The Al Jazeera English show I’m appearing on starts in about 10 minutes, at 3:30 PM
You can watch a live stream of the show (TheStream) on the Al Jazeera website here.
It’s a proud day for the dudes over at A Voice for Men, which is celebrating the landing of the Curiousity rover on Mars by giving dudes everywhere serious dude credit for the event, which apparently involved no women at all. Well, maybe a few. But it certainly didn’t involve any of the women in the women’s studies department at Columbia University!
Actually it would be rather difficult for that to be the case. Impossible, really, as there is no women’s studies department at Columbia. Instead, Columbia has an Institute for Research on Women and Gender, an interdisciplinary center that works in cooperation with the Barnard College Women’s Studies department.
In any case, that once sentence is the entire text of the post, which linked to a live feed of the landing.
But to make sure everyone understands the MAN-significance of this MAN-vent, the AVFM dudes promoted it with this MAN-tastic blurb on the front page. (I mean the blurb on the right, of course, celebrating MEN and their UTTER MASTERYof technology. Just ignore that bit on the left about the technical glitches that AVFM has itself been having lately.)
The comments are more or less what we’ve come to expect from the AVFM crowd. I especially liked these two, from a manly fellow calling himself ActaNonVerba.
His followup is a bit Anthony Zarat-esque in its utopian grandeur:
I will be appearing on Al Jazeera English tomorrow talking about misogyny online. The show I’m going to appear on is called TheStream; it’s on at 3:30 PM ET.
You can watch a live stream of the show on the Al Jazeera website here.
If you want to be part of the discussion on the show, you can record a comment for the show’s producers here, or on the main page for TheStream. Some of the questions they’re asking:
Do women face more misogyny online than they do in person? Why? Does it reflect real sentiment or opportunistic, anonymous behavior? Have you experienced harassment as a woman online? What can be done about it?
I’m really looking forward to the show. It should be interesting.
If you have any suggestions about issues I should raise or points you think it’s important to make, let me know in the comments below.
They remain adorable and tiring, though they’ve calmed down a little from the first few days. I think coming from a cage (filled with other kittens) to a big apartment overstimulated them a bit and gave them a desire to run and run (and play and play, and fight and fight).
So, yeah, I’ve been reading some more Roosh.
Just a little FYI. It’s probably not a good idea to take dating advice from a dude who writes shit like this:
Your fuck funnel is the series of steps you take from the approach all the way to sex. Most girls will drop out as they go through your funnel by losing interest, declaring they have a boyfriend, flaking out, throwing up, or a multitude of other reasons that prevent sex. This means that for ever one girl you fuck, you have to approach a lot of girls. This is the basic law of averages, where no man fucks every girl he interacts with (even serial rapists have a failure rate).
Or this:
The best sex I’ve had was from mediocre girls who let me treat their bodies like garbage receptacles.
Or this:
I could probably have raw dog sex with 95% of all white girls, regardless of socioeconomic background. I only have met one girl that was super serious about using condoms, but I eventually fucked her without a condom too, so actually I change that to 100%. I could bang every white girl who lives in the United States without a condom if I desired, within three dates. I’m not kidding. I could do most of them raw dog on the same night. Here’s how to do it. ….
At this point our intrepid dating guru explains his clever Assange-esque (allegedly) method for convincing women to have sex with him sans condom, which involves repeatedly sticking his condomless penis into his dates until they stop resisting.
Note: He followed this post with another one about how terrified he was that he might have contracted HIV.
Oh, Roosh, is it entirely by coincidence that your name rhymes with “douche?”
Men’s Rights subreddit regular Demonspawn (remember him?) is back again with some deliberately vague but definitely threatening talk about judges and politicians:
Not a lot of “plausible deniability” here, though I am sure various MRAs will try to excuse this as not being what it obviously is: a threat of violence against judges, politicians and others who work for the government.
He’s done this before; I wrote about it here.
And while we’re on the topic of Demonspawn, here’s a little followup comment of his from the thread we discussed the other day. It’s a giant wall of text, I know, but it contains gems like: “When women mouth off to men and get their faces bashed in, they’ll know equality.” At least this comment of his got as many downvotes as upvotes.
I’m banned from the Men’s Rights subreddit, of course, but Demonspawn, despite repeatedly violating the subreddit’s rules about posting comments advocating violence, continues to post away. See his comment history for more lovely thoughts on, among other things, why women are parasites who don’t deserve the vote.
In yet another discussion of Arthur Goldwag’s latest post on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Hatewatch blog (looking at MRAs bad-mouthing the men who lost their lives protecting their girlfriends in the Aurora shootings), longtime Men’s Rights Redditor Liverotto offers this intriguing take on what he sees as Goldwag’s motivations for criticizing the Men’s Rights movement:
Yeah, a dude actually wrote that, and a couple of people actually upvoted it.
I’m trying to understand the logic: Goldwag is growing older and more homosexual (do men usually become gay as they age?). But gay men age badly, which makes them mad at their “suitors.” So therefore Goldwag has come to hate the (mostly straight) men of the Men’s Rights movement?
Another highlight of the discussion: The r/mensrights regular who thinks I’m Paul Elam. No, really.
Ladies! Do you want to look younger? Forget green tea moisturizers and cucumber face masks and exfoliating gloves! Don’t waste your hard-earned stolen-from-men money on $200 Clarisonic Skincare Brushes or Botox or Shiseido Benefiance Pure Retinol Instant Treatment Eye Masks, whatever those are. Pickup guru Krauser, of Krauser’s PUA Adventures, offers four simple rules to help you look your best!
1) Don’t live past the age of 30!
Women possess a short fragile bloom of youth. From about age fifteen their body begins to take on a woman’s shape but it takes time for her to grow into it – to lose the puppy fat, have her hips widen, and develop the poise of a real woman – so she is kinda cute but not really able to inspire lust. Depending on the girl she’ll hit her true bloom somewhere near nineteen years old and hold it for a maximum of five years. She can continue to be sexy into her late twenties but the unmistakeable radiance diminishes.
2) Avoid “excessive careerism,” or, really, any job with any responsibilities at all:
Women are not designed to carry the weight of the world on their shoulders. Look at photos of Clint Eastwood or Charles Bronson. When a man carries responsibility he takes on a weathered look that adds value. A weathered woman looks horrible.
3) Don’t drink (at least more than is necessary to convince yourself to have sex with Krauser):
Men are constituionally far more capable of holding their beer over time than women. It’s not merely because a man’s physique is less important in determining his overall value. Women who drink even 10 units a week are seriously messing up their hormones, their shape, and their skin.
4) Don’t have sex with more than one penis!
“[G]ood girls” who follow a healthy lifestyle and identify with the feminine last longer than “bad girls” who chart a path through hedonistic waters. …
Sex in itself adds to a woman’s glow but sex with different men detracts from it. A woman who gets herself fucked 500 times by one guy she loves will look good. If the same woman spreads those fucks across 30 guys she will look like shit.
Let’s do the math here:
One penis x 500 fuckings per penis =Youthful bloom!
30 penises x 16.67 fuckings per penis = Weathered crone look!
And remember, gals, once you’ve “squandered” your “bloom,” that’s it: “Once it’s gone, it’s gone forever.”
Happily, at least for Krauser’s readers, there is no similar aging effect from contact with multiple vaginas. Evidently, the more vaginas your penis touches, the better! At least I assume that’s the case. Why else would Krauser devote his entire life to teaching those with penises how to get these penises into as many vaginas as possible?
Over on the Men’s Rights subreddit, some of the fellas are discussing a recent post from Arthur Goldwag on the Southern Poverty Law Center Hatewatch blog. Goldwag looks at some of the hero-bashing comments from MRAs in the wake of the Aurora shootings, which we’ve discussed here and here.
This somehow inspires the prolix Men’s Right Redditor Demonspawn to set forth some of his opinions about (most) women and how shitty they are. The whole discussion is worth reading, as a sort of case study in MRA hypocrisy: all this woman-hatred comes in a thread in which Reddit MRAs wax indignant once again that anyone might possibly label them hateful. (Also, how dare women suggest that there’s anything untoward about a dude hanging onto nude pics of an ex, when clearly not deleting them is a sign of “respect.”)
Looks like Demonspawn won himself a convert! Congrats. you beautiful douchebag.
When I think about contraception, my thoughts generally run to things like this:
“Is this condom on inside-out? Oh, crap.”
“I guess IUD’s aren’t necessarily a good idea for some women unless they like bleeding from their vagina every day for six months.”
“Has anyone ever actually used a female condom?”
Over on Complementarian Loners, an MRA-adjacent “relationship” blog written by a couple of Catholic converts, the bitter divorced dude who calls himself 7man has some more, well, advanced ideas about contraception. By “advanced” I mean, of course, “odd and terrible.”