Categories
a voice for men antifeminism antifeminst women crackpottery evil women FemRAs hypocrisy I am making a joke I'm totally being sarcastic irony alert men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA MRA paradox patriarchy reactionary bullshit sluts the enigma that is ladies

Calling women names = human rights advocacy: A visit to A Voice for Men.

So the other day I was perusing the front page of the angry dude blog – sorry, “human rights organization” – A Voice for Men, looking for something inspiring to read. My eyes hit on a promo for a recent AVFM radio show. It was on the topic of feminism, and, apparently, women in general:

Flatworms, eh? You know, those “relatively simple bilaterian, unsegmented, soft-bodied invertebrate animals” without brains, with primitive eye spots that allow them to sense light?

As you know, human rights organizations are widely known for comparing large categories of humanity to primitive worms.

I am reminded of the inspiring words of Martin Luther King:

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. And by the fact that they’re not slimy, dirt-eating worms, like all those damn white kids.

This is, of course, from King’s famous “I had a dream – a really weird dream, where all the white people were worms” speech.

Oh, perhaps JohnTheOther and GirlWritesWhat have some highly clever explanation for that whole “flatworm” thing, but in order to find out I would have to listen to their “radio” show. But life is short, it is a lovely, if a bit chilly, Saturday in April, and I would rather have ferrets chew the flesh off my bones while I am still alive than listen to an hour or more of those two, so I guess I will never know.

But no matter, because there was another post on A Voice for Men that caught my eye:

Yes, I said to myself, I will have to find out what Cooter Bee thinks about the differences between intellect and emotionalism. In the course of my day to day life, I often find myself pondering the deeper philosophical questions of human existence, and when I do, I always wonder: What does Cooter Bee think of that? It is rare that I actually get to learn what Cooter Bee thinks on a particular matter of philosophical import. So naturally I clicked on the link.

Here’s what I learned from the esteemed Professor Cooter Bee:

Endless citation, refutation of fallacy and Socratic pursuit of truth are the tools of reason. Men tend to understand them. Women, generally speaking, don’t because indignation, outrage and gut level distaste are rooted in emotionalism. Women do understand base emotionalism and do respond to it in a more predictable way than they could ever respond to reason. They are also more likely to respond appropriately because the message is more clearly understood. Emotionalism is their language.

So, really, there’s no point in actually arguing anything with those flighty ladies.

No need to waste words or knock yourself out reasoning with feminists or even your wife, for that matter, when a short and visceral pronouncement from on high will do and is more effective.

For example, you can just call them sluts:

Sluts are against slut shaming because sluttiness is, indeed, shameful. Say so. Your position would be unassailable because they too believe it. They invoke moral relativism and slut pride marches as a means to escape the inescapable.

Actually, it’s better if you call the ladies sluts over and over and over again:

Slut Walks, “Sex in the City” and the self esteem cult are all attempts to reassure women that even when they behave abominably that the bad behavior has the sanction of the collective and they face no risk of expulsion if they engage in it. To modify the behavior of women, reimpose that risk. The good news is that it can be done in relatively short order. … A stark and unvarnished remonstration from someone in closer proximity will undo the propaganda swiftly. Declarations of “that is disgusting” accumulate. Hearing it once may not overcome Cosmo and she can dismiss it as an isolated raving of a lunatic. If she were to hear it more often, however, she begins to doubt herself and wonder about her status within her more immediate collective.

You can also modify chick behavior by praising them when they act the way you like them to. It’s really quite simple:

Chick language provides us with a construct that we can use. To women something is “nice” or it is “mean”. They use that simple, emotionally based dichotomy because that is what chicks understand. They use it with us and they use it with each other. That is how they evaluate the world. Use it. …

Most women want to be good so tell them what good is in a way they can grasp easily.

What if they disagree with your assessment of what is good? Doesn’t matter, because you are a man, and therefore right:

Who is to decide what is good and what is evil? Simple. You are. Some men might think it arrogant to anoint themselves as the final arbiter of all moral issues. Not true. As a man, nature equipped you to make decisions based on merit alone without respect to consensus. … You know right and wrong when you see it.

Are there any good women out there? Yes, Cooter Bee tells us. Indeed, there are several women who contribute to AVFM, so there’s them. Beyond that, Dr. Bee, tells us,

I am of the belief that most women are good, if somewhat misled. They only resist righteousness because they think that any behavior that the collective endorses IS righteous. The rare woman who is capable of moral judgment will select good herself and would not be on the receiving end of harsh moral criticism.

Then again, you still might have to yell at the good women from time to time. Really, it’s your duty – it’s for her own good.

Good women are human too. Even in the seldom occurring event of a temporary moral lapse by a decent woman, your diatribe will be no more severe than the one she administers to herself. Would you do less in the case of a man whose judgment falters?

Thank you, Cooter Bee, for your insights!

I had no idea that going around telling women that they’re sluts was a form of human rights advocacy, but apparently it is. The next time I see a woman standing on the streetcorner trying to get me to sign a petition for Amnesty International, I will simply tell her what a dirty whore she is. I will accomplish more with these words than she will in a day of collecting signatures and donations!

NOTE: Since you bring it up all the time, fellas, you might try to remember that the name of the show is Sex AND the City. Also, it ceased production eight years ago.

This post contained some

367 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
jumbofish
10 years ago

@rutee
I personally don’t really care to hear her weird excuse for poly or gay people but I know she won’t answer anyway. I am just pointing out how ridiculous she is.

Kyrie
Kyrie
10 years ago

Oh surprise, Ruby didn’t answer any question, changed subject and ran away. I am shocked, people.
Anyway, I’m terrible at evolution. I study in an engineering school, surrounded by men all day and here I am, dating a soon to be teacher. And it’s no even like I’m too ugly for engineer students, I was asked out by one of them (well kind of, but that’s another story) but I refused because he was creepy. (ahah, MRA, I called him creepy, I’m worse than Hitler!)
Also I don’t plan to make babies any time soon. (I can barely take care of me, so that would be the worse idea ever even if that was something I wanted)

seranvali
10 years ago

I love how the evo-psyche types never actually mention the real reasons why people marry or choose important, long term partners, little things like (shhhhh) love, friendship, companionship, shared interests, being able to depend on your partner in a crisis and raising kids together. All of it goes by the board because they want to think that partnering is a simple pecuniary transaction, which is among the daftest things I’ve ever heard!

Believe it or not many, many of us have complex, happy, trusting, honest relationships lasting decades.

Pecunium
10 years ago

Big Momma: are people on benefits in the US able to access tuition for free, especially if it seen as ‘vocational’? in the UK and Oz (where i now live), people are able to attend college whilst claiming back to work/disability benefits to retrain.

Generally not. It depends on the type of disability they are getting. If it’s federal (i.e. national) benefits, then no. If it’s state benefits, it depends on the state, and the type of disability. If it’s that one has been disabled in a way that makes one’s specific ability to do a job (say one is a wine blender, and has lost some sense of smell), then retraining may be offered.

But as a rule, they have to pay the tuition anyone else does, AND they aren’t eligible to access vocational retraining funds, because they aren’t considered employable.

Pecunium
10 years ago

Ruby: Weird how you guys take up for people who put undo stress on our safety nets.

Citation needed.

As to the “argument on sexual attraction”. I had let it drop. I merely took the crashing echoes of your silence as an admission of defeat. I see I was wrong.

So… I’ll repeat myself

And this one

That’s four studies which contradict the one you linked to. The other crap you proffered, on the subject of hypergamy, is still crap, and the comments above the first link explain why it is.

But it’s not really about the “sexual attraction” argument. It’s about how you don’t support the personal opinions you present and then pretend are proven “truths”.

Ruby Hypatia
Ruby Hypatia
10 years ago

On to the next topic. You guys really need to calm down from your hysteria. LOL!

hellkell
hellkell
10 years ago

Instead of tone trolling us Ruby, why don’t you move on to the next website, AWAY from us?

pillowinhell
10 years ago

Hahaahahahahahaha! Wut?

Ruby, we listen to the exact same drivel from every troll who comes on here. There’s nothing new to get over excited about. When I called you a cowardly shit it was a statement of fact, not an emotional response.

pillowinhell
10 years ago

Ruby has become tedious, much like the droning of a mosquito in your ear. Anyone else want ruby banned?

pecunium
pecunium
10 years ago

Ruby: Care to actually respond to the arguments presented?

Or are you going to continue emulating trolls?

And, this being a medium where we have nothing but what you present, to act like a troll is to be a troll.

You get to choose your identity.

(and, being a man, I have no uterus, and so can’t be, “hysterical”, but nice use of a sexist insult. The MRM would be proud).

Pecunium
10 years ago

Banned? No. I think the bar should be high. Then again, I was willing to be patient with Brandon for far after he’d outlived his origninality. Ruby’s descent into irrelevance wasn’t much of a surprise. The “rugged individualist” strain of libertarianism tends to have a lot of essentialism, which tends to lead to acceptance of sexist tropes.

But hope springs eternal.

The thin-skinned ability to deal with people who are, understandably, frustrated with her intellectual dishonesty and petty attacks; mixed in with direct aspersions on her opponents character, and honesty… well who can blame people for being a bit acerbic?

Not I.

pillowinhell
10 years ago

True enough Pecunium. What I really want to know, is that if women marry the richest man their looks can buy, how much is Ruby worth? And what will she do when those looks fade and he husband decides to buy a new model?

Pretty much any woman can cook and clean and raise children, but no woman maintains the same beauty throughout a lifetime. Hell, her husband could probably save himself some expense and hire a live in nanny.

But hey, this is clearly the world she wants to live in, always following her husbands gaze.

Bee
Bee
10 years ago

You guys really need to calm down from your hysteria.

What a great feminist statement. I totes take back what I said about you sounding like an MRA in disguise.

hellkell
hellkell
10 years ago

I don’t want her banned. Let’s have moderated until she can cite a real source or prove she’s read and understood people’s rebuttals to her nonsense.

Kyrie
Kyrie
10 years ago

So Ruby, feel like you’ve answered too many questions? Feel free to move on and troll on another subject (or change, but I doubt we’ll see that happen) just like we’ll feel free to remember and remind others that you’re a troll. And dare to ask questions sometimes.

Bee: she probably isn’t, and it’s sad she call herself a feminist and be so sexist.

Btw, I don’t think she deserves to be banned, based on the standards of the blog.

Cliff Pervocracy
10 years ago

I don’t think Ruby’s earned a banning. (I mean, shit, we let Meller post.) Just a “yo, we didn’t forget the last thread” the next time.

I also think that she honestly thinks she’s a feminist. She’s all for women’s equal right to be hysterical and hypergamous… or something.

I think Ruby has some seriously advanced mechanisms to avoid thinking anything through all the way.

pillowinhell
10 years ago

Alright, banned might be a bit much…but really Ruby is very dull whilst we try to spoonfeed remedial human decency 101 to her. I figure it will likely take another decade of that before we can get to any other social justice basics.

And I think rubys made it pretty clear that’s she’s not interested in even listening.

Pecunium
10 years ago

My problem with Ruby is her lack of self-awareness. She thinks the response she’s getting is related to what she says, not how she deals with us.

It’s not that I give a damn that she completely failed on the subject of “what women want/what men want”, it’s that she thinks it’s about that.

When it’s about her lack of honest engagement.

Sharculese
10 years ago

@kyrie

Anyway, I’m terrible at evolution.

‘rock made biology’. that’s all you gotta know

Sharculese
10 years ago

y’know, i don’t doubt that there are ‘moochers’ (to borrow ruby’s childish phrase) on every level of society, from top to bottom. if a few of them are taking advantage of the system, my felling is kind of ‘so the fuck what’. it’s a pretty small price to pay for the benefits of living in a society that takes care of its own.

Pecunium
10 years ago

I’m wth Sharculese: It’s a case of pennywise, and pound foolish. I also think the level/types of enforcement are excessive, in that they make it much harder for people who aren’t abusing the system to use it without being made to feel abused instead of helped.

ithiliana
10 years ago

@Pecunium: Re: Ruby She thinks the response she’s getting is related to what she says, not how she deals with us.

I agree, and note it was true of the more….hmmm…..I don’t want to say mediocre trolls, but the *not so extremely out there in bizarreoh world that they just want to cut/paste rants and mostly could care less what they get in return” (unlike DKM and NWO)…

Certain MRAL and B___n fall into Ruby’s category.

@Sharculese: I agree with you, and would note that the little known or little acknowledged fact about the “social welfare system” in the US is how it’s supported a whole lot of people who wouldn’t have a job otherwise–and yet because it’s so underfunded and people are so overworked and so much of the emphasis in recent years is on finding those terrible moochers that it’s not serving anybody well–either the people who need help, or the people who go into this public job area (don’t even get me started on privatizing it, or I will be forced to post links about what TExas did.).

Back to work…………….

cloudiah
10 years ago

The moochers discussion reminds me of the discussion around voter identification laws in the U.S. In order to take care of the nearly nonexistent problem of voter fraud, they want to make it much harder for everyone — but particularly the poor, elderly, etc. — to vote.

they make it much harder for people who aren’t abusing the system to use it without being made to feel abused instead of helped.

This.
You know that law they passed in Florida to test welfare recipients for drugs? How many tested positive? 2%. The state is now on the hook to pay for the tests for the vast majority who did not test positive. (Leaving aside the question of whether or not people who DO test positive should just starve to death on the sidewalk, which is not something that I believe.)

katz
10 years ago

Oh I’m sorry. Heh. What, should I leave this blog?

Oops, sorry, I didn’t mean you were contributing nothing! Your points about neurological development were very interesting. I meant I was contributing nothing because everyone was talking about serious stuff and I was making a masturbation joke.

%d bloggers like this: