We Hunted The Mammoth

>Hey, where’s my comment?! Hint: Spam filter

Post author By David Futrelle
Post date December 18, 2010
1 Comment on >Hey, where’s my comment?! Hint: Spam filter

If you post a comment and don’t see it up on the site immediately, that means it’s been caught by Blogger’s overactive spam filter, which unfortunately I can’t shut off. Unless your comment is incredibly foul or otherwise violates my fairly liberal comments policy, I will un-filter it as soon as I see it. Sometimes this will happen quickly, sometimes slowly. I’m not always online.

If your comment is posted and then later vanishes, that means I deliberately deleted it. But unless you’ve posted something truly awful, or spammy, or you’re among the tiny number of those I’ve banned (which can be counted on one hand), this isn’t going to happen to you.

>All the problems in the world — solved!

Post author By David Futrelle
Post date December 18, 2010
17 Comments on >All the problems in the world — solved!

Adam Smith: Legendary Cockonomist

Sometimes mean people criticize Men’s Rightsers for complaining endlessly on the internet without offering any real solutions to the problems they complain about. Well, the meanies can’t make that criticism any more. Because now we have what is essentially a solution to all the world’s problems, in the form of a five-point “agenda for Nice Guys” set forth by a fellow called genepool on NiceGuy’s MGTOW [Men Going Their Own Way] Forum. It starts off with a bang:

Elimination/reduction of welfare and government’s socialized program. Welfare gives too much power to women. Women that don’t pick you shouldn’t get your money. The money comes with the cock. Sure she has her cunt. Well, you got your cash. Make sure it goes to and only to your biological children.

You may have to read this one twice to understand all the nuances. Anyone having trouble with the cock-centric economic theory here should get out Adam Smith’s Wealth of Cocks and remind themselves how the Invisible Handjob of the market really works. I quote:

It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their cocks. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their hard, throbbing dicks, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of our cunts.

Cocks are led by an invisible handjob, or maybe a blow job if she’s drunk, to make nearly the same distribution of the necessaries of life which would have been made had the earth been divided into equal portions among all its inhabitants, and thus, without intending it, to advance the interest of the society. And possibly to stick it in her butt if she’s a real slut.

Let’s skip point 2 for a moment to quickly cover the last three:

Privatization of marriage. … I do not have exclusive agreement with Mc Donald. Why should I have one with my wife?

Damn you, genepool! You have foiled my plans!

Exactly. Any man who wants to put his dick in a woman who is not his wife, or to perhaps rub it on a Double Whopper at the local Burger King, should be free to do so.

The remaining two points: Legalization of prostitution, and limits on child support for rich dudes. Both total no brainers.

But it is point 2 that is genepool’s truly visionary notion:

Consensual women trafficking. All males in rich countries should support this. You’re rich. Women prefer the rich. You do not need to be deceptive or forceful to get a lot of beautiful women. A long time ago Nazis killed jews. Those Nazis couldn’t kill a lot of jews if the jews can easily immigrate to US, Shanghai, etc. The same way, why bitch about girls getting stoned in Iran? Get them here. However, you won’t do that out of altruism. You need [incentives]. What can those girls become? Sex workers. Keep it real. If it’s consensual, it’s win win and it should be legal.

Win win? Something this brilliant deserves at least four wins. Win win win win. A solution to nice guy loneliness AND the Holocaust! Imagine Anne Frank, sitting quietly up in that attic, scribbling away in that diary of hers. What if she could have gotten on the internet and snagged herself a sweet, shy pedophile in, say, New Jersey? That’s at least slightly preferable to a death camp, right? Problem solved!

Genepool, you are a genius.

antifeminism douchebaggery feminism men who should not ever be with women ever sex

>Hey ladies!

Actual message sent to a women identifying herself as a feminist on an actual dating site, by someone who evidently thought it would totally charm her into hopping in bed with him:

Against my better judgment upon seeing the ‘f’ word, I read your profile in full. I generally eat feminists for breakfast. My favorite meal is a third-wave feminist with a sprinkling of postmodern-pretentiousness (2% caramel version)— quite the delicacy. Anyway, we have absolutely fuck-all in common, I can’t see us ever getting along, and the sex would probably be some sort of power struggle for dominance. I honestly don’t even know why you bother with feminism.

Nothing turns the ladies on more than condescending hostility! I found this on A(n)nals of Online Dating, a treasure trove of interpersonal internet douchebaggery. (Thanks to Amanda Marcotte for alerting me to the existence of this site.)

Uncategorized

>Sharing is caring!

Hey, Man Boobz fans. This little blog of mine, three months old, is starting to reach critical mass. But I could use your help. If you enjoy what you’re reading here, please post about it elsewhere! Some of you guys are tweeting or Facebooking posts of mine, and I appreciate it — a lot. I’ve added a little “Share This” button that makes it extra E-Z to post to all sorts of social networking sites. (It would be especially great if any Redditors here could submit some of my posts to some relevant subreddits there.)

And if you do click that little Share This button, you can have this conversation with a friend:

You: Today I helped make Man Boobz bigger!

Friend: Wait, what? Did you bake John Travolta a pie or something?

You: No, silly. Not that kind of manboobs. Man Boobz, the blog!

Friend: OMFG you are so cool!

I thank you in advance!

EDITED TO ADD: Thanks, Reddit submitters! And tweeters!

discussion of the day evil women masculinity MGTOW precious bodily fluids Uncategorized

>Johnny’s Turn to Cry

Boo fucking hoo.

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.

Uncategorized

>Masculine inadequacies drive women nuts! Also, turtles.

Post author By David Futrelle
Post date December 16, 2010
15 Comments on >Masculine inadequacies drive women nuts! Also, turtles.

Notice they are only attacking him, not her. Clearly, turtles are misandrists!

crackpottery homophobia I'm totally being sarcastic men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny reactionary bullshit sex

>Sperm: It’s What Women Crave!

Post author By David Futrelle
Post date December 16, 2010
18 Comments on >Sperm: It’s What Women Crave!

They want your sperm.

Remember that scene in Dr. Strangelove in which General Jack D. Ripper starts ranting about a “international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids?” Gen. Ripper, of course, was worried about the purported evils of fluoridation. Also, he was a fictional character. But now the “manosphere” has done him one better. A recent post on the Muslim Patriarch blog suggests, with utmost sincerity, that women never truly love men — they just love our most precious bodily fluid. Sperm.

Yep. Fellas, apparently we’re nothing but giant sperm repositories to the ladies. So what evidence has the Muslim Patriarch, aka Samvel Arshavir, got for his novel theory? He claims that his wife seems to treat him worst after the two of them have sex, when his “sperm reserves” are largely depleted. (Emphasis added.)

On the days immediately following an ejaculation, my wife loses all love and respect for me. She treats me like garbage. … I used to think that I have done something wrong for her to so suddenly lose all love for me. …

When I finally understood what was going on, when I understood that it all depended on the amount of sperm stored inside of me, I saw the humor in this love that everyone talks about. … Her love is just a way that nature tells me I have a lot of sperm in my reserves.

Arshavir notes that he hasn’t exactly done the scientific experimentation to prove his new theory. But he has made some careful observations:

My idea of ‘sperm reserve’ isn’t related to anything that scientists say. It is something I have found with experience. If you ejaculate twice or more in one day, the next day your reserves will be around 10%. Women have two terms for this level: douche bag and loser. On day 2 your reserves will go up to 25%. Day 3 they will be at 40%. Day 4 at 50%. As your levels pass 50%, women will start respecting you and finding you attractive. At around two to three weeks of abstinence your levels will have gone to 90%. And when you get a wet dream … you can then know that your levels reached 100%. The night before the wet dream you will be at your most irresistible-to-women phase.

As a former horny teenage boy, I respectfully must disagree with some of his calculations here: the male body seems capable of producing almost endless quantities of sperm upon demand.

But this is a question for the scientists amongst us to debate. Arshavir has bigger fish to fry. His revelations about ladies and sperm have led him to question some of the most fundamental tenets of heterosexual love.

When I have 10 days worth of sperm saved inside of me, when my wife wants to make love to me three times a day, it doesn’t any longer make me feel good about myself, because I now see that it is not an accomplishment. It is not because I am an awesome guy. It is just her animal nature responding to my biology.

This knowledge has freed me from the biggest fraud of our age. The fraud that tells us men to seek happiness in a woman’s love. What a joke.

Ah, but there is a complication here. Unlike sperm-loving women, Arshavir argues, men still can feel love for the ladies. True love, not just crude ovary lust. The only trouble is that those sperm-loving creatures don’t really deserve our love.

Ours is the spiritual love for another being. Theirs is the love for our biology. Their love for our sperm reserves could have easily been a love for big muscles. In both cases it is a purely physical love–nothing that deserves our spiritual love.

So where can a poor fellow find true love today? Dudes.

And I now realize why men like W. S. Maugham become homosexual after delving deep into the nature of women. Once you know that romantic love doesn’t make sense to women … the next logical step is to find a man to love.

If you look for true love, you can only find it in another man.

Wait — “another man?” Seriously? That sounds a little — what’s the word I’m looking for here? — gay. Isn’t this blog titled “Muslim Patriarch?” But don’t worry. Our intrepid patriarchal blogger hasn’t gone all gay on us. He is quick to add the obligatory “NO HOMO,” in the parlance of our times. Love other men, but just do it in a totally non-gay way.

The idea of having sex with another man is utterly disgusting to me. The mistake of men like Maugham is that they fail to separate love from sex. …

The correct thing to do as I see it is to save our deep, romantic and spiritual feelings of love for male friends, while maintaining sexual relationships with women. …

Apparently, men are from Mars, women are for penis.

[A] man’s romantic love is completely wasted on women. … Had you used your love on another man, you’d have gotten a loving friend for life. With a woman, no matter how much love you spend on her, her love for you will be no more than your sperm-reserve levels. …

A healthy culture would have taught us men to love other men, and would have taught us not to take women seriously.

This man’s wife is lucky indeed.

EDIT: More on ladies and their sperm-love here.

douchebaggery MGTOW misogyny MRA rape violence against men/women

>Two “manosphere” blogs have now posted the contact information of Assange’s accusers

Post author By David Futrelle
Post date December 15, 2010
71 Comments on >Two “manosphere” blogs have now posted the contact information of Assange’s accusers

>Two influential blogs in the “manosphere” — there may be more, I don’t know — have now posted the names and contact information of Julian Assange’s accusers; I won’t link to the posts. Clearly the purpose of doing this is to encourage harassment of these women. Disgraceful.

EDIT: Some asshole keeps posting the contact info here so I am moderating comments for now.

discussion of the day I'm totally being sarcastic manginas men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny western women suck

>Women: Completely useless, or only partly?

Post author By David Futrelle
Post date December 14, 2010
96 Comments on >Women: Completely useless, or only partly?

Women: They can’t even walk properly

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.

DAVID:

So why am I paying attention to you?

SEXY LADY

(brightly)

Well, I have a pussy.

DAVID:

A pussy, you say?

SEXY LADY

Yeah. Right down here, in my pants.

DAVID:

That might work with some guys, but that it ain’t gonna work with me! Pussy just doesn’t cut it any more!

SEXY LADY:

But, pussy?

DAVID

(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:

Pros:

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.

That and modern sanitation.

douchebaggery men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny

>All I want for Christmas is low self-esteem

Post author By David Futrelle
Post date December 14, 2010
36 Comments on >All I want for Christmas is low self-esteem

Ho, Ho, Hoes!

Don’t let it be said that Men Going Their Own Way lack Christmas spirit. On the MGTOW message boards today hanzblinx asks the rest of the fellows to “suggest a holiday gift for my gf.” Nothing fancy, just something that makes her feel special. Well, not that special. Actually, not very special at all:

OK I know the first answers will be..

apron
oven mitts
mop
dustcloth
g-string

but what exactly can I get my GF for Christmas for about $30 that would not inflate her ego too much? Is there a book? A CD? Anything?

Hmm. Given that she’s dating a dude who hangs out on the MGTOW message boards, I wouldn’t think there would be much danger of hansblinx’s alleged girlfriend having an excess of self-esteem, or really any at all, but what sort of gift do you give a gal that will help keep her ego permanently deflated? A framed picture of a female friend you think looks prettier than her? Sexy lingerie several sizes too small? A “Does My Fat Ass Make My Ass Look Fat” bumper sticker? An “I’m a Cunt” t-shirt? A “Shut Your Whore Mouth” needlepoint kit?

Actually, that last one sort of rocks.