Category Archives: sexy robot ladies
MRA futurist: “We’re going to need litter boxes for women in the future.”
Unlike women, men never urinate outside. Except for this one dude.
Our dear friend over at the Pro-Male/Anti-Feminist Technology blog is worried about filthy sluts. And when he says filthy, he means filthy: these are gals, he tells us, who quite literally “piss and take dumps everywhere but a toilet.”
To see examples of this new breed of sluts, he tells us, we need look no further than reality TV or any woman’s dorm:
There have been plenty of examples from Snooki of MTV’s Jersey Shore pissing outside like a pet to college chicks taking dumps in showers.
Return of the Sexy Robot Ladies, Part Two: Electric Boogaloo
Our glorious future
The sexy robot ladies are back! Not so much in real life, where they are still more scary than sexy, but in the fervid imagination of dudes who hate real ladies. Like Eric here, on The Spearhead:
When I first came to the MRM, there was a story in the news about a Japanese robotics engineer who had made a female android. It really wasn’t much more than a fairly realistic-looking doll; although there was quite a bit of discussion at the time for the potential to improve on the design. The main thing was that it’s invention caused a fury from the feminists. Even at that early stage in my MRA days, I could see the reason: for the first time women were looking the very real possibility that they could become expendable.
Well, “expendable” only if you view women as little more than support systems for their vaginas.
Personally, I’m more into foreign girls than virtual sex. But the same principle applies: as long as there are alternatives to feminists, the feminists are expendable. They don’t have the power to convert every woman on the planet; and even if they could they can’t stop men from building robots.
Please, build those robots, and lock yourselves away with them forever, and leave the rest of us alone.
Elsewhere in the same thread on The Spearhead we get some examples of why it’s a problem when Men Who Really Should Be Going Their Own way … don’t. A fellow calling himself Rmaxd apparently suggested that men who feel themselves to have been mistreated by the courts should: “Lynch a judge as you would any traitor or dictator.”
His comment was deleted, and heavily criticized — apparently for not being circumspect enough in his threatening language. After all, our dear friend JeremiahMRA got mostly upvotes on The Spearhead for a similarly threatening remark just the other day. And elsewhere in the very same thread as Rmaxd’s now-deleted comment we find a fellow called freebird suggesting that men who have allegedly suffered because of women should
share this pain with those inflicting it.
cue up “blood on the plow”
Meanwhile, again in the same thread, a commenter called walking in hell brings up the example of Thomas Ball, the MRA who self-immolated on the steps of a Keene, New Hampshire courthouse a year ago in hopes that his dramatic death would inspire other men to (quite literally) burn down police stations and courthouses using Molotov cocktails. (You can read Ball’s manifesto, complete with its call for MRA terrorism though without the specific instructions on how to make effective Molotov cocktails, on A Voice for Men, in its “activism” section; search the page for “burn” to go directly to his advocacy of terrorism.) Walking in hell also thinks family court judges should be “punished” for their alleged “crimes,” by which he means denying some fathers visitation.
[R]esponsibility for such heinous crimes against children can behold an individual to a special kind of punishment.
We see the nervous squirming by judges in the Australia case marked by the judge issuing an apology. We also see nervous squirming in the UK with the evildoers trying to issue fake political gestures to angry people.
The evildoers must smell something besides fire and brimstone. The sooner they get to the fire and brimstone, the better off children and fathers will be.
Apparently this vaguely threatening language was vague enough to pass muster on The Spearhead; this comment got more than a dozen upvotes.
The sooner you fuckers build those sexbots you like to talk about so much, the better for all of us.
Oh, the questions they ask!
Here are a couple of, well, let’s just call them very intriguing questions asked of me by a Men’s Rights Redditor. Since I can’t respond to them on the Men’s Rights subreddit — I’m banned - I thought I’d respond here:
Mr. Levelate, allow me to answer your serious questions with some equally serious questions of my own:
I’ve wondered for a long time how people like you react to the men’s rights mantra of ‘all women are wombats’, when you see a woman who isn’t a wombat, how do you explain this?
Also, many MRAs advocate turning all squirrels into bologna, what makes you think squirrel bologna would taste better than regular bologna, and what would the world do with all those extra uneaten nuts, were it ever to come to that?
Here’s the thing, Mr. Levelate: those things you think feminists believe? FEMINISTS DON’T ACTUALLY BELIEVE THEM.
That “all men are rapists” quote from Marilyn French you guys like to pass around? That was from a character in a novel.
The number of radical feminists who seriously want to get rid of men, or a significant number of them, you could probably count on your fingers. I’m not sure how many MRAs want to make squirrel bologna, but the numbers are probably similar. And, fyi, there are actually more than a few MRAs who fantasize about breeding certain types of women out of existence, like this dude on The Spearhead, and a small army of MRAs and MGTOWers who pine for the imaginary future where babies are gestated in artificial wombs and women are all replaced by sexy sexbots.
Listening to MRAs talking about feminism is a bit like sitting in on a book club in which no one has read the book.
Civilization and its Discontented Ladies
If it weren't for us men, we'd all still be living like this.
Oh, you ladies! Apparently, if you were left to your own devices, we’d all still be living in caves. The dude at The Black Pill, the blog formerly known as Omega Virgin Revolt, explains the grave danger that uncontrolled ladieness poses to civilization. (The thing, not the computer game.)
What is civilization? There are many definitions of “civilization”, but IMO the most important definition of civilization is controlling female behavior, all of which acts against civilization. Civilization was created as soon as ways of controlling female behavior were developed. Before civilization men had to constantly deal with female behavior so they never had the time to develop science, technology, etc. When female behavior was put under control, then men didn’t have to spend so much time worry about women. Men could spend time inventing agriculture and later other forms of science and technology. Keeping women and their destructive behavior under control is the key to civilization.
Seriously. If we dudes hadn’t clamped down on your lady behavior, we’d be fucked. Dudes like Mr. Black Pill would be out there trying their best to build up civilization by posting lady-hating screeds on the internet and not having sex with anyone, and you gals would be undermining all their hard work by doing terrible lady things like, say, working in government, doing scientific research, teaching filmmaking, writing books, making interesting jewelry, working as EMTs, being Secretary of State, and writing Supernatural fanfic. Wait, that’s already happening. Uh oh. Civilization is in danger!
And of course evil feminists are at the heart of the Lady Plot Against Civilization.
So much of feminism is a screed against civilization, science, and technology. Feminists have called Isaac Newton’s Principia Mathematica a rape manual. Feminists hate the technology industry and have attacked technology in general as male rape of the natural world and/or the enforcement of patriarchy over nature. Feminists know unconciously that civilization is the greatest threat to the power of women. Civilization was developed by men, not women. Women are only along for the ride because sex and babies can’t happen without them (for now). Every advancement in science and technology is a threat to women. Every advancement in science and technology brings up a step closer to freeing men from needing women.
So watch it, ladies. As soon as we work out this whole having babies without ladies thing, your days are numbered! Then all we’ll need to do is to figure out how to get all the dudes in the world who actually like and respect women and think of them as fellow human beings to abandon them for sex robots. Piece of cake.
Let’s shame some virgins!
NOTE: THAT HEADLINE IS A JOKE. IT’S APRIL FOOL’S DAY.
In today’s edition of “Make Shit Up About Man Boobz,” we have this highly upvoted comment from the Men’s Rights subreddit attacking me (us?) for all the evil virgin shaming we supposedly do around here.
The total ridiculousness of this comment is fairly obvious. But I would like to take a moment to clarify a few things.
Being a virgin, or celibate? Not inherently funny.
Being a virgin, or someone who has had literally one sexual encounter with a woman ever, and writing post after post about how evil and icky vaginas are in an attempt to get other men to swear off women forever – that’s pretty funny. That would be a bit like me writing a travel guide to Denmark, or Albania, or any other place I’ve never been to.
Having trouble getting a date? Not inherently funny.
Having trouble getting a date because you’re a loathsome tool who hates women? Funny.
Using a sex toy? Not inherently funny.
Dudes pontificating about how sex toys and sex robots will soon make icky real women obsolete? That shit is fucking hilarious.
Also, sex toys themselves? Yes, they can be funny. I mean, the legendary Fleshlight is a disembodied vagina/mouth/asshole-replacement in the form of a giant clunky flashlight-shaped thing. That’s sort of funny. Attaching this giant clunky thing to an iPad so you can pretend that the iPad (or at least an image on it) is giving you a blowjob? That’s comedy gold!
Here are some other sex toys that are hilarious and/or seriously disturbing, courtesy of Scary Sextoy Friday, perhaps the world’s greatest blog. (All links are NSFW.)
Vibrators shaped like Santa Claus.
A dildo designed to look like poop.
Sorry. I got carried away with the links. That blog is like crack.
There’s an app for that! By “that” I mean “penis.” And by “app” I mean a doohickey to attach a Fleshlight to your iPad.
Maru the cat wants none of this.
Ladies, your time is up! The sexy robogals are here! Prepare for the end of feminism and the eventual elimination of all women, with the possible exception of some of the really hot ones, so long as they don’t have too many opinions of their own.
Now that I’ve got your attention I should point out that the sexy Robogals aren’t quite here yet. The not-quite-Robogals currently available, as we’ve seen, are a lot more scary than sexy.
But one dude has a much simpler and less horrifying solution: he’s invented a doohickey that will allow horny penis-having people to attach a Fleshlight to their iPads, so they can pretend to be having some sort of sexual relations with images of actual sexy ladies (or sexy anything else, for that matter) on their iPads.
Read more at The Register, which also has a photo of the doohickey at work. (Dude fucking it not pictured.) I really didn’t feel like having that picture here, hence the gif of Maru the cat with his head in a bag.
If you’re havin’ robogirl problems I feel bad for you, son!
Uh oh! Trouble in Robogirl paradise! Apparently some of the sexy robot ladies are just as bad as real ladies in the not-shutting-up-and-obeying-the-men department.
Anyway, I found this online. I have no idea what comic it’s from. Do any of you comic book experts know?
MRA demands that people stop calling him an MRA, and instead call him an … MRA.
A Male Renaissance Agitator in action.
Stop the presses! Noted counter-feminist bloviator Fidelbogen has an announcement: He no longer wants to be known as an MRA. In a shocking and stunning post on his blog, Mr. Bogen informs us:
I am an agitator against feminism, and in favor of a Male Renaissance.
But I am not an “MRA”.
That is not a word which I apply to myself as a label. I formerly did, but I no longer do.
He likes these one-sentence paragraphs.
But why, oh, why would you turn your back on those three little initials, Fidelbogen?
That word has picked up more baggage than I can honestly claim to be carrying. I mean that it has picked up other people’s baggage. And it would place an unwanted burden on me personally, to carry a shitload of baggage which I do not own — or which is worse, to have other people assume that I am carrying such baggage.
Huh, what kind of baggage might that be? Could it be that MRAs have picked up the “baggage” of being labeled a bunch of histrionic woman-hating angry dudes – perhaps because ( I would hypothesize) so many of those calling themselves MRAs just happen to be historionic woman-hating angry dudes.?
But what shall we call you now, oh Man Who Will Not Be Called an MRA? He’s got some suggestions:
A counter-feminist….
A non-feminist. . .
An activated non-feminist. . .
These are his actual suggestions; I swear I’m not making them up.
A non-feminist partisan. . .
A partisan of the non-feminist sector. .
A pro-male agitator. . .
A pro-male partisan. . .
And last but not least:
A Male Renaissance Agitator. . .
Uh, really? Male Renaissance Agitator? Mr. Bogen, I hate to break it to you, but “Male Renaissance Agitator” has the exact same set of initials as “Men’s Rights Activist.” In other words, you want us to stop calling you an MRA, and start calling you an … MRA?
[I]f you still insist on calling me an ‘MRA’, it is in contravention to my own stated wishes.
But you just said to call you a Male Renaissance Agitator!
It’s the SAME THREE INITIALS.
But Fidelbogen is off and running again:
I invite others to crystallize around the suggested list of terms above, in order to create a distinct brand that will gradually come to be differentiated from the ‘MRA’ brand. We ought to create many, MANY such distinct brands if we wish to claim the liberty of the non-feminist sector.
Or for short: the Liberty of the Sector.
The what of the who?
Fidelbogen imagines a glorious future for this new brand of activism:
Some day, I hope to organize “Non-Feminist Be-ins” at such venues as college campuses. It might be nothing more than a crowd of silent people at some popular location, standing stock still like the guards at Buckingham Palace and wearing identical t-shirts that say, “I am not a feminist”. And maybe holding up signs, too.
Yeah, the signs and the shirts would be nice touches. Otherwise you’ll just look like a bunch of dudes waiting for the bus.
Does anyone want to think of more things to call the guys who now call themselves MRAs?
Let’s make it a little game. It has to be three words. Double your points if it can be acronymized into MRA. Triple points if it’s an anagram of Men’s Rights Activist. No using terms that already exist, like Magnetic Resonance Angiography, Maritime Reconnaissance Aircraft, Michigan Restaurant Association, or Magneto-Resistive Asymmetry.
Men Raving Annoyingly?
More Ridiculous Asshattery?
Manly Robogirl Admirers?
Johnny Appleseed: A Man Going His Own Way?
How do you like them apples?
So yesterday I quoted some random Spearheader who described women (well, white women in particular) as “complete parasitical whores roaming the landscape spreading VD like Johnny Appleseed and fucking men over.”
One reader wondered if Mr. Appleseed really went about spreading VD. So I did a little research, and it turns out that it is exceedingly unlikely that Mr. Appleseed – who actually was a real person — spread anything other than the magic of apples. And his Swedenborgian beliefs.
Why? Because Mr. Appleseed – real name John Chapman – was what these days we might call a Man Going His Own Way. Seems he didn’t have much truck with the ladies, according to one contemporary account quoted in his Wikipedia entry:
On one occasion Miss PRICE’s mother asked Johnny if he would not be a happier man, if he were settled in a home of his own, and had a family to love him. He opened his eyes very wide–they were remarkably keen, penetrating grey eyes, almost black–and replied that all women were not what they professed to be; that some of them were deceivers; and a man might not marry the amiable woman that he thought he was getting, after all.
So what led poor Mr. Appleseed to these dire thoughts about women? Apparently the underage girl he hoped to some day get with was more into dudes who weren’t him:
Now we had always heard that Johnny had loved once upon a time, and that his lady love had proven false to him. Then he said one time he saw a poor, friendless little girl, who had no one to care for her, and sent her to school, and meant to bring her up to suit himself, and when she was old enough he intended to marry her. He clothed her and watched over her; but when she was fifteen years old, he called to see her once unexpectedly, and found her sitting beside a young man, with her hand in his, listening to his silly twaddle.
That ungrateful little strumpet!
I peeped over at Johnny while he was telling this, and, young as I was, I saw his eyes grow dark as violets, and the pupils enlarge, and his voice rise up in denunciation, while his nostrils dilated and his thin lips worked with emotion. How angry he grew! He thought the girl was basely ungrateful. After that time she was no protegé of his.
But Appleseed, despite giving up on women in the real world, held out hope for the afterlife – explaining to others that he expected to have two spirit wives all his own after he died. Which I guess is the 19th century equivalent of the MGTOWers today who fantasize about the sexy robot ladies who will eventually, it is hoped, make actual human females – with their troubling “thoughts” and “needs” and “desires” of their own – obsolete.
Mr. Appleseed’s quest to remain alone was probably also helped by the fact that – if the illustration I found on Wikipedia is any indication – he looked a bit like Dale Gribble from King of the Hill. Only much, much sloppier, with long hair. Oh, and instead of wearing a baseball cap, he wore “a tin utensil which answered both as a cap and a mush pot.”
So, yeah, a creepy weirdo who hates women — definitely an MGTOWer all the way.
Oh, except that he actually did something with his life — you know, helping spread apple trees to a big portion of the midwest — instead of spending all his time going on about how all women are whores.
Men Going Their Own Way baffled by lesbians, refuse to believe they exist
Silly lesbian! Girls are icky. Also, you probably don't even exist.
MGTOWers, mostly straight and mostly narrow, don’t really spend a lot of time discussing lesbians. Lesbians, after all, are not only women, but women who like other women — you know, like like. But recently one of the regulars on MGTOWforums.com discovered the concept of “lesbian bed death” – the mythological notion that lesbians in long term relationships barely ever have sex – and, well, a very strange conversation ensued. Shade47 started off the discussion with these, er, observations:
Looks like the super hip lesbos forgot the small fact that in lesbian relations no one ends up paying for sex so it doesn’t happen…
The, “we don’t need men not even for sex.” club isn’t a banging scene these days.
I guess this outcome should have been obvious since you can’t put a hole inside of a hole. I keep trying to picture that and it sends me in a logic loop like a computer tasked with calculating infinity. I just can’t grasp how nothing going into nothing can create the best thing since sliced bread. …
Shade47 is so baffled by lesbians that he refuses to believe that they actually exist:
Do you guys think women are really lesbians or is it just another form of “look at me” attention whoring? I mean they don’t have sex, they don’t reproduce, they don’t achieve financial success like the gay male community does. In fact I’m not sure exactly what lesbians are doing in their relationships. I still don’t believe they are real. In order for two people to come together there must be a very specific purpose and attention whoring is shallow even for women. They usually only shack up for babies and money.
Drauger seconded the notion that lesbians are imaginary:
What do you think would happy [if] you put [two] hateful women in a home together? Bliss? Bitches go fucking shit nuts if some man isn’t giving them attention.
Repeat after me: there is no such thing as a Lesbian, only really confused women. Women are by nature whores that will change their whims depending on the whim, depending on what they perceive society rewarding them for, i.e. whores.
However there are such things as gay men, they are men who have made a defining choice.
Goldenfetus added some conspiracy theory to the mix:
Honestly, I think the entire homosexual scene is about attention - for both men and women. I’m not denying that there are men who are attracted to men and women who are attracted to women, but I do believe the entire ‘gay culture’ was intentionally manufactured to further destroy the birthrate, with the reward for participation being attention and the approval of their elite masters.
Avoidwomen, for his part, not only accepted the existence of lesbianism; he also predicted a big lesbian upswing in the future after more and more men Go Their Own Way:
I expect to see a big increase in lesbianism as more and more men avoid women. We know that women are far more social than men and they really hate being alone, even having cats is considered companionship. As for sex, it’s possible one lesbian couple is a dyke with high T(for a woman) so she pressures the more feminine lesbian for sex and the dyke may actually be paying for sex.
Then he returned to his favorite hobbyhorses: sexbots and “virtual reality” girls:
It will be very interesting to see how much sex men have vs. how much sex women have with their virtual reality computer generated men and women in the year 2020. I bet most men get laid everyday while women try it a few times and not bother with sex anymore when she realizes there’s no money in it. Women will use VR men for his virtual money while men will be with virtual women for virtual sex.
The Great One imagined a slightly different result:
I think that instead of a rise in lesbianism we will see a rise in bisexuality among females.
When females can’t find a man, they will settle for another female (or several pets). .. These female on female relationships will fall to the side when an available man offers a long term relationship.
Several pets? Hmm. If this guy is right, the future may bring severe cat shortages, sending the price of cats through the roof!
I’m putting all my money in cat futures right now.
Stay tuned for more on MGTOWers and lesbians. It gets even weirder.
