In the future, young men will be forced to play all video games as Fat Lara Croft.
The We Hunted the Mammoth Pledge Drive continues! If you haven’t already, please consider sending some bucks my way. (And don’t worry that the PayPal page says Man Boobz.) Thanks!
Of all the loopy manifestos that this whole #GamerGate fiasco has inspired, I think this loopy manifesto, posted several days ago to the Men’s Rights subreddit to a smattering of upvotes, is probably my favorite.
Take it away, trudatness:
Think about what really went down in gaming journalism – not on the micro level, but on the macro level.
The most left-wing journalism companies happily filled the gaming journalism void. Think about it…
The most virulent lavender menace feminist laced industry on the planet began covering an industry whose target audience was comprised of somewhat socially awkward young men.
Hey what could go wrong?
Answer: Everything.
Woah, hate to be a stickler for stuff that actually makes sense, but if you’re going to use a homophobic slur to describe your opponents, make sure you pick the correct homophobic slur. The phrase “lavender menace” originated as an insult aimed at lesbians in the feminist movement; the term was later reclaimed by lesbian feminists. Whether as as a slur or as an honorific, I’m pretty sure the term is not a terribly apt description of the dude-dominated world of video game journalism, as dudes cannot actually be lesbians.
Thor, Captain America and other Norse gods prepare for battle.
Huh. So Thor — you know, that dude in the comic books based extremely loosely on Norse mythology — is going to be replaced by a woman. No, for reals. Marvel comics announced it on The View. No, that’s for real too.
I wonder what the alpha dogs over in the Red Pill subreddit might think of this?
Gay marriage isn’t a men’s right, according to AVFM conference speaker Anne Cools
A Voice for Men likes to present itself as a voice for gay men as well as straight ones. In a recent post, site founder and chief fulminator Paul Elam declared that
We regard men as human beings, regardless of their sexuality. And most of us feel that this is the salve that heals what has in recent history been inflicted on gay men.
No mention of lesbians, but of course they’re women, and Elam does not seem to like women very much.
AVFM managing editor Dean Esmay, meanwhile, likes to present himself as a champion not only of gay men but of lesbians as well, boasting in one recent tweet that “I have been lesbian-supporting since the ’80s.”
So why is AVFM giving a platform to one of Canada’s most influential opponents of same-sex marriage — and gay and lesbian rights in general?
It’s the eternal question: do misogynists spend their entire lives looking for excuses to get mad at women, or are they so naturally enraged by any evidence of female autonomy that they can’t help but erupt in rage over the tiniest of things?
We may never know the answer to that question. What we do know: almost anything can provoke them, no matter how trivial it is, no matter how misguided their anger might seem to anyone who doesn’t actually, you know, hate women. Let’s look at some of the latest things to cause women-haters to lose their shit.
So I had to re-ban a couple of long-banned trolls today, who had returned with new names and slightly different IP addresses but who gave themselves away with their behavior. And that got me thinking about the people — well, the MRAs and PUAs and other such charming folks — who regularly denounce me as an evil censor of FREE SPEECH.
In fact, when I ban people, I do so for good reasons: one of the two trolls I banned today was a longtime MRAish commenter here who eventually creeped everyone out by boasting about having sex with underage prostitutes; the other was a man of many sockpuppets known for angry, abusive meltdowns full of slurs.
Anyway, so I thought I’d give you all a glimpse into my “trash” folder. Here’s a sampling of comments from would-be first time commenters at Man Boobz that I felt would not add anything to the discourse here. But in the interests of FREE SPEECH I thought I’d give these “ideas” an airing today.
TRIGGER WARNING for violent and offensive language. (Sorry about the quality of the last two; you can click on them to see larger versions.)
Not all of the comments I trash are quite this awful. Some are only mildly violent or abusive. I tend to be a bit picky with people’s first comments, assuming that if someone posts a shitty first comment it’s not likely to get any better after that. There are a few banned commenters who stop by and try to post anyway, including one fellow who leaves endless comments trying to prove, as far as I can tell, that teenage girls are objectively hotter than women in their twenties and older.
And, of course, there are comments targeting individual women, whether these are giant cut-and-pasted rants about Anita Sarkeesian, vaguely threatening remarks aimed at other well-known internet feminists, or bizarre sexual comments about female MRAs from fans of theirs.
Once in a while I will get a comment from a feminist that resorts to violent language; I don’t let those comments through either.
And then there are the pictures people try to post in the comments. Below, one of the ones I actually let through, depicting me in a dress with some extremely tall dude. A quick Google image search reveals that it was originally posted online by regular A Voice for Men contributor Janet Bloomfield, in a blog post of hers from last year on Disney princesses. Stay classy, Men’s “Human Rights” Movement!
I don’t actually own a dress like this.
Anyway, the pictures I don’t let through are worse.
So over on The Spearhead, the fellas are discussing pop star and self-professed feminist Lorde — no, really — and, well, I have some bad news for you all. Apparently we’re about to be taken over by Barbarian tribes. No, really — again. Blame Lorde, Lena Dunham, Lady Gaga, and of course Sex & the City. Among others.
According to a comment-cum-manifesto from The Other Jim, which won itself a couple of dozen upvotes from The Spearhead’s highly civilized readers, Lorde’s feminism
is merely symptomatic of the fact that we live in what can only be called, ‘The Fem-Centric Reality” … Where the culture of the West caters to female desires. Thus, it’s why we see movies, tv, books, music, etc. targeting women(with the govt. legally and economically empowering women eg Title IX, Lilly Ledbetter, etc.), but more importantly appealing to their innermost desires.
It’s why we’ve seen the popularity of such things like ‘Sex & the City’, ’50 Shades of Grey’, ‘Rom-Com’ movies and shows, ‘Girls’, ‘Dancing With the Stars’, ‘The Bachelor/ette’, Katy Perry, Lady Gaga, Justin Bieber, ‘Grrll-Power’ Heroines like Jennifer Lawrence in the ‘Hunger Games’, ABC News, the ‘War on Women’, etc. All of it catering to the fleeting whims and desires of women. Thus, we all live in ‘Chick-World’. *
So, the ‘Fem-Centric Reality’ is the dominant cultural force in the West right now. Of course, it won’t last, nothing ever does, but the price it will exact from Western Civilization will likely help in usher in a cultural, if not civilizational collapse as the Barbarian tribes surrounding the West see the weakness the Fem-Centric Reality engenders and are patiently waiting to take over a weaker civilization.
So there’s that.
Jim ends with this, well, intriguing theory about trans women:
* It’s also why we’re seeing more MTF transsexuals in the public eye, IMO due to a form of Stockholm Syndrome whereby some men aren’t merely sympathizing with the hostage takers(women & the FemCentric Reality), they’re trying to become the hostage takers(women) and be at the center of the FemCentric Reality where the benefits are quite generous.
Fellas: just make sure to get your transition in before the barbarians take over, if you want to enjoy the lady benefits while you still can!
Men in dresses: How A Voice for Men chose to promote its post about trans women
Men’s Rights hate site A Voice for Men has not exactly shown much of an interest in trans* issues in the past. Indeed, the only time I can recall founder Paul Elam ever even mentioning trans* people was in the context of a vicious attack on a Men’s Studies expert who happens to be a trans woman; he suggested she was a mentally ill man-hater whose “so hated the sex they were born with that it sparked a life long academic quest to deconstruct it into something that did not disgust them.”
So it’s a little surprising to see a post on AVFM now with the seemingly dispassionate, slightly turgid, title “Male/female discrepancies in transsexualism.” The post starts out as dry as its title, but it soon becomes clear that it is “scientific” in style only. It’s not an attempt to understand trans women or trans people in general; it’s an attempt to use the existence of trans women as a helpful prop in an old Men’s Rights argument.
[TRIGGER WARNING: QUOTES CONTAIN TRANSPHOBIA, ADVOCACY OF VIOLENCE TOWARDS TRANS WOMEN]
Pickup guru and human stain Roosh V. continues his search for attention at any cost. His latest grab for page views takes the form of a nasty little post on Return of Kings ostensibly “warning” his readers how they can protect themselves from evil “[t]rannies [who] will try to trick a player to get some loving.”
The post, written by someone calling himself redpiller1985, is a transphobic rant in the form of a jokey list purporting to show guys “8 Ways To Spot A Transsexual.” Redpiller1985 starts off by declaring that
It’s not just betas and closet conning alphas trying to hold us back. It’s cross-dressing men who are so mentally ill that they think they’re women. They’re delusional omega men who think acting like a caricature of the women who don’t give them play is how they can finally get some sexual pleasure from unwitting men.
The “humor” of the post is so strained it’s doubtful it would even elicit a chuckle from even the most egregious transphobe. Redpiller1985 mocks “trannies” for allegedly having silly names “[l]ike the name Jessica but spelled as Jessika.” He think’s its hilarious that they don’t like being referred to as “he,” and that some “trannies” use words like “kyriarchy” and “cisgender.” He thinks it’s risible that “[t]ranssexuals have an incredibly high suicide and drug abuse rate..”
Indeed, a portion of the article is devoted to mocking the suicide attempt of a trans game designer; I’m not going to quote any of that.
Redpiller1985 ends by proclaiming, with mock sincerity, that all this nastiness is really an attempt to help poor “trannies” get their lives in order:
We as red pillers must even tell the most beta blue pillers in existence when the “hot girl” at the bar is really a lying mentally ill man in a dress. If we stand up to their mental illness and call them out instead of making their delusions worse. It will inspire these disfigured men to stop being omegas and start being true men again.
In the comments, someone calling himself Ben “Race War Now” Garrison declares that “Trannies will be the first to hang on the Day of the Rope.” Another commenter posts a photo of a murdered trans woman lying dead in the street, with the note “[h]ere’s a good example photo of what happens once trannies get found out.”
Not all the commenters are on board with the transbashing. One suggests that
[T]rannies (especially the Asian kind) are super friendly and outgoing. No girl is every as nice or friendly to the strange guys around her.
That bit of racial and sexual fetisihization is about as “trans-friendly” as it gets on Roosh’s hate site.
So a fella on the Men’s Rights subreddit made this poster, which he’s planning to post in the vicinity of the Women’s Studies Department at his school, assuming he can find it.
Since I know that a lot of females read this blog, I thought I’d ask you all just which of these Unchecked Female Privileges (There’s Nothing “Benevolent” About Them) are your favorites. You can pick more than one! (I know how inherently greedy you feemales are.)
Has he missed any important ones?
Non-women are allowed to post in this thread as well, but only if they preface their comments with “If it may please the feemales, might I humbly suggest that … .”
No, I think Roosh V has you beat in that category.
The Pax Dickinson Crisis seems to have abated somewhat, with postings on the #standwithpax hashtag on Twitter slowing to a trickle and the production of manosphere rants on the subject more or less grinding to a halt, at least for the moment.
But there is one manosphere ideologue who hasn’t given up the fight for injustice, and that’s the despicable “game” guru Roosh Valizadeh, who seems to have embarked on a crusade to ruin the life and career of the Valleywag/Gawker writer who first brought Dickinson’s terrible tweets to the attention of the wider world.
He explained his strategy, which he suggests will work on all liberal writers who might criticize men for racism or misogyny:
Unless she’s applying for a position at Jezebel, no respectable company will touch a toxic individual who has been linked to racism. They don’t want anyone who may cause controversy for them, and behind rape, nothing says controversy like race. …
It’s a slow-burn attack that will effectively punish these writers and scare their co-workers , whose income is low enough that they need to depend on corporate employment indefinitely, unless one day they get an original thought and can stay away from their iPhone long enough to write a book. It won’t work on the big liberal writers like Jessica Valenti or Naomi Wolf, since any attention they get just helps them sell more books, but it does work on the young girl out of college trying to win feminist brownie points by denouncing a man for being “creepy” based on a bad joke.
And then he compared it with something he seems to have a certain amount of experience with:
Having your name destroyed on Google is the internet version of getting raped.
Lovely.
There are more than a few practical problems with Roosh’s little plan, the most notable being that if some hypothetical hiring manager comes across Roosh’s attack on Tiku — or on any writer he’s tried to tar — all this manager will have to do is spend a minute skimming Roosh’s post to see that the charge is bullshit and that Roosh is himself a raving bigot.
And Roosh, if you’re trying to smear someone, it’s generally not good form to announce this plan publicly in a post that at times reads like the monologue of some cartoon supervillain.
In his piece, Roosh notes that “[n]ot long ago, Buzzfeed insinuated I was a rapist.” Well, it did more than that: It quoted Roosh admitting quite frankly that he’d had sex with a woman who was too intoxicated to consent.
I thought, in the interests of openness, it would be worth quoting that passage from Roosh — it’s in his e-book Bang Iceland — once again. Heck, I’ll even give the bit Buzzfeed quoted a little more context. I’ll let you decide if Roosh is a rapist or not.
I hooked her arm and off we went. The best thing that possibly could have happened was a “failed” afterparty. There had to be a moment when she realized that all her friends are gone and the only reasonable option left was to go home with a strange man she had just met.
While walking to my place, I realized how drunk she was. In America, having sex with her would have been rape, since she couldn’t legally give her consent. It didn’t help matters that I was relatively sober, but I can’t say I cared or even hesitated.
I won’t rationalize my actions, but having sex is what I do. If a girl is willing to walk home with me, she’s going to get the dick no matter how much she has drunk. I’ll protect myself by using a condom (most of the time), but I know that when it comes to sex, one ounce of hesitation or a feeling of morality will get me nothing.
Emphasis mine.
At this point even Pax Dickinson may want to distance himself from this creep.
