In a discussion of Britain’s financial troubles on the Happy Bachelors Forum, a dude calling himself rebel managed to tease out some good news in the prospect of complete financial meltdown: the collapse of civilization might just serve to put the wimminz in their place!
Let’s face it: feminism was possible only through oppulence [sic]. The richer the country the worse it got.
Now the opposite is happening: we may have to suffer not being able to buy that new pair of shoes, but women will become less arrogant when they will have to live on bread crumbs.
I say keep them starved, skinny and obedient. Civilization is harmful to men: it causes women to go haywire.
If the economy tanks, men will be the winners.
“Oppulence?” Apparently, in the brave new post-civilization world, correct spelling will be a luxury we can no longer afford.
EDIT: Screencap for those not registered at Happy B:
Fellas, be careful out there, lest you run across the single gravest threat to modern man, and probably civilization itself: the single mom. These money-hungry, baby-hungry monsters will seduce you and abandon you, after extracting from you the magical substance that allows them to pop forth babies that you will have to pay for forever. Young or old, straight or lesbian, they all want your sperm and your money.
At least that’s the argument of a dude calling himself The Fourth Planet on the LoveShack.org message boards. I’ve put some especially good bits in bold.
[T]he time has come to look at male sexuality as a weakness that makes men vulnerable to all kinds of predator. It’s a sexual vulnerability that makes you prey to baby mama or baby-hungry women. …
Your sexuality is tolerated only when it’s necessary to provide young women, long past menopausal women, lesbians, single mothers by choice … with children. In other words, only for as long as it serves women’s needs to satisfy their baby urges. …
Women’s sexuality gives them, and the state, almost unlimited power to control men. As long as women are free to use their power of sex to exploit men, then all the things we resent in women will continue and get worse.
Our weakness for pussy is … being used to destroy us. …
You must reject single mothers because she represents all of the things that destroy men, our children, our families, and our communities. …
Today, women only engage in sex for as long as it takes to establish a claim on a man’s resources. In other words, through marrying and divorcing him or having a man’s child out of wedlock. They want the benefits that that provides in marriage, but not the commitment to one man. That’s because they want to be free to use their sexuality for themselves and be free to exploit other men for their resources.
Fuck those bitches. They didn’t invent air conditioning!
How to win friends and garner dozens of upvotes in the Men’s Rights subreddit on Reddit: Bash out a barely coherent stream-of-consciousness rant suggesting that women are ungrateful bitches because they don’t mine coal, and didn’t invent air conditioning or hunt mammoths. Of course, no one posting in the Men’s Rights subreddit has done any of those things either, but apparently everyone with a penis gets automatic credit for them.
Here’s the post, from some dude called TheGrendler:
We men built a nice safe world for you all the the coal-mines of death, roads, railroads, bridges and tall office buildings. Its $1,000,000 spent per death of a man on a large dangerous project on average now you can just 9-5 it and call it a day in air-conditioned and heated safety. Forget about the wars we died in and the sacrifices made just ignore history or is it now hersorty? You are accruing the benefits without ever having to pay the price you still don’t have to sign up for the draft and who will protect you? The Sex and the City girls will fight off the North Koreans with their Manolo Blahniks?
Men gave you this modern world now you take it for granted we hunted the mammoth to feed you we died in burning buildings and were gassed in the trenches but that was just for fun right?
How quick and conveniently you forget who made this possible.
We gave you Leonardo da Vinci, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy not to mention countless others, Jonas Salk saved half the world from death and you just piss on it all.
Shame on you,
You hedonistic, narcissistic, sociopath metastasizing cancer.
Whatever happened to live together die alone?
Damn you ungrateful sluts for enjoying air conditioning, despite the fact that it was invented by a dude! (Probably. I didn’t check.) Only dudes should enjoy things invented by other dudes! Jonas Salk was a dude! Only dudes should get the polio vaccine! How do you like your polio, you fancy-shoe wearing bitches!!!?? You should have thought of that before you went and didn’t invent the motherfucking polio vaccine!!!
And you can just forget about reading any motherfucking Dostoevsky! Only dudes can read Dostoevsky! You filthy whores stick to Jane Austen!
As many of you have no doubt noticed — what with the literally dozens of news stories and op-ed pieces on the subject that have appeared in the media in the last week or so — incoming Speaker of the House John Boenher is a bit of a weeper. While some have scoffed at his public crying jags, quite a few people, including some who don’t like his politics at all, have stepped forward to defend his right to cry.
Women have been especially quick to jump to his defense, at least when it comes to the crying thing. In the Washington Post, Ruth Marcus announced that she wanted “to celebrate the lachrymose speaker-to-be and hope that he helps make the world safe for public crying.” Rachel Maddow devoted a whole segment of her show to a defense of his shows of emotion — while pointing out that while Boehner has been moved to tears by the plight of American schoolchildren, his policies will inevitably result in massive budget cuts for education.
But the most, er, original interpretation of the whole crying thing comes from one commenter on NiceGuy’s MGTOW [Men Going Their Own Way] forum, who sees this female defense of Boehner’s right to cry as … an evil female plot to make him look bad. As Phloridian put it in a recent posting:
By now many of us have become aware of the crying episodes of John Boehner who is soon to become the next Speaker of the House.
Women all over the media have been insisting that it is alright, but snickering about it covertly. The piece on 60 Minutes has virtually doomed any chance of becoming President and he is beginning to become a laughing stock.
This is why women are not to be trusted. They will encourage men to cry, and expose their vulnerabilities all in an effort to weaken the man. That’s what’s being done here and it sickens me.
Women are devious creatures indeed! It makes me want to cry.
Have you ever sat down to write up a little list of pros and cons, only to find that you can’t think of any pros at all? That was the dilemma faced by a number of regulars on the grotesquely misnamed NiceGuy MGTOW [Men Going Their Own Way] forums when the subject of “what women offer” to men came up the other day. Nightstorm introduced the topic thusly:
It just seems women cannot offer a man anything these days. The days of “well.. I have a pussy”, just doesn’t seem to cut it anymore.
Don’t I know it! I can’t tell you how many conversations I’ve had with the ladies that go just like this:
INTERIOR, FANCY RESTAURANT, EVENING
DAVID sits eating a delicious steak while his date, a SEXY LADY, picks nervously at her tiny salad.
So why am I paying attention to you?
Well, I have a pussy.
A pussy, you say?
Yeah. Right down here, in my pants.
That might work with some guys, but that it ain’t gonna work with me! Pussy just doesn’t cut it any more!
(Holding up hand)
Meet Pamela Hand-erson — the only pussy I’ll ever need!
SEXY LADY quietly weeps.
DAVID Oh, by the way, you’re paying for dinner.
And … scene!
Nightstorm, a fair and open-minded fellow, did concede that women had some good points, a few of them anyway, and set out to write up a list of pros and cons. First, the pros. Read this carefully, ladies. These are the only good things you bring to the table:
Pussy Emotional support (if its a decent chick) which can ranged from listening to you, to snuggling, ect. Sammichs Something cute to look at while they are young A cure for lonliness
Yes, “lonliness.” Spell-checking is for bitches and hoes.
Predictably, Nightstorm’s “Cons” list was a lot longer. Some selected highlights:
Bankrupcy. A chick will cause your wealth to go DOWN. One of my cousins knew a guy who would literally be a millionare if his wife didn’t spend. Bitching. Yes, they nag and vex your soul to death when they do not get their little ways. Manipulation and Control. What? You don’t want to do the dishs for me? No sex tonight!!! … Loud. Women have high pitched voices, who’s bright idea was it to use it all the time making screetching noises? Trashy. Once they get what they want (marriage), then they stop working on themselves. Now they let themselves go. Divorce. See Bankrupcy. Once you wake up to these ho’s, they have alittle secret.. their taking HALF of what you own. Cheaters. They will go sleep with other men if things don’t work out with you, you don’t mind.. right? Entitlement. They deserve it all because they have been born with a pussy hole. Dangerous. You can’t be you around women. One false word and it could be jail time for you till the manginas say its enough.
Naturally, others piped up with their own observations. Not many “pros.” Lots of “cons.” Some found it hard to think of a single good thing to say about women. IHateRegistering summed up his feelings with an enigmatic one-liner, declaring women: “Reused and retreaded wares at government-mandated retail prices.” (Uh, what?) Cherishthehate, living up to his name, concluded that women were more or less entirely useless:
I have let this question ruminate for the last couple of hours while doing other stuff. Basically I came up with nothing.
Pussy? Meh. … I once thought of trying gay just to get a decent blowjob. (jk of course 🙂 ) …
Companionship? Again, I have known very few women who you could have a decent conversation with that didn’t focus on clothes, TV or their friends’ love lives. …
Women basically contribute nothing to a relationship, the onus is always on the man to keep them happy. If you ever ask a woman what she brings to the table in a relationship you will be mostly met with blank stares. It is a total non sequitur for them.
True, a couple of commenters did stand up to defend the virtues of women. Well, sort of. Seems like the ladies can be worth keeping around, so long as you keep them in check. As fschmidt put it:
I would like to remind the gentlemen here that most of the cons listed are the result of mistakes made by men, mistakes like giving women the vote. When properly managed, women are an asset.
Ah, giving women the right to vote. I always knew that was a terrible idea.
So the fine fellows on The Spearhead have taken up the issue of women in the military. DevilDog, a Marine, started off the discussion with a clear statement of his central thesis, that most women in the military are “USELESS … god damn whores.” Here are some of the highlights, by which I mean lowlights. (In this and following comments I’ve bolded the bits that grabbed my attention.)
[T]he majority of the women in the military… ARE USELESS! … women cannot pass the PT standards for the average male, okay, so they lower em for women, many women cannot even pass the lowered standards, they don’t get kicked out though … These god damn whores walk around with an over-inflated ego because of this and think they’re GI Janes who can kick anyones ass… A lot of these girls are ugly as SH!T, but are given a lot of attention because we’re all horny and wanna fuck. We call ‘em desert queens, a 4/10 Female gets attention and thinks shes a 9/10..
You guys wouldn’t believe some of the stories I have: women getting gangbanged by 10 Marines, same woman who has a Husband and children. Women blowing officers for privileges, while her family is at home.. Believe me, IT’S RAMPANT. …
Oh and SO MANY F***ING WOMEN CHEAT on their husbands while they’re deployed fighting in Afghan. Unfaithful whores.
We MEN have fought for thousands of years, and continue to fight and protect, then some fucking slut comes along and does 1/100th of the job we do, and is praised by the white knights, media, and general american population as a f***ing GI Jane empowered goddess and shit.
Taking up the contrary position was … well, nobody. One brave soul stood up to say that, while he basically agreed with DevilDog’s post, he noted that on a trip he made to an air force base that “I expected the women to look like blocks, but I was quickly disabused of the expectation. The women were overwhelmingly good looking.” This small divergence from the majority view earned his comment 61 downvotes.
A few others weighed in with thoughts on women in the corporate world. According to Keyster,
There always seems to be a few decent women who “get it”, but typically most of them get very little done and stir up trouble when they try to work. Their blatant incompetence is always excused because they’re women. If you complain about them, you’ll be the one who’s punished. You have to tolerate them, cover for them and pretend they’re good at what they do.
I’m not in the military but I do work with a lot of women. … [T]hey clearly do not have comparable problem solving ability or inclination. When it comes to figuring out how to go about something they’re terrible. Their strategy is always to bring more people in, have more conference calls, spend more time talking.
50 upvotes for this one. So women are useless in the military or in the civilian workplace. What about in the home? Nothingbutthetruth, thinking outside the box, suggested that if men were physically capable of giving birth “I am sure they would [do] a better job [as wives and mothers] than women as with everything.”
So, in summary: women bad, men good, even at giving birth (if they could).
Oh, by the way, my title for this post is a Saturday Night Live reference. A really old SNL reference. Fuck, I’m old.
Also, if you decide to read the whole depressing Spearhead discussion, you will notice someone posting there as “David F.” That person is not me.
Younger women have realised that instead of spending the day listening to some bore drone on about sales figures, it might be more fun to go swimming with the children while the cleaner sorts out the house.
2) Decide that this dumb, irritating woman is somehow a “feminist,” even though she actually mocks feminists at one point and, oh yeah, her whole life plan for her daughter is pretty much the exact polar opposite of feminism.
The 21st anniversary of the Montreal Massacre this Monday naturally inspired some discussion anongst Men’s Rightsers and Men Going Their Own Way. And so it was only a matter of time until someone posted something essentially justifying Marc Lepine’s murderous rampage. On NiceGuy’s MGTOW Forums, Kargan3033’s only real objection to Lepines’ actions was that he picked the wrong targets — women who weren’t actually feminists. Here are the key parts of what is his own Lepine-style manifesto. It’s badly written, and full of typos, but it’s worth slogging through simply because it is so utterly vile. I’ve bolded the creepiest parts.
Was ML right in doing what he did?, in my opinion yes and no, yes that he had the right idea and no that he picked the wrong targets.
If I was ever to pull an ML, I would go to the femanazis and their goverment pimp daddies and start handing out some FMJ [Full Metal Jacket] love notes to them, not some innocet person in the streets that I would run into, why you might ask, that simple to make it clear to the femanazis and their goverment whore misters that “You keep pushing and abusing men you will pay for it with your live’s blood personaly” and by taking out the femanazis and the evil scum sucking traitors who sold out their fellow men for a wiff of pussy and more power you would be sending a clear message to the public that one you are not some crazed gun man who walked into the local walmart and capped off a bunch of random strangers and second of all that the reason why you went postal was because of the shit and abuse that you suffered because you are a man thanks to the femanazis and their goverment pimp daddies and you settled the issue with them Personaly which would give you more respect in the eyes of men and most of socity at large because you delt with the ones who pushed you to far instead of gunning down innocent men, ladies and child who happened to be in the worng place at the worng time.
Also by taking out the femanazis and their goverment puppet masters you will inspire other men who are to the snaping point to got after their True Abusers and not innocent people.
All in all we are going to see more and more MLs as the femanazis and their goverment pimp daddies keep puting the screws to men which in turn will cause them to tighten the screws to the men and boys which will inspire more revenge and the spilling of their blood untill western socitey tears it’self apart.
Kargan3033 was so proud of this comment he posted it to AntiMisandry.com. He was quick to add that it was “not a call to violance” [sic]. Really? Then what on earth is it?
People like this aren’t just wrong. They’re dangerous.
Hello, lover! (When they say “All-Purpose,” they MEAN IT!)
The Happy Bachelors of the Happy Bachelors Forum may not be so happy, but you can’t say they’re not ingenious — and thrifty! In a recent discussion of masturbation, onezero4u asked
anybody tried the “fleshlight” before????
i made a homemade one out of half a empty caulk tube, about 10″ of bicycle inner tube to line the inside & some duct tape to secure it on the outside. dammmmm i didnt leave the house for a month after that.
That’s right. He turned a caulk tube into a … cock tube.
I also like how he specifies he used ten inches of inner tube. Because this guy having sex with a caulk tube wants you to know he’s hung like Ron Jeremy!
Great. Now I’ve got to get THAT image out of my head.
I’m beginning to suspect that the Happy Bachelors who populate the Happy Bachelors Forum are not quite as happy as they let on. Why is this? Well, when anyone suggests that their single status might in any way be undesirable, they don’t brush the comment off like most of us reasonably well-adjusted unmarried guys do. No, they get mad. Really mad. And they start talking about “femhags,” “fem-nags,” bitches and hoes (not the garden implement).
Maybe I shouldn’t have waited [to get married], because it seems like every unmarried guy in the age range I’m looking for (40 to about 50) is a loser of one sort or another. If the guy has never been married, he’s either got commitment issues, or he’s lacking in social skills, or he drinks too much or has some other unattractive qualities. If he’s divorced, he’s either angry at women or so desperate to find a new one that he wants to hook up before he even knows you.
This comment is like a red flag to the Happy Bachelor bulls, who release a torrent of abuse that inadvertently reinforces every negative stereotype in the woman’s email. After a few comments lauding the superiority of young Thai and Filipina women over fortysomething American gals, spocksdisciple gets the woman-hating orgy underway. (I’ve bolded some of the best — as in worst — bits in his comment and some of the others.)
Women like this lack an essential quality to even begin to comprehend why they are such total failures in their relationships.
That essential quality is that of introspection and reflection, instead of asking what bad choices she’s made and her role in making these choices, she goes on the typical female tirade about how it’s the fault of all the men around her. …
I see lots and lots of cats in her future and nothing else, I will enjoy the upcoming decades as more and more of these useless bitches end up alone and going stir crazy. I’m betting that many of them will end up abusing drugs or alcohol to make their pain bearable. I will laugh at them because even then they will not look inwards to see if they were in part responsible for ending up alone.
[W]omen are not capable of introspection, its always someone else’s fault. They don’t realize that their being cum dumpsters, going for Alphas, and their hypergamy destroys their chance at landing a mangina. They don’t have a beta male mangina…because…they overlooked them…and still are. I think you are right, these aging women that are alone will be screwed up mentally. …
Women just don’t know what to do with themselves. … Coming home to a quiet and empty home for them…is like descending into hell because they don’t know what to do once they get there. Men get hobbies. For them Its get drunk, or watch So You Think You Can Dance or the Bachelor…hahaha…..nothing goes on inside those heads of theirs.
I’m assuming he’s not the real Marcus Aurelius — I’m pretty sure the original Marcus Aurelius never used the term “cum dumpster.”
Others contribute their own insights about women. In the process, Curiepoint explains why he never became a firefighter:
I find it an honor to be so offensive to the likes of women. After a lifetime of looking after everyone else, bowing and scraping for a meagre paycheck, and kissing the ass of a woman who voraciously consumed everything I had (two of them, actually) I am more than proud to stand in defiance of any woman’s shitty personality.
I wouldn’t piss on a woman if she were on fire. Chances are, that would amount to one huge, spitting grease fire, given how “hot” women are comprised mostly of blubber and cheap rayon clothing. …
Women aren’t worth the effort to work up enough spit to hurl at them. And, any man who would actually cave in to her demands deserves to burn right along side them. They are not men. Both barely qualify as being vaguely humanoid.
Lavastorm suggests that perhaps being a winner isn’t what it’s cracked up to be, based on the following (apparently typical) scenario:
So a “winner” is a “man” who follows society’s pre-programmed path to self-destruction (gets married, becomes the wife’s tool to keep up with the neighbors, works in a soul-destroying job, is destroyed by wife when she gets “bored,” gets blamed for “destroying the marriage,” is thrown to the gauntlet of dread judges, retarded pit bulls, and menopausing succubi who commence sucking his blood.
In case you’re wondering: No, he never closes the parenthesis. He’s Going His Own Way, grammatically.