Category Archives: western women suck
>A New Low in Victim-Blaming, Part 2: In Mala Fide on Lara Logan
>
 |
| From In Mala Fide |
The reaction of the “manosphere” to Lara Logan’s reported sexual assault in Cairo has been highly revealing, to put it mildly. And what it reveals about the assorted Men’s Rightsers, Men Going Their Own Way, pickup artists, and others who make up the manosphere is pretty ugly.
Take, for example, Ferdinand Bardamu’s posts on the subject. On Tuesday, Bardamu, whose antifeminist blog In Mala Fide is widely linked to in the manosphere, spat forth a snide, sarcastic rant that attacked Logan for having the temerity to even set foot in Egypt. He started out dismissive:
Apparently, a CBS lady reporter got raped while covering the revolution in Egypt. For some reason, we’re expected to feel sorry for her.
Then turned up the sarcasm:
Oh, what a symbol of courage Miss Logan is! What a beacon of determination and grit and…no, seriously. I can’t go on.
Fuck Lara Logan. Fuck her and the shit-for-brains idiot who thought it was a good idea to send a WOMAN to report from a war zone. …
Of course, Bardamu ignores the simple fact that is is dangerous to send ANY reporter, male or female, into the midst of a revolution — indeed, the Committee to Protect Journalists has documented more than 140 attacks on journalists in the Egyptian unrest so far; one journalist was shot and killed. Despite this fact, it is an undeniably good thing that some reporters (male and female both) are willing to risk their lives to cover wars and revolutions and other dramatic, dangerous, and important events. No one has suggested that the attacks on male journalists mean that men should not be covering these events. No one is mocking the male journalists who were attacked. (Well, almost no one. Bardamu refers in passing to CNN’s Anderson Cooper, also famously attacked while covering the events of Egypt, as a “twinkle-toed pansy [who] couldn’t handle the heat on the streets of Cairo.”)
For Bardamu, though, Logan’s story is one of a woman foolishly trying to make her way in a man’s world:
You send a chick into a situation like the one in Egypt, you might as well hang a sign around her neck that says “FREE FUCKTOY”. I don’t care how many disaster areas she’s reported from, how many awards she’s won, it was going to happen eventually. …
Sucks that Lara got raped, but she had it coming. [Emphasis in original]
To Bardamu, this case is evidence not only that women journalists should not be sent to cover the Egyptian revolution but that they should not be allowed to leave their home country at all:
[O]f COURSE Lara shouldn’t be sent on another foreign assignment again! She, nor any other women should be allowed to be a foreign correspondent for their own safety.
And then, after arguing that Logan “had it coming,”and that any western woman who has the temerity to leave her hotel room and step out into the streets of Cairo should expect herself to get raped sooner or later, Bardamu then suggests that Logan may be making it all up:
There’s a non-zero chance that she didn’t get raped at all, and that she made the whole thing up to garner attention and sympathy from the weepy, chivalrous masses. …
I have no evidence that she’s not telling the truth, only a tiny feeling in the pit of my stomach that’s been growing year by year, with every venal vixen who falsely accuses a man of rape because she wants fame, or she feels like a slut after sleeping with the guy, or she’s mad that he slept with her best friend the day after, or whatever else.
Naturally, in the comments, many of Bardamu’s fans agreed that women women who trespass into male spaces deserve whatever happens to them. According to “John”:
Women do not belong in men’s locker rooms, Mike Tysons apartment at 2:00 a.m., drunk in a bar bathroom with the Steelers quarterback, and they sure as hell don’t belong “reporting” in the middle of a revolution. Women should not go to Frat Parties dressed like sluts and get drunk with the expectation that “nothing will happen.” …
This woman, Laura Logan, is not just an idiot – she is an adulterous whore. She shares this unfortunate circumstance with tens of millions of others of her sex, and deserves no pity whatsoever.
For some, the case was not just another excuse for “slut shaming” but evidence that the very notion of equality between the sexes is wrong. As Brett Stevens put it:
American women are rape targets worldwide. They are known to be clueless, friendly, and most of all, sexually easy. If a woman chucks her sexual favors out the door at the drop out of a hat, why not just go the extra mile and apply pressure? … We take these girls from comfy suburbs and send them into war zones and riots and wonder why they get gang raped. Amazing cluelessness, arising from our insane idea of “equality.”
There were other comments even worse than these — e.g., this one — but I don’t have the heart to post them here.
But Bardamu’s retrograde notions were also challenged in the comments — mostly from those who saw his noxious post linked to on feminist sites and on Twitter, but also in a few cases from actual fans of his blog.
This reaction inspired Bardamu to post a second piece on the Logan story, one even more narcissistic and self-righteous than the first. After taking on some of his critics (most notably Molly of Progressive Blogic, whom he labeled a “premenstrual whiner”), and casually referring to Logan as “an unwilling cum dumpster,” Bardamu tried to pretend that it was him, and not the feminists, who had the best interests of women at heart.
Lara Logan had no business being in Cairo, or anywhere in that part of the world for that matter. All of you leftie feminist tossers screeching about “rape culture” have her blood on your hands. How many more have to suffer before your lies are discredited?
Sorry, but a guy who refers to any women, much less a woman who has been raped, as a “cum dumpster” pretty much forfeits any right to be taken seriously on the subject of what is best for women.
About a week ago, Bardamu reported that he’d taken a Psychopathy Test on OkCupid, and had scored an impressive 31 points, which put him in the ranks of the “True Psychopaths.” His posts on Logan — full of narcissistic rage and utterly lacking in basic human empathy — seem to bear out this diagnoses all too well.
-
If you liked this post, would you kindly* use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.
>Animal lust
>
What better day than Valentine’s Day for a post about love? Or at least the MGTOW version of love, which is more like a mixture of lust and loathing.
I’ve spoken before about what I’ve called the MGTOW Paradox: Men Going Their Own Way generally seem to hate the ladies, but the ladies still keep giving them boners. Recently, on the grotequely misnamed Happy Bachelors forum, Marcus Aurelius — who describes himself without irony as “one of the more, if you will, ‘spiritual’ voices on the forum” — offered four partial solutions to this problem of excess lady desire. They are, in order: Porn, furious masturbation, a deep understanding of the Buddhist notion of “the impermanence of form,” and … whatever this is:
And another thing I do…when [desire] ACTUALLY hits….like say I see a hot looking girl at work, and it starts to creep up, I actually indulge in it for a moment. I look at the woman. Think about my attraction to her nice…whatever. Then, I think about it as tho I am at the Public Zoo. Seriously. At the zoo, you will see a wild exotic animal, and you will stare through that glass in awe of this animal…..but you wouldn’t set foot in that damn cage…because you KNOW if you did….that damn thing would TEAR YOU APART. Thats how I like to look at attractive american women. Animals in a zoo.
That only works for so long, dude. Then you turn into a furry.
-
If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly* use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.
*Yes, that was a Bioshock reference.
>American Women: They use too much birth control and it’s fucking up their vagina
>
 |
| This is what aspartame and birth control will do to you. |
I‘ve been disappointed so far with the BOYCOTT AMERICAN WOMEN blog. Most of the posts so far have been pretty straightforward and, frankly, boring, with none of that inventive, over-the-top loopiness that I associate with misogynists of real quality. But this post from yesterday more than makes up for lost time:
American women are drugged-out zombies
American women are constantly in chemicals. Chewing bubble gum constantly (aspartame, which causes temporary retardation). The makeup. They are always doing diet things for extra doses of aspartame. They use too much birth control and it’s fucking up their vagina. They have periods for 2 weeks out of the month. They flirt with other men when married. They have a few steps up on the ladder in the courts. They have a feminist movement where they actually think they were born superior to men. They have a pair of shoes for every day of the month, which third world slaves made. Their makeup is made out of animal fat by product. They are in their own world and not reality from popping too many anti depressants for minor mood swings. lol they’re nuts!
LOL indeed, my good sir. LOL indeed.
-
If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly* use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.
*Yes, that was a Bioshock reference.
>Beware the jackbooted feminazi marriage thugs!
>
The denizens of the Happy Bachelors forum, always alert for possible threats to their Happy Bachelorhood, seem to have discovered a new one: Evil feminists “enslav[ing] men through forced marriage.”
That might sound a bit like the plot of an old episode of Futurama, but apparently the threat is all too real. Artbunker sounded the alarm in a recent posting:
What if women and manginias in power pass a law to make men marry with women?
Hear him out, guys:
[M]ore and more guys are truly waking up to the no marriage to Western Women concept. It’s a small but growing fact. We already know feminist have made it harder fro Eastern European women to come over here and probably in other countries as well.
If they can get laws passed for that how much longer till they start going after single men? How much longer till they want to make sure single women with kids are paired with single men for “the betterment of the children?” because the single man makes a good wage to support her and her family.
Why would this be necessary, you may ask. Aren’t there a lot of simps and manginias doing this already, of their own volition?
Sure there still a lot of simps and manginias that dont mind doing this already without a law sure. But we know these women really want guys who have the economic power to provide them the lifestyle they want. A lot of simps and manginias today cannot provide that for them .They want the guys with the big checks whom they know wont chose them.
Yes, all the fantastically wealthy movers and shakers who spend all their time trading stories about how evil women are on the MGTOW message boards of America.
Longshot39 suggested one (somewhat familiar) way to resist the jackbooted feminazi marriage thugs:
A man with any sense could still refuse to marry, at least in the traditional sense. Just get another MGTOW friend and marry them, like was said in another thread. Even if a person were required by law to live in the same house, having your friend as a roommate would still be a HUGE improvement over being forced to marry some womb turd with little thuglits.
To be sure, not everyone on the Happy Bachelors forum is convinced such a danger is imminent. The always logical spocksdisciple responded:
There won’t be forced marriage, as women want the earning power of the beta but ‘gina tingle factor of the thug/bad boy. Instead what the gov’t will do is simply start to garnish the wages of single men with selective taxation and “fees.”
And if any men resist the New Girl Order by not earning enough, well, naturally they’ll just be forced into labor camps:
These labor camps would come into existence under some economic pretext set up by gov’t. One such pretext is that unemployed or underemployed people(ie men) of a certain age range say 18-40, would be very useful to the government as labor for various federal projects. …
Of course women would be exempt because they’ll have some beta or stooge on standby for marriage and they would claim “gender oppression” should women be inducted into such camps. …
These camps would be run under the auspices of FEMA and would be painted to be “emergency support facilities”, note that some form of this type of forced and indentured labor already as come back in the form in prison chain gangs which were all but abolished by the 1950s-60s but made a comeback in the late 90s.
But hey, still beats being married — amirite, fellas?
All joking aside, I feel that one thing we can all agree upon here at Man Boobz is that the fine gentlemen at Happy Bachelors should not be marrying anyone any time soon, either voluntarily or as a result of evil feminist legislation. So I ask the women reading this post now to pledge publicly, in a comment below, that they personally will not marry anyone on the Happy Bachelors forum, even if they are required by law to do so.
-
If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly* use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.
*Yes, that was a Bioshock reference.
>A different kind of flapper
>
 |
| Not the kind of flapper we’re talking about. |
So I’m over at the Boycott American Women blog, reading a post by someone describing himself as an “angry black American man.” It starts off clearly enough (“There is WAY TOO many of the MISS THANG type type in america”), and continues on to make a fairly standard argument to the effect that American women are stuck-up narcissists who will end up “alone an bitter.” (To be fair, that description applies to a lot of us guys as well.)
But it’s the grand conclusion that leaves me a little baffled:
its a growing trend among the women to act like tryant like cunt flaps.
Uh, what flaps?
I wondered if this was some sort of slang I hadn’t heard about. But Urban Dictionary seems to confirm that the term “cunt flaps” does indeed mean, er, what it seems to mean, i.e., labia that hang down like flaps.
So what does it mean to say that women are acting “like tryant like cunt flaps.”
Is there a typo here, a word missing, or what? I assume that by “tryant” he actually means “tyrant,” but that’s really the least of our problems here.
Did he mean that women are acting like tyrants, and that they are also acting like cunt flaps? (Which raises the question: How exactly does one act like cunt flaps?)
Did he mean that women are acting as though tyrants like cunt flaps? (Which raises the question: is there something about ruling a country with an iron fist that leads one to be drawn to larger-than-average labia?)
Or maybe I’m totally wrong about the “tyrant” thing. Maybe he’s saying that women are trying to act like cunt flaps. (Which, again, huh?)
I remain baffled.
-
If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly* use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.
*Yes, that was a Bioshock reference.
>Women Are … Part 6: Herd of Hens Edition
>
 |
| We all agree that ladies are too conformist. |
Another installment of our popular “Women Are …” series, in which I collect examples of manosphere misogynists rudely generalizing about women like there’s no tomorrow. I’ll let you figure out the theme this time. It’s not herd, er, hard.
Women are: A herd of hens
All women constitute one huge herd. They are a uniform group, and their thinking always falls into line. I’ve actually had women make that “I’m so shocked noise” and then ask, “you don’t really think that do you?” Yeah, I do. I have a mind of my own.
They don’t search for facts, reality, or truth. They search for consensus and emotional validation. They are cackling hens. Cackle cackle cackle
Women are: Herd creatures who won’t date you.
Most women in a culture are nearly psychologically identical. So … if you arent successful with the first 25 women, chances are you wont be successful with any of women within that same subset, cause they are herd creatures and take cues from the environment rather than having any real personalities of their own.
Women are: Bleating, uncritical sheep
Women are like herd animals and desperately desire to belong.
Men on the other hand are critical and won’t blindly follow someone if they don’t merit our approval. This is the difference in critical, mature thinking, and sheep bleating.
Women are: A herd of orgasmic voters
Women love to vote (group herd orgasm with her sisters). … In fact, women love any group activity. Men largely want to be left alone to live their lives in freedom. … That is why men do not really care about government. Men do not need it. So men do [not] vote that much. Women love government so women love to vote.
Women are: A herd of Facebook cunts
The problem is Ameriskank mindsets, they are close minded and stereotype every strange man as a pedophile, creepy, or a loser….
You need INTELLIGENCE & an OPEN MIND to meet & understand NEW people and Ameriskanks have none of the above.
Ameriskanks are the ultimate HERD animal. I can not stand these fucking cunts from Junior High & High School messaging me on Fucking Facebook (all single moms) wanting to start a “friendship” aka “find a sucker to take care of my bastard children”.
Women are: Matrimony-minded herd creatures who hate doing chores
Women ARE herd creatures - the mentality of the group is more important than the self realized truth brought by evidence. However woman also demand products to do every chore for them, and ask the government to freely provide money to they can live without working either from government handouts or by getting government to enforce draconian laws that allow women to rip men off with the lie of ‘holy matrimony’.
Women are: Hormonal herd creatures unchecked by patriarchy
The problem is, too many women allow their emotions, their hormones, their herd instinct, and the media to run their lives. Again, in past eras, these were all checked by patriarchal institutions, but these have long since disintegrated.
Women are: Herd beasts who don’t want anyone to see them naked.
An ancient king was once faced with a rash of suicides of young women.
He ordered that the body if any woman who killed herself would be displayed naked in the public square.The suicides stopped.Shame works better on women than on men because women are herd beasts. Women care more about the opinion of the group than their own thoughts or even their own lives.
You know what’s ironic? Groups of like-minded lady-hating men gathering together online to talk endlessly about what herd creatures women are.
>Boycott? Make that a MANcott!
>
 |
| Judy Chicago brings vagina to the table. Via lolvantgarde |
Careful readers may have noticed a new blog in my Enemies List, a promising up-and-comer in the world of nutbag misogyny. Yes, I’m talking about BOYCOTT AMERICAN WOMEN, a blog whose purpose is clearly stated in its name. So why should we fellows boycott — sorry, BOYCOTT — AMERICAN WOMEN? Oh, our blog proprietor has got himself a little list:
American women are the most likely to cheat on you, to divorce you, to get fat, to steal half of your money in the divorce courts, don’t know how to cook or clean, don’t want to have children. …
American women are generally immature, selfish, extremely arrogant and self-centered, mentally unstable, irresponsible, and highly unchaste. The behavior of most American women is utterly disgusting, to say the least.
So yeah, it’s pretty much the standard-issue anti-American woman crap. And for the most part the posts so far — little missives (allegedly) from different guys explaining why they hate American gals — haven’t been terribly imaginative.
But there are occasional sparks of wonderful nutbaggery. Like the little word-portrait evoked here by John from USA:
So many American woman seem to think that all they need to do is bring their vagina to the table and that I will just give them whatever they want
Vagina? Table? Paging Judy Chicago!
In case you were wondering, ladies, John assures us all that he does “not have a small penis!” But too bad, ladies, he’s taken.
A post from someone named James laments that American women have become
a spoiled, non compassionate sex that I have seen de masculinate their spouses
Mark from the USA, meanwhile, seems to have something of a hair fetish:
Many foreign women have much nicer body shapes, more feminine traits and a lot still have nice long hair, opposed to the boyish low-maintenance short cuts that most American women get by their mid to late teens and never grow back.
Damn those hair-cutting sluts! Also, Mark seems like he’s really not into the whole “communication” thing.
I’m looking for a foreign spouse too, and would NEVER accept an American woman. I don’t even care what country she’s from or if we speak a mutual language. In fact, I’d probably be happier with her if we couldn’t even understand each other, than some American bitch constantly nagging and ragging at me in English.
I don’t think I’ll be boycotting American women any time soon. But I’ll be coming back to this blog for sure.
>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:
SEXY LADY
DAVID:
SEXY LADY:
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.
>Not-So-Beautiful Losers
>
 |
| Guys, they’re hiring! |
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).
Here’s the thread in question. “analyzing” starts off the festivities by pointing to an email from a lovelorn 42-year old lass to an online relationship advice column:
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.
Marcus Aurelius commends what he sees as an excellent analysis, and adds his own thoughts:
[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.
>Ladies! Stop assaulting us by dressing like slutty sluts
>
 |
| Dirty whore flaunting her sexy arms. |
Oh, you foul, filthy women, why must you continue to oppress men with the power of your evil sexiness? I’ve been spending some time recently reading a tiny internet forum with big ambitions. “The CoAlpha Brotherhood,” the site’s Mission Statement notes, “is an attempt to abandon feminist society and collectively create an independent sub-culture based on patriarchal values.” High on the CoAlpha agenda: get women to stop dressing like such sexy, sexy sluts.
The head CoAlpha, a fellow calling himself Drealm, laments the situation he finds himself in as a man living “in a university town that’s overrun with young girls,” a man continually assaulted by the sight of women in clothing more revealing than a Burka:
As you can imagine, my university town, Berkeley California, is one big liberalized hypersexual runway show. I’m forced to stare at hundreds if not thousands of women a day, all of whom bring sluttiness to all new pinnacle.
He is forced — forced, I tells ya! — to stare at these women with lust in his heart, and presumably in his trousers as well. How unfair is that?
[T]he only time it’s enjoyable looking at promiscuously dressed women, is if you can have them on the spot. So if a woman is a hooker or a stripper, then it’s enjoyable to watch them. However, if a woman is completely unattainable, then it’s mentally and physically unpleasant to look at promiscuous women.
So, ladies, if you’re not going to put out, or at least give the poor fellow a free lap dance on the steps of Sproul Plaza, cover up.
Women, out of respect for men, should dress in a way that doesn’t excite men. A woman dressing provocatively and leaving a man in an unfinished state of excitement is the equivalent of a man dressing in such a way that causes a woman to have a sudden onset period. Simply put dressing provocatively and then suppressing male urges is an assault on men’s sexuality.
And if you assault a man like this, he might just have to rape you — in self defense!
I cannot on a primal level get passed my sexual urges when looking at sluts. … [t]he only thing I want to do to a slut is rape them. … If I extrapolate this observation to society, I think it’s easy to see why in a slut society women will be more prey to rape. … Simply put, dressing like sluts brings out murders, rapists and sadists in men. … A society based on sluts, might as well be a pro-rapist society.
Ladies, really, do you want to bring out the murders and rapists in men? Forget tight t-shirts and skinny jeans. Just say no to halter tops and short skirts. Think: what would I wear if I were Amish. or Muslim, or perhaps Hindu.
Seeing as Berkeley is also a multi-cultural haven, I sometimes have the pleasure of being startled by the sight of conservative muslim and Indian women. … The only thing I want to do is help them. Yet the only thing I want to do to a slut is rape them. These muslim and Indian women are very beautiful, so it’s not as though I’m not attracted to them. It’s just that dress codes in both sluts and modest women operate as agents for activating different hardwired impulses in my psyche.
And seriously, no man can be expected to actually curb his baser impulses to rape and murder ALL the time. They’re hardwired! So don’t set him off by wantonly exposing your arms and legs and perhaps even some of your even sexier parts. Dress as if the ozone layer has gone poof and every little bit of exposure to the sun will burn your flesh like steak on a grill.
[T]he point of modest clothing is to cover up anything that excites men. … to cut off all triggers that excite men. In my opinion this starts with skin coverage. The more a woman’s skin is covered, the less she excites men. This is why short skirts and low cut tops are antonyms of modesty.
Tight clothing is also very dangerous.
[C]lothing should not exaggerate a female’s body shapes. This is why I still think jeans can be immodest on women, because a tight pair of jeans will accentuate a woman’s legs and buttocks. High heels meet the same conflict as tight jeans, while they may not show extra skin, they accentuate a woman’s legs and buttocks.
And watch out with that evil, sexy hair of yours.
Uncovered hair isn’t as much an immodesty crime, but I still feel raw long hair can excite men. Long hair’s affect on men can be counteracted with a scarf or veil.
So what should a nice modest young gal do? Cover up. Cover everything up. Rent yourself a copy of Witness, and sew yourself some clothes that are really motherfucking Plain.
Or, I suppose, you could always crawl into a garbage bag and hop.
NOTE: This post contains sarcasm.
