Categories
antifeminism disgusting women evil fat fatties evo psych fairy tales grandiosity heartiste it's science! men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny narcissism patriarchy PUA reactionary bullshit

Heartiste: Women athletes are mannish uggos because “women’s natural bodies are not evolutionarily designed to run, throw, fight or lift optimally.”

An innately unsexy lady athlete somehow cons a dude into kissing her.

So over on Chateau Heartiste, the Dude Who Used to Call Himself Roissy seems personally affronted that the female athletes in the Olympics, by and large, didn’t live up to his wet dreams of Perfect Womanhood. In one post, he hails a Turkish newspaper columnist (yes, the same one we talked about here) who complained about the allegedly unwomanly bosoms of female Olympians, and offers his own less-than-complimentary assessment of their looks:

Who with the eyes to see hasn’t noticed the narrow hips, the grotesque six-pack abs (never a good look on women), the chest “stubs”, the linebacker shoulders, and the manjaws of an inordinate number of the female Olympians?  

So why does it matter that Roissy/Heartiste couldn’t get a boner watching the Olympics? Apparently because these women are violating the PRIME DIRECTIVE, which forbids representatives of the United Federation of Planets from “intervene[ing] in matters which are essentially the domestic jurisdiction of any planetary social system.”

Sorry, that’s the PRIME DIRECTIVE from Star Trek. These gals are violating what Roissy/Heartiste thinks are mother nature’s PRIME DIRECTIVES (plural) for women, which are to look pretty and make babies. No, really. You see, women aren’t actually supposed to be, or look, athletic. It’s SCIENCE.

[W]omen must conform more to the male physique ideal in order to compete successfully in sports, and particularly elite sports, because women’s natural bodies are not evolutionarily designed to run, throw, fight or lift optimally like men’s bodies are designed to do.

Yeah, there’s no evolutionary advantage in being athletic, if you’re a gal. Evidently female hunter gatherers during humankind’s “environment of evolutionary adaptedness” didn’t ever run or throw or carry or fight anything or anyone, spending most of their time hanging out in cave clubs and texting their friends on their Smart Rocks.

Women’s bodies are — and I know this will get under the skin of the right sort of losers — shaped by the relentless laws of nature to fulfill TWO PRIME DIRECTIVES.

Visually please men.

And bear children.

Everything else women do is commentary.

Apparently Roissy/Heartiste has become an amateur Torah scholar. (And not a very good one, at that.)

You might be wondering: if Roissy/Heartiste really believes in all the evolutionary psych crap he constantly spouts, why on earth would he care that some women aren’t fulfilling their evolutionary duty to give him boners? Won’t they just get bred out of existence? What does it matter to him?

Well, evidently Roissy/Heartiste was feeling so defensive about people asking this very question that he wrote a whole other post explaining, sort of, why he cares. Sorry, why he totally doesn’t care.

The issue being raised was never about how much it personally mattered to me, or affected my own life. That’s the problem with you unthinking liberals — you always want to reframe an argument you find distasteful, or you find yourself on the losing end of, into a personal matter, a position from which it’s easier for you to morally strut and preen and preach fire and brimstone from your tawdry little masturbatoriums.

Yeah, you strutting masturbatoriumizing liberals! How dare you ask him why he spends so much of his life complaining about the bodies of women who don’t give him boners?

He continues:

The morality, or lack thereof, of manned-up women competing in the Olympics is not the point of the Olympic female athlete post. No one’s rights are abridged if some manly swole she-beast hoists 400 lbs above her head, nor is any moral law du jour violated. The point here is to remind the losers and equalists and assorted anti-realists that there is nothing inherently empowering about female sports participation unless one defines empowerment as “becoming more man-like”. It is also to address, honestly and truthfully, the obvious fact that a lot of female athletes are just quasi-men, in appearance, musculature and temperament.

Boy, there’s a brave and original notion.

Therefore, the encouragement of women by the media industrial complex into elite sports mostly rests on a foundation of denying women their feminine essence.

Huh. In his first post on the subject, Roissy/Heartiste complained about the “narrow hips” and “manjaws” of female Olympians. Did the evil “media industrial complex” somehow lure women into developing narrower hips and less-rounded jaws? Is Roissy/Heartiste some kind of Evo Psych Lamarckian?

A nation that wasn’t fucked in the head with an overload of kumbaya horseshit would not shy away from this bald truth of the reality of sex differences, and would realign its cultural incentives so that a proper balance was restored, reflecting innate biological reality, until sports programs and funding return to what they once were: mostly geared toward men.

If “innate biological reality” demands that women remain unathletic (and thus pleasing to Roissy/Heartiste’s eyes and penis), why are there any female athletes in the first place? If athletic women are by definition going against nature, why bother talking about culture at all, much less the urgent need to “realign cultural incentives?”

Evo Psych types like Roissy/Heartiste like to pretend that it’s biology, not culture, that sets up the allegedly innate differences between men and women. But somehow culture matters again when people stubbornly refuse to conform to their supposedly natural roles.

At the very least, the feminist propagandizing of female sports empowerment has to end, and hand-wringing over “equal representation” needs to become a shameful relic from this ugly, god-willing bygone era.

Huh. So I’m beginning to get the impression that you do care about all this, after all.

In the comments, some dude calling himself Maximin manages to be even more pompous than Roissy/Heartiste himself, declaring that

feminism … aspires, in the name of equality, to make women in to men, but revealing, at the same time, the inherent hatred of women that is feminism. This is not equality—rather this is bigotry against women. By forcing women to act like men—to look like men, to have the musculature of men, to date like men, to have sex like men, to work like men, what they are saying is: the male body and the creations of the male body are superior to the female body and the creations of the female body. Therefore, change the female body into the male body and hence allow the female body to then create male works (and from what we have seen, these masculine women can only, at best, land in mediocrity).

And of course, it’s ugly women who are to blame for it all:

It comes from a hatred of the female—most likely from highly masculine women who are naturally more intelligent and competitive than highly feminine women. They cannot garner the attraction of men because they are ugly, so they scorch of the earth of femininity, and suddenly the scales are tipped in their favor. Beware a masculine woman scorned: she will burn down the world and rebuild it in her favor.

Fellas, be careful! If you don’t watch out, Holley Mangold will sneak into your bedroom at night and LIFT YOU OVER HER HEAD!

232 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
aworldanonymous
9 years ago

I think I really need to stop anxietying about having been that “different” kid in public school, people far more experienced than me, from you guys to my family, to friends of mine IRL who are in university and/or have degrees seem to define creepy in a different way than high school kids do.

Tatjna
Tatjna
9 years ago
Reply to  jumbofish

If someone says you’re creepy that doesn’t mean you are, but if someone says they are uncomfortable around you and please go away and you don’t, then that’s creepy.

So yes, if people ask you to go away, doing so is the correct response.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
9 years ago

Also I really think being around older people will help. High school kids are assholes, generally – it’s an environment that lends itself to anyone who’s visibly different being singled out and picked on. That aspect of social behavior gets a lot less common as people get older, thankfully.

aworldanonymous
9 years ago

@Tatjna

I kind of figured that much, again, I could just be anxious about how my social life was in high school, a lot more people there seem to define creepy as quiet, shy and/or introverted.

Noadi
9 years ago

@aworldanonymous People have different things that turn them off from wanting to interact with another person. So even if you try your best not everyone is going to respond well to you. If you are the message that someone is uncomfortable or doesn’t want to be around you, leave them alone and go find someone else to interact with. This has been something I’ve had trouble with being border-line aspie too and once I accepted that things became less stressful.

Noadi
9 years ago

Also going to echo being around adults being a big help. Highschool sucked but college and afterwards has been so much better, teenagers are assholes.

aworldanonymous
9 years ago

Yeah, IIRC we had to watch “What About Bob?” in one of my classes in high school, and one of the metaphors he used was to treat people like phone booths, if one doesn’t work, try the next one.

The Kittehs' Unpaid Help

We need a time machine to bring some of the women warriors of ancient cultures here … they could give Roissy a really personal demonstration of their strength and skill with swords and spears …

The Kittehs' Unpaid Help

Hey, if ‘alpha’ has gone, does that mean I have to tell my Katie-cat she’s not really the alpha female of the household? She won’t like that one little bit, she likes being Miss Bossy too much. 🙂

Wisteria
Wisteria
9 years ago

High school can be awful. I enjoyed some of my classes and had some good friends, but I was considered a nerd and I wasn’t popular at all. We had mandatory pep rallies (both the principal and vice-principal were former coaches) and I would get ice and paper cups thrown at me by some of the other students during them, because I wasn’t enthusiastic enough about our lackluster football team.

College was much better. So, aworldanonymous, I think things will improve for you once you’re in college.

Rahu
Rahu
9 years ago

We need a time machine to bring some of the women warriors of ancient cultures here … they could give Roissy a really personal demonstration of their strength and skill with swords and spears …

OOOOOOO, yes, TKUH!

I’m thinking Boudicca, for example.

aworldanonymous
9 years ago

So for those of us who don’t mind darker electronic music as brain bleach I offer up one of the most original and inventive artists in the modern day electro-industrial scene.

ersatzmoons
ersatzmoons
9 years ago

Roissy’s rant reminded me of Jenna Marbles’ video on Sports Bras in response to the columnist. If you don’t want watch her whole rant, at 2:25 she compares her body dressed up as a athlete versus her body in a bikini. Jenna received a Masters in Sports Psychology from BU and previously worked as a go-go dancer.

It’s amusing that for someone to claims to know so much about women’s bodies, he doesn’t know a lot about how they look.

Argenti Aertheri
Argenti Aertheri
9 years ago

Unter Null? O.O! Yes please!

On topic — down side of moving back in with my parents? I spent the entire Olympics listening to this shit from my father — he was literally unable to watch a sport with women in it without going on about their breasts, or lack thereof, or “look at that one’s nose”, or some other shit about “that broad”. (And I’m apparently the problem because I have an attitude problem when it comes to replying to his shit and I swear and he’s sick of me and ARGLEBARGLE)

…that was only half on topic, sorry <.>

The Kittehs’ Unpaid Help — wolves may not have alphas anymore but afaik certain fish species still do, so call the kitteh an alpha if you want? (I’m thinking of clown loaches here, and they usually have an alpha female, which would just royally piss off the MRM XD )

Argenti Aertheri
Argenti Aertheri
9 years ago

Wow, I am out of practice at this whole internet thing, I broke my cranky face!

>.< — twice over now (and my apologies for both the personal rant, and the double post)

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
9 years ago

@ersatzmoons

I wish there was a way to go over to Roissy’s blog and say “fucking sports bras – how do they work?” without giving him my IP address.

Snowy
Snowy
9 years ago

Tor proxy!

teiresias
teiresias
9 years ago

The sixpack thing is utterly nuts, even by Roissy’s standards. Words do not exist to describe someone who finds a sixpack on a woman unattractive. They really don’t.

Molly moon
Molly moon
9 years ago

So we’re fit-shaming now? Gotcha

RubyHypatia
RubyHypatia
9 years ago

Obviously there’s an evolutionary advantage to women being athletic, because after all, we are athletic. That women have often been treated as fragile little flowers is purely cultural, and probably meant to feed the male ego.

jcyang
jcyang
9 years ago

I dunno, I think there’s some credit to the evolutionary aspect. Although there’s nothing wrong with what a woman wants to do with her body, this appears to be an attempt at “equalizing” our physical differences, when they are, clearly different. Ignorance is not tolerance.

lowquacks
lowquacks
9 years ago

@teiresias

They do, and one of them might be “lowquacks” if I were keen on describing things as unattractive rather than just Not Being Into Them. Having opinions on what you dig lookswise is one thing; typing long angry gender-policing rants about people who don’t fit your standards implying that women are only good for sex is quite another.

teiresias
teiresias
9 years ago

lowquacks:

Well, that’s the key difference isn’t it?

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
9 years ago

Yeah, I have to back lowquacks up here. I don’t find super muscly women particularly attractive (or super muscly men either, actually). That’s a personal sexual preference, and it’s a rather different thing from insisting that nobody in the world finds physical characteristic X attractive and therefore it is bad and wrong for people to have that characteristic.

Kakanian
Kakanian
9 years ago

>until sports programs and funding return to what they once were: mostly geared toward men.

I would really like to make a joke about how those “Sexy Sport Clips” aren’t about sport at all, but I think it would go over everyone’s head.

%d bloggers like this: