Most misogynists, it would seem, are loath to admit that they’re misogynists. “How can you say I hate women?” they’ll ask. “After all, I love my sister. She’s not like the rest of those whores.” Or, “I just hate Western Women.” Or whatever fine distinction they like to make to pretend that their hatred of pretty much every woman they ever come across, or imagine in their overheated little brains, is something other than misogyny.
Then there are those who not only admit their misogyny but who are downright proud of it, thinking it’s a sign of their own personal superiority. Today, a pretty good example of Proud Misogyny, taken from the reactionary Christian blog Samson’s Jawbone.
Our intrepid woman-hater starts off by contrasting his brand of misogyny to the peculiar kind of woman-appreciation advocated by the PUA gasbag now known as Heartiste (but still known as Roissy when this post was written):
Roissy is fond of saying that he’s not a “misogynist”; no, learning the unvarnished truth about female psychology has given him a *higher* appreciation for women. Not so for me. Sociosexual philosophy has disillusioned me beyond all reckoning. Peering deep into the psyche of woman has rendered me grievously scornful in feeling and mercilessly unscrupulous in behaviour towards these unholy, ungodly beings. I venture to say that… I hate them. Yes, I hate them! And how could I not?
Did I mention that he has literary pretensions as well? Like a lot of reactionaries, Mr. Jawbone has adopted a melodramatic, vaguely archaic prose style that he evidently feels is the height of literary sophistication, but which sounds a lot more like the monologuing of some cartoon villain.
Oh, the vile criteria by which women judge menfolk! O, abominable, loathsome beings!
Is anyone else reminded of Newman from Seinfeld?
But Mr. Jawbone is just getting started:
A creature so damnably constituted as to admire a man for his “social dominance” – by which is meant his ability to waltz through an absurd series of meaningless, contrived riddles – rather than his work ethic, his self-sacrifice, his affability, his charity, his honesty, his justice – in short, his righteousness and integrity; such a creature deserves to be used and abused like a cheap street harlot – or better yet, a vermin-ridden ass – and discarded appropriately. Nothing more; she merits nothing better.
Here’s an actual vermin-ridden ass, having a nice scratch in the dirt:
Oh, but Mr. Jawbone isn’t done yet:
Words like “honour”, “duty”, “kindness”… those things that define goodness and rightness… all meaningless, meaningless to this wretched, wicked half of the human race. And do women who profess belief in something “higher”; women who should know better, afford any solace? No. Instead they show themselves as fraudulent, fickle hellcats who think good men are “weak”. So alas, I can no longer view the distaff horde with anything besides revulsion and contempt. They perjure themselves by their own words; they are beasts, deserving nothing but callous treatment and damnation; and I can wish nothing upon them but furious hatred, ignominy and a miserable passing.
What a cheery fellow!
I take no joy in penning the above – but I feel clean and spotless as the lamb. What else is to be said for a lot that believes black to be white, up to be down, and good men to be worthless? Poor Ashley Wilkes, and all good men.
Hate to break it to you, dude, but you’re not actually a good man. You’re a pompous dickbag. Oh, sorry, you’re a base, proud, shallow, beggarly, three-suited, hundred-pound, filthy, worsted-stocking knave!
(Thanks to Shakespeare for that last insult, and to Quackers for pointing me to Mr. Jawbone’s post.)
@fade
yeah, and I’m mostly tempted to respond ‘well you aren’t a women, so you can’t say how women’s sex drives are’ Any time someone makes a ‘all men/women are x/ so different’ I want them to step on a lego.
Also, a distaff is just a gizmo for holding fiber so you can spin it. Quite useful. I’ve never quite figured out how that became synonymous with “girly stuff,” as opposed to other female-gendered-tools like spindles or needles or large wooden spoons…
@Fade
Well, they are also still claiming that women aren’t capable of real feelings(while at the same time being too emotional), so whatever it is about, we either don’t know what it’s like, don’t have enough of it or too much of it.
more than 200 years, and there’s still no pleasing guys like these.
Whelp, lucky for them, sex bots are only illegal in Canada!
The distaff was a symbol of female authority in an English household. I am guessing that it had to do with who decided the flax was ready to spin.
It’s so turgid I think it’s made me constipated
I asked my gf is she is a feminist and her response was: “Not at all, I hate most women.” I pointed out that she is a woman and she snapped back with “most doesn’t mean all, you douchebag!”. ‘Nuff said.
Ah, but you see, it involves a keen balancing act of the most astute of logic, nay, most sheer adroit focus of intelligence to uncover. To wit, bear witness:
If we assume that all womenfolk are emotional hellcats, then it follows that they are:
1) emotional
2) hellcats.
I repeat myself, says you, my most patient audience? Ah! But the repetitions the thing that’ll unmask the core o’ it all: FORSOOTH, see this is the magic of the moment!
Hellcats are felines most frightful from the frigid, festering foul vaguely Fallopian depths of hell. Hence the prefix. And beings from Hell are per definition creatures of endless guile, bad manners and lies. Lies, says I? Yes! Lies, my complete rational followers.
So if females are hellcats, and they are emotional, they must be able to only feel fake emotions! Have I blown your minds? I have indeed proven the noble adage that no woman can feel any real emotion despite being emotional! I am a true wunderkind of doublethink. My cognitive dissonances reaches astounding heights, astronomical heights, heights undreamed of by mere philosophers, lofty and airy structures of Thinking only reachable by the rigorous application of Inverse Logic. Logic that bears no relation to the muckracking, dirt bound aspirations of common sense. Pfah. Common sense is just another Feminist ideal, and we all know where they get those! Quantum mehanics. Female intuition. Nay, brothers! Onwards! Let’s Logic ourselves way, way out of the stratosphere.
—
Don’t think I quite have the style down.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Yer funny, zach. But not that funny. Just because love is transitive does not imply that it is symmetric. That is, loving someone else does not guarantee nor obligate them to love you back. If you want to be successful in terms of romance & sex, you have to be attractive to others. And unfortunately, espousing love to those you desire is just not enough to make them feel the same way. I realize people hear are going to chew me out for this because it’s not very romantic sounding, but it’s true. If you love women as a group that’s certainly sweet of you, but it irks me how you try to lie to yourself and to others that by doing so you’re going to get something from any of them for it. This is exactly the mistaken thinking that so-called “nice guys” make.
Jawboner thinks Gone With the Wind was a documentary.
But Zach, that would mean thinking that women are people.
It’s a bit like if Joaquin Phoenix’s character in Gladiator got really really drunk, and then someone asked him about his sister and set him off.
I get really pissed about the sex drive one.
I’m trans, okay? Even if you’re a strict biological literalist, I’ve been on testosterone and had the hormonal levels of a cis man. Did it change how I experienced sexual desire? Yes. But it was SO not uncontrollable, and it was SO not an excuse for bad behavior. (I was afraid of T for a long time because I kept hearing stories about trans men suddenly understanding how one could rape. What a relief it was to discover that it was completely untrue, at least for me!)
But I guess because I wasn’t born with the damn thing, that means I don’t count.
RE: Purple Star
My god, for like, most of that paragraph, I actually agreed with what you were saying. You were sooooo close, and then–
it irks me how you try to lie to yourself and to others that by doing so you’re going to get something from any of them for it.
Nah, dude. I love someone to love someone. Loving someone on its own feels good. I don’t do it in the expectation of getting something out of the deal! I love humanity, because… humanity is lovable. I don’t expect them to love me back.
And the Purple Star has demonstrated that he has managed to find a woman as thick headed as he is.
***Applause***
@The Purple Star:
Actually, I doubt anyone here really has much to chew you out for for stating that expecting people to love you back just because you love them is generally not a good idea.
Pretty much a given. Yep. Sort of a fairly normal statement. Emotional manipulation does not engender love. Can’t find much there to chew on. I agree with you.
Of course, everyone knows Zach there hardly meant love as in literally stating your adoration 3 seconds after meeting someone. In fact, Zach was probably aiming for the more nebulous concept of not regarding sex and romance as an arithmetic contest between variables of behavior and hierarchies of attraction. In fact, I’d take it so far to assume that Zach probably meant that loving women as a group would imply that you don’t, oh, I don’t know, random example, expect them to be stimulus response units set up to react to certain triggers in relation to your activities. As if, hmhm, doing anything else was some kind of lie one told one self to… live with a callous reality wherein people were merely responders, instead of inherent lovable beings in and of themselves.
So we agree! Awesome.
Lady Stark – find, or imagine? 😉
LBT:
That sounds utterly horrifying (to be told). Must have been a terrifying unknown to imagine. Thing is, it’s probably the flipside – people who were the kind of people who would rape someone suddenly have an excuse. Oh! It was my much higher T levels and the treatment.
Totally.
Honest, swear-to, Officer.
Oh, you’d do the same thing if you felt what I was feeling!
Bees. My god.
(Hello, first time commenter, long-time reader!)
I actually wasn’t sure whether Purple Star was a troll or not, since most of zir second comment was totally accurate. But yeah, just because your girlfriend said that, doesn’t mean all women are going to agree. We’re all, you know, DIFFERENT PEOPLE.
The Purple Puncher is back!
I’ve learned so much from him!
1)his girlfriend knows most women
2)Disliking someone is enough reason to deny them equal rights
3)specialest snowflakes! Because hating your own gender means you’re different from those bitches!
Fibinachi… are you a fellow Linkara fan?
If not, you should be.
But…Scarlett was crazy about Ashley Wilkes. He’s the one who rejected her, rebuffing her advances to marry Melanie. In fact, he’s pretty popular with the ladies in general, so I’m not sure how he’s an example of women treating good men badly.
(Not that I think Ashley is a particularly good man, since he’s also super racist, but so is everyone else in Gone With the Wind.)
RE: Fibinachi
It was a pretty scary thing. Even now, I still sometimes wonder if maybe the only reason I didn’t get it was that I wasn’t a real man. *shudder* Thankfully, those thoughts pass briefly.
I feel bad about it, but I don’t want to understand how someone could rape another on anything but an intellectual level.
@Karalora
I think they actually mean “how come this very specific subset of women I fancy who have nothing in common with me don’t want me? Boohoo, how unfair!” Women=2% of women between 14 and 22 (though to some, 22 year olds are clearly old hags for their stunning 45 year old body.
Women are superficial, you see?
I’ve never seen a purple star, I never hope to see one, but I can tell you anyhar I’d rather see than be one.
See, lonely single guys? There really is a perfect match for everyone. Look how The Purple Star has managed to find someone as abrasively unpleasant as he is.
@LBT
Just wondering (read as: I have no fucking idea what I’m talking about), one trans woman told me she did experience a heightened sex drive with hormones, so I always assumed it had more to do with psychological aspects, being more comfortable with oneself(yeah, because of one woman, but what she said made me happy so I chose to stick with confirmation bias I guess). Haven’t really looked into it. Don’t know how to phrase my question, any comments? Or reading tips, this interests me a lot.
But I can imagine it was hard, the thought that your hormones might change your nature that much sounds really scary…