are privileged by patriarchy, they are harassers, wife beaters, rapers.

Men have plenty to be angry about. Just because feminism dismisses men’s anger doesn’t mean their feelings are not legitimate. Their anger will help fuel and grow the MRM.

So Mags, do you go to MRM sites and chide them for cultivating their indignities over their misunderstandings of feminist thought? I mean, I already know you’re lazy, have double standards, and barely understand the stuff you talk about, I just want to know what it is you do, exactly.

well moe, i have to figure out your question. is your question, (1) riddled with ad hominems because you want me to stop talking to you (let’s call this the maggie method of ad hominems), or (2) are you using them to be ironic in some sort of urban hipster way (“Personally I think the ad hominems and false dichotomies you use are the worst forms of argument, mostly because they’re actual logical fallacies.” -you).

please clarify.

Someone who called Hugo a word that essentially means “ball-less” is complaining about ad hominem attacks. Oh, that’s rich.

It’s a rhetorical question illuminating your values, in which attacking insulting someone based on their mental health is dismissed as “cultivating indignities,” while misunderstanding the feminist address of gendered violence and being angry about it is regarded legitimate. It amuses me to do this.

Someone who called Hugo a word that essentially means “ball-less” is complaining about ad hominem attacks. Oh, that’s rich.

No, see, it’s funny because as a male feminist he lacks manliness and testicles and is free to be thereby degraded. It’s funny! Funny.

I’ll never understand why so many of the trolls here are under the impression that they’re annoying or upsetting the regular commenters. So far it seems like the only one who’s genuinely irked people is MRAL, and that’s only because during his fake repentence period so many people extended compassion towards him, which he then threw in their faces. Other than him most people seem to regard the regular trolls more the way that my cat sees her toy mouse.

It’s hard to imagine how magdelyn navigates basic daily tasks if she doesn’t understand that, if she doesn’t like the result of something, she should stop doing it. I imagine her actually punching herself and complaining that it hurts.

Woops, I should have said “… in which protesting against the use of a person’s mental health as an insult is dismissed as “cultivating indignities”…”

I wasn’t going to correct myself, seeing as how Mags prides herself on understanding people despite their grammatical errors, but since she has so drastically failed to understand her ideological opponents I decided not to risk it. Luckily, those things are not related, as plenty of people on manboobz are able to be witty, concise, and understandable with terrible spelling/capitalization.

Now if you’ll excuse me, as a loyal but disgraced grammar fascist I must go to commit seppuku, lest the Greater Grammar Co-Prosperity Sphere be besmirched by my name.

Trolls like Mags think of themselves as Charizards wrecking the place up. In reality they’re more like Magikarp, splashing around and repeating their cries.

Also, I love how pointing out someone’s shitty argument is something that onky “hipsters” do. lol

Now if you excuse me, I’m going to listen to few songs from Tremellow (oh, you’ve never heard of them? LOOOOOOSER! And your debate skills suck).

/notahipster

/ijusthavetoomuchtimeonmyhands

Oh, Maggie said Moewicus ad hom’d her.

I never cease to be amazed at the collective internet fascination with claims of ad hominem while failing to understand what an ad hominem is. Ad hominem is when you substitute an insult for an argument (ex. “i hope u don’t take offense that i don’t respond to your posts. firstly, i find male feminists to pretty icky most of the time…they remind me of people like hugo schwyzer and mickael kimmel…people who obviously despise men.”; your argument is invalid because you are a male feminist, and these other two male feminists are people I claim hate men, which also adds in guilt by association), not just when you use an insult (ex. “Mags, you are illiterate, and your criticisms of sociologists are contentless whining absent any sort of evidence that they are actually wrong”; your argument is invalid because of counterargument X, and you are also an idiot for making your argument.)

Moewicus’ insults didn’t attempt to invalidate an argument or claim; they were just insults.

Yeah, anyone who took philosophy in high school thinks ad hominem is the universal “I WIN!” in discussions.

Except that there are plenty of times when someone’s personal life may indeed be relevant, such as when setting oneself up as an authority:
A: I’m an expert on law and VAWA is unconstitutional!
B: Dude, you’re 18.

Or being hypocritical:
A: Women who sleep around are slutty sluts!
B: You’ve had sex with a bunch of women. How’s that supposed to work if they’re not allowed to sleep around?

Or actively disproving his own point:
A: The feminist thought police throw all dissenters in jail!
B: You’re a misogynistic douchebag and you’re not in jail.

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.