Man-pert Dick Masterson and the trouble with man-parody (or, marody)
Published by Kyso Kisaen October 7th, 2006 in What Patriarchy?, Cock!, Shame on you for being a womanFinally, someone with the balls to hate all over women in an entertaining manner. Dick Masterson is the Jesus’ General of the MRA set, and he makes a compelling case for male superiority over at menarebetterthanwomen.com. After all, there is no case more compelling than a top ten list.
MenAreBetterThanWomen.com reached 200,000 visitors early this morning, so I thought I would mark the occasion by posting a very special top ten list of the top ten ways in which men are better than women.
Naturally as a man the moment I thought of an idea I set to work implementing it — in this case by writing it. It would have been exactly the same if my idea had been the wheel or the Hoover Dam. That’s because I’m a man and instead of taking shit from the world around me, I can shove shit right back into it as well.
The list is so convincing that I think only a sampling will convince you that Dick Masterson is just masterful.
9. Men are not sponges
Women are social chameleons — or better yet: social vampires. Women walk into a situation and before you know it they’ve completely changed their wardrobe and mannerisms as if they’ve joined a fucking cult. Men are not sheep. Everyone knows the word for a female sheep is ewe, but what about the male word? There isn’t one because sheep is something men are not.
8. Women are racists
Women’s entire lives and social circles are based around hatred. Do they hate their boyfriends? Do they hate their wardrobe? Do they hate each other? Yes, yes and fuck definitely. Men don’t go in for that silly sort of nonsense. If we’re dissatisfied, we pick up and move out. Or we take our mighty man muscles and lift fucking mountains so the world looks exactly the way we want it to. Men do more world changing before 9:00 AM than any woman ever has done in her whole life.
Excuse me while I wipe the testosterone that just oozed out of my screen off of my keyboard. Then, to the, uh, meat of the matter:
1. Men have penises
When it comes to being a man, being quick at identifying problems is tantamount to fixing them. In fact it’s tantamount-ier. Having a penis — in other words looking like a man and having man parts — is a man’s way of telling other men, ‘Hey. Look at me. I’m a man. I won’t fuck up whatever it is that you’re trying to do. If you need some help, maybe ask me and I’ll see if I can lend a man-hand. It’s the least I could do to be fucking courteous.’
I think that Concerned may be a bit too concerned about the content of the site, which is clearly satire:
Do women hate sex — and they do — because of some kind of woman-guilt from an outdated puritan societal dogma? Or perhaps a stigma of guilt or a fear of abandonment? No. None of these things are it. Women hate sex simply because they are lousy at it.
This can be proved in a quick stroll down the checkout aisle at your local market of groceries — a place thick to the rafters with women. Take a look at some of their magazines and you will no doubt see a running theme: ‘Ten Ways to not suck in bed’, ‘Six Things to do to Your Man that aren’t Lay There Like a Futon’, and ‘Honestly who gives half a fuck about socks being on or off? Jesus Christ that’s pathetic’.
However, I’m less sure how to take some of the comments, which get a little hairy:
Hello. I would like to know why women are the way the are, (fucking cunts, attention seekers etc, I cannot possibly list everything) . Im not disputing that they are, as this is a fact; I want to know WHY? Is it biological? Is it because of the media? Is it some sort of rebellion type shit against so called opression? Or is this a question that will never be answered? Please give me some insight into this.
For every person who is (or at least could be) mimicking the tone of the the cock-masterful Dick Masterson, there is another commenter saying shit like:
apart from the rape and pregnancy thing, i actually agree.
It’s scary how much some women seem to feed off attention from men. Slightly disgusting at times to.
Women can be manipulative vindictive bitches.
So what’s wrong with these guys? Why can’t I enjoy something like this:
So let’s compare: a woman’s lust for attention versus a man’s desire to consume or waste things — something very manly indeed. Take throwing a sandwich in the street for example. Do you know what’s better than throwing a sandwich in the street? That’s right, throwing two sandwiches in the street. Now what if that sandwich cost twice as much as the first? What if you had to wait in line again to get it? I would probably still do it and I’m betting that most men would.
…without reality hitting me in the face with something like this?
Yeah, that’s too bad she’s related to the office manager. Not much you can do about that. Otherwise, you could have a lot of fun toying with her until she packs her bags and fucks off forever.
But I suspect it’s good enough knowing that you have the little cunt’s number, as it were.
Good for you.
Strength and honor.
Can’t we make fun of these guys for just a few minutes without being reminded that there are a lot of fucked up guys out there who actually take stuff like “Every Woman Is A Cheating Whore” as gospel truth without stopping for a second to remember that all of these “truths” apply to men as well as women? That the whole site could be regendered and be just as funny (and/or offensive, depending on how you’re leaning)? Well, maybe not - you’d have to go through and replace the stereotypes by hand, but you get the idea.
>Dick Masterson
Subtle. I dungeddit.
Nobody tell him that the X-Ray diffraction analysis that eventually showed that DNA was a couble helix was done by a woman. Nobody tell him about my sister, who is infinitely smarter than me in pretty much everything, who is a nuclear engineer who could make mincemeat of this dude’s puny intellect.
His head might explode from the anti-misogyny annihilation reaction between his brain and the truth. And really, who want to deal with the energy released when that happens?
@Belledame, Men are better than women.com is the epitome of subtlety.
@JackGoff, Great name Jack. Almost as good as Dick Masterson.
Actually, Rosalind Franklin [the woman to whom you refer] has been discussed on mabtw. I’d say, though, that her contribution to the discovery of DNA was somewhat more a matter of “right place, right time”. I do think her work on the Tobacco Mosaic Virus remains outstanding, and it may well prove to be partly foundational in future subfields of hybrid organic computing.
I’m afraid your sister has not been discussed on mabtw, but good for her. I’ve a lot of respect for talented engineers, male and female. We have a few on mabtw, and a few lawyers, and a few PhD’s. Even a literal rocket scientist, though she doesn’t post much.
As for her “making mincemeat of this dude’s puny intellect”, that’s certainly possible, though I’ve my doubts. There are a number of reasonably intelligent and well-educated people on mabtw.com. As well as, to be sure, some people who are simply and sadly very angry, with women being the least of their problems. In fairness, that’s true of pretty much any website with more than 10 people posting and reading.
It’s also worth pointing out that we have a few female posters that are… well… very angry and more than a little crazy. The website again, is the least of their problems. One recent troll went through something like 100+ posts in 24 hours screeching angrily about how everyone was gay, had a tiny penis, etc.
@Kyso Great post. Hope cleaning the “oozing testosterone” off your screen and keyboard wasn’t too messy.
One thing though…
“That the whole site could be regendered and be just as funny (and/or offensive, depending on how you’re leaning)?”
No, no, I don’t think it would be. One of the (serious) arguments Dick makes is that the level of misandry in the public square towers over the level of misogyny. Note my phrasing… in the public square. It’s perfectly acceptable to portray dads as idiots in films, tv and advertising. Moms are overwhelmingly portrayed as capable, in control, level-headed. This may be an improvement over the stereotypes of the past, though I think it’s just as bad. It’s acceptable to portray research into male victims of violence/DV/child abuse as unnecessary relative to research into female victims. And acceptable, in most circles, to portray ‘most men’ as harassers, abusers, and potential rapists.
So simply having a site that talked about how ludicrously bad men were? Sorry, it’s been done, and done to death. It just wouldn’t be that funny. There are too many such sites that constantly relay that message, and it’s acceptable in polite society.
Now a site that showed men agonizing over their weight, their diet, their appearance, whether or not to take the Daddy track? That probably would be funny, because these are exactly the subtle — and unfair — pressures women and girls are constantly bombarded with by media and entertainment and columnists in our society. But that’s distinct from being told that you’re stupid, evil, and violent.
Regards,
-wolfe
*blinks at it*
See, that’s the sort of stuff that sucks the fun right out of it.
Ugh.
Being a virgin is tough.
Everyone knows the word for a female sheep is ewe, but what about the male word? There isn’t one because sheep is something men are not.
Why would he pass up on the ridiculously easy chance to make a sexual play on the word “ram”? Very curious. Unless I’m just missing the joke.
It’s perfectly acceptable to portray dads as idiots in films, tv and advertising. Moms are overwhelmingly portrayed as capable, in control, level-headed. This may be an improvement over the stereotypes of the past, though I think it’s just as bad.
I absolutely agree with you on this, and I think you could find a number of feminist blogs that would strongly support it as well. It’s part of the media’s plan to get one over on women, you see. If silly, vain women can be flattered into thinking they should do the dishes because their husbands are terrible at it, then men won’t have to do the dishes at all! How delightfully amusing, and not at all “misandric,” as the joke, in the end, is on women.
Junk Science —
I like to think that he skipped the ram joke because, as wolfe says, menarebeterthanwomen.com is the “epitome of subtlety.” I mean, look at that sheep argument again. It’s delightfully absurd. From the fact that there actually is a word for male sheep to the fact that the argument has nothing to do with heading, it’s nothing but bullshit the whole way through.
My roommate has this friend who has a philosophy degree and a drinking problem, and who delights in saying things with double and triple entendres that are designed to play everyone in the room off of each other - unless you see through his crap, then you get to sit back and enjoy the joke with him. I could almost hear that guy saying some of the stuff on Dick Masterson’s site. I hope I’m not giving Mr Masterson too generous of a reading, but my first response to the site, besides laughter, is that Dick Masterson is making fun of everyone and probably finds his most slimey and misogynist commenters to be just as laughable as any woman who gets upset and tries to pick fights in the comments.
Take this example from “All Women are Whores Part III” which is actually just a post to draw attention to female Star Wars fans in bare-midriff stormtrooper cosplay suits:
There’s more going on there than just misogyny, and it’s fucking funny. So funny, in fact, that in the absence of more information about cock-masterful Dick Masterson, I’m going to have to assume that the misogyny itself is mostly an act designed maximize hits, comments, and ultimately Dick Masterson’s entertainment.
You know, now i’m thinking about it, I remember being on that site once before: via a link through another really funny guy, called something like “Jungle Dumb.” no, I don’t remember how i got -there-, or how to get back. you can perhaps guess what the funny funny joke was in that instance.
Two thoughts on the website:
(1) I think Wolfe’s suggestion is completely on point. The reason why something like men worrying about their appearance, weight, etc. is funny, is because it is an unusual image for a man — one that is more commonly portrayed in women. It would be odd, different to see men in this position.
I believe that the supposedly funny blogs on MABTW are mostly real stereotypes that are quite prevalent - such as women are lazy, stupid, conniving, “suck at computers,” etc. Because these are REAL stereotypes of women in our culture, I don’t find them quite as witty or amusing as it seems some of you do.
(2) On the other hand, my biggest “concern” is less about what kind of satire might be amusing or funny, and more about the fact that many of those who comment on the site feel that these are intellectual arguments, not hyperbole.
When someone challenges the blogs by Dick, posts didn’t respond by saying “it’s hyperbole stupid!”
Instead, those who respond argue the merit (quite emphatically) of every detail about how men are superior to women in most every way (including intelligence, ability, honesty, etc,) — and sound pretty angry…
For example: “Your incomes are lower than males because all you do in the work place is cause strife and kill productivity. All your work is done by whatever kissass is near enough to you to do all your work and give you the credit. Females won’t be happy until they are paid “median male incomes” to sit on their ass all day at home taking care of their cats.
Or, for example: “Fuckin women can’t even scan items right without some sort of issue, men have to do everything if we want it to get done right. If I get a female cashier I don’t even look at her in the face nor do I respond to her, what’s the point. I just check out her rack.”
Or, my favorite: “They need a slap on the ass to do even a half-assed job.”
There may be something more going on at times, Kyso, but there is a lot of misogyny going on as well.
That said, I want to also say that I’m glad that Kyso put a post up about the website. I think it is interesting to hear different points of view, and I think that the comments on MABTW.com are eye-opening as to the kinds of issues that are really getting under the skin of a certain subgroup of men in our culture.
Thanks, Kyso.
I’m not defending the comments. The commenters are full of crap, and some of it does get damn hateful. But the content of the site not only lacks the hateful tone of many of the contents, it also touches on topics raised in a more serious light by people like Amanda or Hugo. If he’s not doing it on purpose, then I don’t know what to think.
Compare his post on weddings to the example I quoted above about wasting the two sandwiches. He criticizes women for blowing too much cash trying to one-up each other on weddings, but then says that there are few things manlier than consumption or waste. You can very much make the argument that the American marketing machine is trying to link wasteful or harmful activities to some nebulous concept of masculinity. In addition, it would be analogous to the marketing hype behind weddings. In both cases, something unneccesary (a large wedding if you’re a girl, a Hummer or 100-inch TV if you’re a guy) is tied to some emotion that is supposed to be beyond critisism. Amanda has touched on the topic of marketing unhealthy or wasteful products to men on the premise that it’s just “manlier.” It’s just as stupid to tie your ideas of masculinity down to eating a large steak or having a large car or throwing an sandwich in the street as it is stupid to let a bridal store convince you to spend $1,000 on a dress because “your day” won’t be perfect without it.
Now, Dick Masterson doesn’t tie these two points together on the site. He doesn’t explore this in any serious way. Instead in one post conspicuous consumption is derided because a woman is doing it, and in a second wastefulness is praised because a man is doing it, plus he makes an effort to come up with an example of wastefulness that makes no sense and in fact casts the person doing the wasting in the worst possible light. You’d have to be some kind of moron to read about a guy who waited in line twice to spend money on sandwiches just to throw them in the street and go, “hell, yeah, I would soo do that! That is totally what being a man is all about.”
But we have a comment roster full of such people, apparently. People who are only reading what they want to see (you know, full throttle hatred of women) and don’t stop to really read and consider if a) this guy isn’t actually making fun of them, too or b) if he’s not, is he really the kind of guy you want to lionize? He’s not doing a very good job of making guys look good.
So what do we have? We have a funny guy with a site full of volatile bullshit who may or may not actually mean a word he writes, and he’s managed to draw a bunch of hard-core misogynists out of the woodwork, proving if nothing else that men who hate women are just as humorless as women who hate men. Shocking, that.
Well, I liked the site and thought that giving it a bunch of links would get me a better class of troll. Wolfe is a good start. Hope to see more of him around here.l
What do you think, Wolfe? I’d be interested to hear if it is also your sense that Dick may be intentionally making comments that are meant to make fun of the idea that men are better than women. Do you also think that he is actually making fun of misogynists and purposely giving examples of what is manly that are moronic?
Wolfe, your favorite troll Kyso, has his own blog (http://wolfe.mabtw.com), and it is quite interesting. He appears to go to some considerable lengths to keep the name-calling and insults to a minimum, and states that his “views differ to some modest degree from those generally expressed upon mabtw.com” Hmmmm.
y’know, i never really liked Andy Kaufman either, funny as he genuinely was (sort of the master troll, really); there is a certain point at which i think the reason one can’t tell the difference between the person and the persona is because -they- can’t, anymore.
“the mask you wear becomes you, etc. etc.”
i mean, if you do it -all the time…-
Some of this post may be unfunny. Some of it will be funny, but only if you have a very dry sense of humor. No warranties, express or implied. Dealer may sell for less. And I hope you can use HTML for formatting, but we’ll see.
I’ll respond since someone (Concerned) directly posed a question to me. And I see I’ve been upgrade to “a better class of troll”. To be honest, I was a bit taken aback at the response to what I thought was a pretty innocuous and friendly/polite post on my part — ranging from some humor (”Mabtw is the epitome of subtlety”) to some serious comment. Belle referred to me (or my post) as “it”, Kyso referred to me as spoiling the mood (shades of 60’s there), and JackGoff’s eloquent response was “Ugh”.
But hey, different sites, different rules, different people. I made my original post because there were some serious accusations of misogyny, and I felt they represented at best a half truth about mabtw.
@Concerned I am in part wrong about you, I think. Only in part though. Your posts here suggest that. I will write more on this tomorrow at mabtw.
@kyso ‘I like to think that he skipped the ram joke because, as wolfe says, menarebetterthanwomen.com is the “epitome of subtlety.” ‘
Yep. I used this, obviously as a doubled edged comment. MABTW is like a [self-?]righteous battering-ram pounding at the received wisdom of society; it’s like some very decent (though poorly edited) genuinely subtle humor; it’s like some great subtle and reasonably intelligent discussion; and it’s like a bunch of yahoo’s saying damn silly things about women. It’s all of those things, subtle and incredibly unsubtle. But a lot of Dick’s writing is the former.
@Kyso “I’m not defending the comments. The commenters are full of crap”. Some are, some aren’t. We’ll have to agree to disagree here. I’m a commenter, I obviously don’t believe I’m full of crap. Concerned has become a commenter; I think she is ‘mostly crap free’. (a play on Concerned’s comments on men as being mostly harassers. I know, explaining the joke destroys it. Too bad.)
“in the absence of more information about cock-masterful Dick Masterson” If I believed mabtw.com was a site that advocated hatred of women, I wouldn’t post there. I may of course be stupid or naive, sure. Others can judge that.
@Concerned: “I believe that the supposedly funny blogs on MABTW are mostly real stereotypes that are quite prevalent - such as women are lazy, stupid, conniving, “suck at computers,” etc. Because these are REAL stereotypes of women in our culture”
But I don’t see these as acceptable stereotypes of women in our culture. They’re circulated as samizdat. Whereas the stereotypes of men that I listed above are acceptable — you’ve even articulated some or all of them.
On a personal point, indeed, the idea that women ’suck at computers’ is risible — see Ada, Countess Lovelace and Admiral Grace Hopper if you haven’t already. We should hope and pray women suck, but surely, not at computers. (Apologies if that humor is in poor taste, I still don’t have a feel for your site).
@Concerned “What do you think, Wolfe? I’d be interested to hear if it is also your sense that Dick may be intentionally making comments that are meant to make fun of the idea that men are better than women”
Of course he’s making (and having) fun. Of that there’s no doubt. Kyso’s analysis of his posts is generally excellent.
@Concerned/Kyso, “Wolfe, your favorite troll Kyso, has his own blog (http://wolfe.mabtw.com) and it is quite interesting. He appears to go to some considerable lengths” Yep. As Concerned notes, there are rules. Surprisingly, a majority of my readership is female. My basic rule is that you have to assume you’re in my living room, as my guest. And if you insult another guest, you’re not welcome. But then, my blog is a lot less funny than mabtw.com.
Best,
-wolfe
“When you look into the abyss, the abyss also looks into you” - Frederich Nietzsche
Mike’s Corollary: “What you seek to lampoon, may end up lampooning you…”
Um, misandry doesn’t exist, wolfe. Has never existed. It has no power behind it. It’s saying that an opressed group is capable of oppression in a society where the oppressors have all the power. It’s non-sequitur. I said “Ugh” because there is nothing truthful in your original post to respond to. I articulated my disgust at that fact. Fair enough that it might be satire. There are people who don’t believe it is, as shown by the multiple comments at the original site. Want to know what true hatred towards a sex is? Read a few comments. I’m sure if you really felt that Dick’s about satire, you’ll be disgusted like I was. Granted, nothing you’ve written has shown that you, in fact, do understand that misogyny drives our society.
Misandry? BAH HAHAHA!
“One of the (serious) arguments Dick makes is that the level of misandry in the public square towers over the level of misogyny”
Okay, not to say oh for the love of god, you realize that Dick is a parody, right? In other news, Jesus General, not all that conservative. Stephen Colbert? Not exactly president of Bill O’Reilley’s fan club.
But I don’t see these as acceptable stereotypes of women in our culture.
You may not see them as acceptable, but a lot of other people do, and for the most part they’re quite mainstream and uninteresting.
men who hate women are just as humorless as women who hate men.
I could probably count all the women that I know hate men on one hand, but yeah, none of them are remotely funny, except as sideshow displays. And men who hate women tend to range from extremely frightening to uncomfortably staid, passive-aggressively terrified as they are of pissing off a woman.
@Jackgoff “because there is nothing truthful in your original post to respond to”. Ok, so you’re calling me a liar. So your name is not great. And Rosalind Franklin wasn’t a part of the discovery of DNA? And her work may not be “foundational in future subfields of hybrid organic computing”.
You’ve stated these as verifiable falsehoods from the first few paragraphs of my original posts. You’re crazy or a liar. I’m not sure which. But obviously much of what I said was verifiable fact. People can google/wikipedia and verify. I’m baffled by why you’d choose to call me a liar on such easily provable grounds.
I think probably you’re a young lad (or lass; I assume the former) (18-29) that hasn’t really grasped truth or the real world. You’re still in college or something tightly connected to it. Nothing wrong with that, but in the real world, facts matter Jack. You’ve bluntly called me a liar and I’m calling you on that.
Please prove the following are lies (remember, you stated that that there was nothing truthful in my original post.
-Rosalind Franklin’s work was foundational for definition of the TMV.
-That work may in turn be critical for future organic computing research
-Rosalind Franklin has been talked about on mabtw
-Your sister has never been talked about on mabtw (please point me to the link where we talked about her)
-female trolls on MABTW.com have been rude and ignorant.
You can prove all those, and more, right?
Right?
Of course you can’t.
Look, Concerned, much though I detest her view of men and what I see, rightly or wrongly, as a passive-aggressive style of attacking men… Concerned has to my astonishment been much more of a stand-up person than you. She’s got lacunae the size of galaxies in her world-view, but she actually seems to be honest.
You, Jack? You’re ridiculous. You’ve made a flat statement that nothing in my original statement is true. Back that up, retract it utterly, or begone.
I’ll continue my response below. It won’t be as contentious, I promise.
Regards and respect,
-wolfe
“On the other hand, my biggest “concern” is less about what kind of satire might be amusing or funny, and more about the fact that many of those who comment on the site feel that these are intellectual arguments, not hyperbole.
When someone challenges the blogs by Dick, posts didn’t respond by saying “it’s hyperbole stupid!”
Instead, those who respond argue the merit (quite emphatically) of every detail about how men are superior to women in most every way (including intelligence, ability, honesty, etc,) — and sound pretty angry…”
Yeah, but I think that’s the point. The net is overrun with scary MRA types, and when Dick mocks the hell out of them, they respond by going “DUUUDE! I LOVE YOU! YOU GET IT!” LOL He’s not creating or encouraging these guys, unfortunately they already exist, and while their comments are as scary as ever, at least it’s funny, including for the satirist, to see them getting slapped upside the head and not even know the difference. Their minds aren’t going to be changed because they are that clueless, so a little fun at their expense can’t hurt. I get why some some liberals might not see this as satire because it’s not different from typical MRA ranting, but it’s so over the top and yet not quite so scary at the same time.
Oh and (sit down wolfe, I don’t want to scare you) I think there’s a good possibility that Dick’s actually a woman, so….
“it” was the post, yes.
>“When you look into the abyss, the abyss also looks into you” - Frederich Nietzsche
Mike’s Corollary: “What you seek to lampoon, may end up lampooning you…”>
*nods sagely*
@Caromboard “Oh and (sit down wolfe, I don’t want to scare you) I think there’s a good possibility that Dick’s actually a woman, so….”
How do you know I’m not a woman with a devilish sense of humor?
“The net is overrun with scary MRA types”
No, no it’s not. That’s one of the problems in our society to view the ‘other’ as ’scary’. A lot of polarization is going on, propelled by fanaticists of all types. It’s not clear to me that this is necessary.
-wolfe
He’s not creating or encouraging these guys, unfortunately they already exist
Technically that isn’t correct. He has flamed me and to my eyes, encouraged others to have a go at me, simply based on my sex. He tends to like to refer to me as either a farm animal, a child, a teenage girl or a lunatic. I’m not sure if he has any other categories for women aside from those.
I’ve also thought at times that it is possible he is actually a she, but I don’t think that is the case. Now I think he is actually a few, and they’re all male.
I don’t think he has a set view of women either, most of his posts incorporate aspects of commenters discussion the week prior, which he weaves into a misogynistic fairy tale.
Most of it seems to be nothing more than catering to the particular audience for that week. Mostly, it just seems to be a business and he couldn’t care less about what is PC or non-PC, as long as the site meter continues to roll. And I just bet he/they are loving this extra attention.
OK, yes. I made the blunt statement that you never made any truthful statement and that is incorrect. The gist of your first statement however is incorrect. Misandry does not exist as a force in our society. Oh, and my name? It’s my name.
How do you know I’m not a woman with a devilish sense of humor?
Uh…Wild guess…
No, no it’s not. That’s one of the problems in our society to view the ‘other’ as ’scary’
Okay, you got me there. I’m going to learn to love guys who call me a fucking cunt and say they want to make me bleed. Looked at in another light, that’s healthy. And remember, anyone who doesn’t agree is a vindictive bitch who wants to suck a man dry AND portray him badly on television (say, as the old overweight shlub with the hot young wife who doesn’t, alas, appreciate him as he deserves). Down with misandry and all its fanaticists! lol
Look, Concerned, much though I detest her view of men and what I see, rightly or wrongly, as a passive-aggressive style of attacking men… Concerned has to my astonishment been much more of a stand-up person than you. She’s got lacunae the size of galaxies in her world-view, but she actually seems to be honest.
What’s your problem with Concerned, exactly? I didn’t see her attack men, just the woman-hating troglodyte commenters on Dick Masterson’s site.
How do you know I’m not a woman with a devilish sense of humor?
Because you’re not funny.
Let’s give him some credit, though, sure he immediately reached for “passive-aggressive man-hater with detestible view of men,” but so far he’s refrained from “hysterical woman” or “vaginal dentata.”
And I found “Concerned has to my astonishment been much more of a stand-up person than you. She’s got lacunae the size of galaxies in her world-view, but she actually seems to be honest” to be *far* more charming than condescending, *honestly.*
I think that Dick Masterson is a chronic master debater.
But not a very cunning linguist.
“I’m going to learn to love guys who call me a fucking cunt”
That’s unacceptable in my view. No one should call you that. It’s revolting and disgusting. People should be free to call you wrong, or an idiot on the basis of your ideas. But an F-ing C-nt? No, that’s wrong. You’ve a choice whether or not to expose stupidity. You’ve little or no choice on the matter of gender.
Yes, mabtw does that sometimes. It’s wrong to do so.
It’s like dismissing my comments the way some posters here have. They assume I’m lily-white American (wrong) and that I’m male (maybe wrong).
“What’s your problem with Concerned, exactly? I didn’t see her attack men,”
It’s on mabtw.com. I think Concerned would agree she and I have a dispute that is not on the basis of our respective putative genders. She might well argue I’m wrong, and that’d be a fair (but wrong, imo) statement, but I don’t think she’d argue there’s no grounds for there being a dispute. I’m reevaluating my views of Concerned, based upon her posts here.
As for Jackgoff “OK, yes. I made the blunt statement that you never made any truthful statement and that is incorrect.” OK fine, he withdraws his accusation that I’m a liar and he acknowledges that he simply states things that are untrue. I thank him for the acknowledgment, and I shall govern my responses accordingly to him (though frankly I shall pay him more attention for the honest admission).
I know it’s not funny, but let’s try and move beyond that. Caramboard has a point for all her cynicism about men. It’s not acceptable for me — or in the public square — to view women that way.
It’s for that precise reason that I argue there’s more to mabtw.com than meets the eye as Ms. (I assume) Kyso argues.
Respect to all,
-wolfe
That’s unacceptable in my view
Gosh, thanks. I appreciate the validation. (Was that passive-agressive?)
Caramboard has a point for all her cynicism about men
Okay, I don’t want to be mean, but seriously, come out of your parents’ basement (yes I know you’re 50 or so). I’m not cynical about men, why are you even assuming I’m a woman, hmmm? It’s very possible that a man could be called a fucking cunt by another man. I’m cynical about creepy, scary (yes, scary) MRAs (FYI that stands for Men’s Rights Activists, a tiny subset of male kind) who infest the internet trying earnestly to convince people that white male billionaries are the world’s most oppressed group, and who like to vent their anger in the creepiest imaginable ways. Most men aren’t like that, which is why it’s all the funnier that you guys (oh yeah wait I’m sorry you’re very likely female *ahem*) read the site of Dick (aka the feminist woman who set up the damn site to mock stupid, oblivious MRAs) and see him as your leader and try to form your own sincere community around his parody page. lol I mean, does being this irony challenged make your life very difficult?
Oh, and if you are a female satirist, your prose style needs serious help, if you want to distinguish yourself from the guys who bore endlessly everywhere with this typical garden variety heard-it-all-before stuff you need to be a lot jazzier–use your mighty man muscles and see Dick’s “men have penises” and “women are racists” for inspiration. Parody is supposed to be FUNNY.
Who’s cynical about men? We’re cynical about assholes who call women fucking cunts. Not to mention passive-aggressive condescending weirdos.
no, no, you missed the IRONIC part. clearly. s/he’s an engima! wrapped in bacon! is sie a cunningly sly parody of a misogynist? an actual misogynist disguised as a parody-misogynist? an actual misogynist who’s pretty much an unconscious self-parody, but eventually it dawned on ‘im that people were laughing for some mysterious reason and decided to just go with it? a terribly terribly sensitive person who puts on this mask to hide the tears on the inside? the mystery! the intrigue! the Dwama! it’s like Umberto Eco and Andy Kaufman and Greta Garbo and that kind of hostile guy who stands on the corner and shouts incomprehensible but vaguely alarming things in your general direction, all bundled up in one intricately knotted, um, bundle of intricate knots-type thing. RIVETING.
Shit-stirring complex humor of the Andy Kaufman sort is distressing in the sense that a good satire can convey more layers of complexity than hundreds of pages of theorizing, it’s true.
shrug. Lenny Bruce, to my mind, was a good, no, great satirist. Difference between him and Kaufman was, for all his demons, he gave a shit about the world around him; that was the -point- of his satire. and he was also able to laugh at himself.
Kaufman, I don’t think ultimately he ever really was expressing anything that didn’t boil down to “look at me! yes, that’s right. now: fuck you.”
then, too, to my mind, “trolling”=! “satire,” especially.
One would think basic interpretive theory 101 would include noting that his motivations are irrelevant to the discussion. Why did people pay attention? In Kaufman’s case, because he was revealing to them absurdities of their culture they didn’t grasp as absurd until he mocked them.
He reminds me of that guy, what was him name, who took the “I got pregnant just to have an abortion for the party” story in The Onion at face value. When he got called on it, he tried to play it off like he was making some kind of metajoke that everyone else was too stupid to get, while still reiterating his original point, and comedy ensued. Damn, what was that guy’s name?
Peter something. But that guy was so much worse. And he just kept crowing and crowing about how “angry” people were at him, as if they weren’t enjoying the fuck out of the whole thing. It was brilliant.
Sorry for the delay in getting in on this. It’s been hard for me to stay involved, but I really think the discussion is fascinating.
I think it is interesting that Female who posts on MABTW and, I think, on Wolfe’s site feels so stepped on by Dick. I’m glad you shared that, because I think my reaction to the site is based on the fact that I think many of the people who post there are happy to see you hurt/shocked by what they say about women (and about you personally).
I have to apologize for really being relatively new to this medium. So, I have to take it on word value from some of you that all over the internet there are individuals who are angry, shamefully rude, and try to shock. Some of you have indicated that it is not just that there are random individuals doing this, but that there are many contexts in which this is specifically done by men attacking women (Caromboard). I looked back over some of Kyso’s previous posts and noticed mention nomarriage.com which says things like “A huge percentage of American women are selfish, flighty, insecure, needy and psychotic, and quite capable of concealing those traits during the dating phase White ‘career’ American chicks are the bottom of the barrel marriage-wise. ” I’m guessing from your comments here that you have many other examples of these kinds of sites. So, I wonder why the community on MABTW.com still think that there’s is a singular kind of position.
I also think it is surprising that even some of the more reasonable people who I’ve talked to on that website, firmly believe that discrimination against women largely does not exist and that feminism’s core belief is basically “all men are disgusting, purposely complicitous members of the patriachy who wish to violate and assault women.” The nuance that feminism actually goes into discussing the ways in which society keeps men in a cycle (as well as women) is lost on a lot of the people I’ve spoken to. Try mentioning societal pressures on that website, and people rant and rave that there is no such thing.
Wolfe- although I agree that we seriously disagree on some of the principle issues that we are discussing, I’m glad that you no longer feel I am being deceitful or manipulative.
Junk Science- thanks for looking out… I think Wolfe was under the impression when he first saw that I had posted here that I was trolling on MABTW and that I was just being manipulative and not really trying to have a discussion with him or the other people on that site. I can see why that would make him think badly of me. I’m also not sure that he has a good feel yet for what my beliefs/politics are, and he may be a drop defensive.
I agree with belledame and MikeEss - I think there are dangers inherent in choosing to live in the satire… I prefer “Be the change you wish to see in the world” rather than “act like an idiot to make fun of other idiots” (the first was gandhi therefore much more eloquent :>)
Concerned, I think what happened to me is similar to what happened to you, in terms of trying to be rational and getting attacked for it, though when I began posting on the site I thought it was a parody so I joined in and took the piss, only I took it out of Dick, not out of women, so all the men (esp. Dick) turned around and bit me on the ass - hard.
I agree with wolfe’s analysis of the site - that it exaggerates to shock and to entertain - and that it is a parody that contains some truths. It does overgeneralise to all women which is the ridiculous aspect. It is also subtle because Dick does take the piss out of men in his anecdotes occassionally, and even, himself - which is always extremely hilarious when male posters just don’t see it and get on like another poster here observed, and go, “Yay Dick, you are teh MASTER!!1!”
The unfortunate and sad aspect of the site is that many men there just aren’t in a funny mood. They are seriously pissed off with feminism and legislation that discriminates against men and they then take that out on hapless females who stumble onto the site like babes in the woods. That is unfunny and the reason I no longer post there.
These men are simply giving MRA and FRA’s who may be mentally sane, a very bad name.
The nuance that feminism actually goes into discussing the ways in which society keeps men in a cycle (as well as women) is lost on a lot of the people I’ve spoken to.
Of course it is. They’re only interested in whining about how much they hate women, accusing feminists of hating men, and failing to have a sense of irony. You’d probably have more productive discussions in Freeperland.
Pete, that’s him! Thanks. The funniest part was that he just couldn’t grasp that there was so such person as “Caroline Weber” (the article’s author) no matter how many people tried to explain it to him. Poor thing, he kept trying to backtrack and act like he was in on the joke all along, but he just could not bring himself to believe that Caroline didn’t actually exist and he couldn’t stop referncing her as if she were real. “I knew all along that Caroline Weber was a liar like all those who kill their babies and the joke’s on her and all of you,” “Pete, there is no Caroline Weber. Just stop. Please!”
Female, I apologize for misconstruing the situation, sorry you’ve been picked apart.
The nuance that feminism actually goes into discussing the ways in which society keeps men in a cycle (as well as women) is lost on a lot of the people I’ve spoken to
Concerned, that’s an excellent, excellent point, but you should go back through some of the archives here where there are lots of examples of sites like Men’s News Daily where the cretins we’re talking about tend to hang out, or more about the MRA movement generally. There are places where guys who are interested in feminism tend to go to have a reasonable discussion and maybe learn something, and there are places where angry guys with outsized senses of entitlement and resentment go to vent their spleens. I think the anonymity encourages some guys to try and outdo each other, and these are the ones who you can’t reason with no matter what (check out Biting Beaver’s page). And like you mention, even some of the seemingly more reasonable guys who hang on the periphery of these things, well, a lot of them aren’t there to reflect on their world view and see if it’s completely rational, they believe what they believe and they’ll keep believing it regardless of any opposing evidence or whatever compelling arguments you make (and if you visit kos and check out some of the archives, you’ll find that there are tons of guys who are supposedly on our side who repeat the same hoary old chestnuts about what a tough time American guys have living in a virtual matriachy, lol). I’m not trying to tell you what to do, I just know it can be very upsetting to read some basically borderline psychotic messages and not be able to get through to anybody.
Caromboard, you didn’t need to apologise to me but thank you anyway.
The thing that I think confuses people about mabtw and that shites me is that the site name is guaranteed to ensure a large percentage of women who post there will do so without first discerning any wisdom from previous posts and who automatically start posting hostiley in defense of themselves and their gender. This in turn will guarantee that most men there will respond to them in a hostile manner. This will then be taken at face value as all women are psycho feminist bitches and all men are psychotic misogynistic asshats.
Btw, the picking apart of myself can be likened to Zen instruction, it has been quite educational.
Man-pert. That’s a good one.
-Dick
The problem with Dick’s site is that, while it may be a satire, it offers no real criticism of the anti-feminist rhetoric it espouses. Furthermore, it seems like the fellow(s) who created the site, having put so much energy into the angsty supremacist polemic, are taking many of their arguments fairly seriously. But the site ultimately fails because it isn’t funny; the “jokes” are not an analysis of gender in our society, and have no redeeming value. Dick merely repeats stereotypes entrenched in our society, takes his rhetoric to extreme levels, and expects us all to laugh.
Finally, Dick Masterson has posted antagonistic remarks on a number of feminist-related websites, encouraging women to view the site and get offended/hurt. I think it’s an unfortunate tactic. After all, would we think it was funny if Dick had a site called whitepeoplearebetterthanasians, and went on a Asian-related site and spewed tired anti-Asian slurs in order to get angry attention from Asian men and women? I doubt it. It isn’t funny, and while Dick may be a reasonable human being outside his internet persona, he should really consider his own personal motives behind the creation of this site.
P.S. Empirical studies suggest that lower empathy in humans suggests lower intellectual capacity.
Empirical studies suggest that lower empathy in humans suggests lower intellectual capacity.
A troll on my blog is a study in this principle.
I believe it JackGoff, trolling is a sad business. I guess it makes people feel powerful or important or funny to harass and bully others anonymously. I often wonder if trolls feel embarrassed about their behavior after they’ve done it. I sure would.
In other news, I liked your retorts to Wolfe’s comments–you’re good at finding logical errors. It’s funny to me that someone like Wolfe, who professes male-superiority, would also simultaneously suggest that men are, somehow, now the main (or only) victims in our society. I mean, is Wolfe suggesting that big business, commercial production, media moguls are so pussy-whipped by angry feminists that they’ve been cowed into projecting negative images of dads all over the TV? It’s a strange argument–kind of a James Dobson-esque regurgitation.
A lot of you are right. Some of the guys on there are taking it to that level where it’s no longer intelligent argument with a few fanatical tweaks here and there.
Yes a lot of men do defend these beliefs to the death. But how else would we stil have democracy?
Female, you began posting on the site with “jokes” about nailing mens feet to the floor to watch them walk in circles.
You deserved every flame you got. It wasn’t based just on you being female.
MABTW is truth, unfortunately women and manginas
like most on here can’t accept the truth.
Women can’t accept what they can’t manipulate.
Women struggle in maths because the answers are true,
and you can’t argue with mathematics.
The idea behind the site is not to go out
and abuse women but to wake men the fuck up like
yourselves and help you from being pussy whipped.
It’s the quiet ones you’ve got to watch and men have
said nothing for 30 years, until FUCKING NOW.