198 thoughts on “Why Don’t Feminists Call Kate Upton A Misogynist?”

1. “Yet feminists blame male desire and the overall “patriarchy” for the “sexism” of the modelling industry”
   They have no choice. Feminists may hate pretty women, and may be motivated by resentment and petty jealousy, whether of those pretty women or the men for whom they bear ‘penis-envy’, but that does not change the nature of the female imperative that they must serve. This is the tragedy of the feminist woman: she despises her body, and its status within the male gaze as no more than a pair of tits and arse to objectify, but that self-same objectification is for her a royal road to power, albeit a covert one. Female narcissism is no casual character trait of the female gender. It is the exercise of power within a world increasingly organised around feminist-controlled definitions of consent. In order to constrain our sexuality they must maximise the appeal of their own, all the better to enslave. Obviously the archetypal feminist operating wizard of oz like behind the curtain is a fat-arsed but flat chested harridan with the pheromonal appeal of a rotting whale carcass which is precisely why they need nubile lovelies like ms Upton. They need to amplify Ms Upton’s appeal to the level of intoxication but only so she like the Sirens of old can reel in passing sailors to be dashed to pieces on to the rocks. Feminism pushes its heroin so that it can fight the drug trade, but at the same time it has to desperately disguise the fact that it is the one tending the poppy fields

   1. After such a well-argued article, that is an excellent first comment.

      1. Thanks. Feminist hypocrisy makes me gnash my teeth

         1. Their hypocritical displays are indeed a serious problem. Even worse however is how utterly brazen and obvious it has become, yet most individuals remain completely oblivious to it.

         2. Same here. I have no problem admiring a woman with a great body but it’s fucked up because men take all the heat for it. You’ll never hear feminists or SJWs call out one of their own as an attention whore because it would reduce members of its own rank (it would start to divide them up).
            They don’t want a division, so it must be the evil man. If the evil man would stop looking at her body, then she wouldn’t have to pose for that camera and she could find other employment (their way of thinking).
            Next up, why a woman drank too much, drove home and killed someone in a car accident. It’s all the fault of these evil men for making alcohol.

         3. I don’t see any immediate signs of anything changing on this front, but equally I don’t think its sustainable. There are lots of people now, in and out of the manosphere, who are noting the discrepancy between what feminists say is the case and what is the reality on the ground. Ultimately women know they like attention and court it often shamelessly (on whatever terms) and in the long term trying to persuade the world that that isn’t the case is going to be a losing battle

         4. Your joke about alcohol neatly parallels the original arguments for prohibition.

         5. The “all men are idiots” t-shirt is basically spot-on.

         6. Yeah…we’re seeing it again today with weed. Someone is many too much money is the real reason why it remains illegal.

         7. I call bullshit when I hear. Will it change things? I don’t know but I can’t sit by and listen to some of the nonsense going on today. It’s going to take us, in the manosphere, to make that call. White knights, manginas and SJWS aren’t going to do it.

         8. absolutely. Our job is to hold up a massive great mirror to their face. At the moment they can still believe they are a force for good even when they commit evil. It is up to us though to show them what they are inflicting upon the world. That will take time and strategy

         9. I don’t even know if we can convince women (because of their nature). It may mean convincing all men that our government is against us (not our government) and showing how politicians don’t give a fuck about men (just need the woman vote).
            When’s the last time you ever heard a politician talk about what a man needs? It’s always this bullshit about woman’s needs, illegal immigrants or average working Americans. You never hear them talk about the average man’s needs.

         10. they won’t talk about men’s needs or problems until men start waking up and voting (or registering their discontent) in a way that forces them to take note. That will be over their dead body so to speak for the most part. Ironically its when enough women start worrying and complaining that they will start saying the right things – women don’t need to be reached through logic / persuasion. If they start to ‘feel’ the effects, and bear some of the consequences themselves then they’ll do what they always do, start moaning, but about the right things. Well its a dream anyway

   2. In Canada there has been a bunch of legal wrangling about prostitution. By and large it has been feminists (and other left of centre SJWs) who have been trying to get it free and clear legalized (prostitution has always been legal in Canada but laws against soliciting, pimping and cathouses mean that you can’t run it as a commercial enterprise or a “career”).
      .
      Meanwhile, they will attack pornography as an industry, which is basically prostitution that you make a video of.
      .
      At law school I learned three oxy-morons: 1) civil litigation (it isn’t), 2) legal reasoning (they don’t) and 3) feminist thought (there isn’t really if you look closely).

      1. I heard something about that, namely that it’s the conservatives who are favour of criminalising male punters only – something which elsewhere is almost exclusively a feminist position. If feminists were truly about women controlling their own bodies and making their own choices they would be both pro prostitution (where a clear conceptual distinction was made between prostitution and trafficking) and pro porn, where there is no suggestion of coercion. In practice they have to reconcile their inner puritanism with the recognition that womens’ power and influence in society depends mainly upon the allure and mesmerism of their bodies. But they can’t acknowledge that, so they work to make any sexual attraction women hold over men as something that is our responsibility alone, even to the point of making men culpable for the choices women make.

         1. What happened was that the Supreme Court found that current laws against bawdy houses and pimps actually create danger for hookers, so they struck down those laws. The government had two choices: legalize the whole thing or make it completely illegal. The social conservative element chose the latter but to have it pass muster in what is a largely left-leaning country they adopted the “Swedish Model” which only criminalizes the purchase of sex, not the sale.
            .
            I don’t really have a horse in that race. If and when I return to Canada with a wife and kids in tow, I don’t want them to see hookers on their way to school or to be propositioned by johns on their way to the grocery mart.
            .
            If made legal then prostitution, as with all parts of the sexual and relationship and gender dynamics in the West, will become taxed, over priced and of questionable quality.

         2. Given how similar Canada seems to be to the wider feminist Swedish model, one might wonder whether the feminists who stood against the Swedish model of criminalising the purchase of sex weren’t actually confident of its passing – I used to look at one popular canadian feminist site and the Swedish model was their holy grail.
            I am not sure what things were like before but I’ve never heard any one argue that street walkers enhanced an area. It sounds like the situation has been misrepresented. I live in the centre of a European city and there’s a gentleman’s nightclub at the end of my road, not far from a school in fact. I’ve never visited it, nor do I plan to, but I’ve never seen any trouble there, and on the one occasion that I saw what looked like one of the girls with a burly looking fellow they looked like they were best friends. Maybe the reality inside is different but it doesn’t look that way.
            The truth is just as with feminists turning a blind eye to Kate Upton’s organised jiggling it’s about power and economic advantage. Criminalising (the purchase of) prostitution enforces the Marxist class analysis of women as an oppressed class in need of protection, while at the same time artificially raising their wider SMV. In a more or less free market situation, both men and women get to make adult choices, whether about getting married or paying by the hour.

         3. You would never see hookers and pimps on the way to school because no reasonable person would stand for that. Even without government interference, brothels would have an interest in positioning themselves where they would not antagonize potential customers. After all, the last thing Daddy wants is the apple of his eye watching him come out of the cat-house across the street…

         4. One would think so, but the sine qua non of modern, liberal culture is to push limits for no particular reason. There will always be some stupid bitch who wants to hang her tail out on whatever corner she wants, and there will always be some asshole looking to buy that tail.
            .
            Wide open legalization could certainly change the dynamics of marriage 2.0. “I slave all week to put a roof over your head and food in our oversized stomach and now you won’t blow me? I was going to buy you a new Gucci hand bag but instead I think I will have the Russian whore on the corner gobble my knob like it is a fucking national landmark.”

         5. Again, it’s not about being anti-porn. It’s about being anti-scummy porn producers who basically chew up and spit out young naïve 18/19 year olds (both male and female) with the promise of fame and big bucks. Neither of which comes.

         6. Street prostitution was never going to be legal regardless.
            And no one, the left or the right is particularly happy with the result they came up with since it’s very likely to be tossed out the first time it’s challenged in court, starting the whole thing over again.

         7. If some stupid bitch decided to hang her arse out on the corner, in your neighborhood, security would rapidly and efficiently dispose of her.

         8. There are some strip bars on Yonge Street and I just ho-hum it if I am downtown shopping with my young niece. It should not have to get any worse.
            .
            Several years ago the left went berserk when the cops thought about doing their job and going after NOW Magazine for public solicitation. Every week they have pages of ads for “escorts” that even quote hourly rates and are quite obviously hookers.
            .
            As with marijuana, I don’t really give a shit but people should obey the laws as they are unless they are engaging in legitimate civil disobedience or insurrection.
            .
            I always paid for sex the old fashioned way. I met a girl online who turned to hooking to make some fast cash. She kept bugging me to pay her a few hundred for a fuck and blow or whatever. Every time I refused outright and then – surprise surprise – actually treated her like a human being. After a couple weeks of that nonsense we went to a party, had a few drinks, and then went back to my place to get down to business.
            .
            Now that I am older and have travelled the world, I guess I am a bit more flexible on the subject. I can see myself going to Viet Nam, Thailand or the Philippines – eyes wide open – and laying down cash for company rather than going through all the dating bullshit in Toronto.

         9. We don’t all live in gated communities, ha ha.

         10. If I recall correctly, the public solicitation statute was left in place by the courts. Hard to say what the SCC will do with the Swedish Model; they have been going bat guano for the last several years.
             .
             Their logic in the previous case seemed to be that if something is legal then you have the right to do it with no limitations. That was never my reading of the intent of the legislation, but there was not much the government could do about it so they said “fine, then we will make it illegal”.
             .
             I don’t see that being a whore is a constitutional right. The court will have to fall over themselves to strike down the legislation under the Charter.

         11. Street walking and public solicitation remains illegal.
             The thing is they still haven’t made it illegal. It’s still to sell it in Canada (as long as it isn’t on the street, which is still solicitation).
             The problem is they’ve now made it illegal to BUY it (but not to sell it) which is just as stupid as the previous legislation. Pretty much every lawyer has said it will eventually fail when challenged and all the Conservatives did was waste everyone’s time with a law that no one agrees with and literally both sides of the political spectrum have criticized this law as stupid and unwanted.

         12. You would have to point out all these lawyers. Heck, I was a lawyer and it all makes sense to me. Liberal shit hole Canada copies even more liberal shithole Sweden and it will be criticized for not being liberal enough.
             .
             It’s almost like the abortion debate: if any government introduced legislation that mirrored Sweden’s there would be feminists and white knights rioting in the streets.

         13. Maybe you missed the part where CONSERVATIVES are criticizing the bill just as much as liberals are.
             Why? Because the Conservatives (big C since it’s the name of the party) listened to what no one was saying and just did their own thing against everyone’s better advice.

         14. Canada sounds uptight. Things are more bohemian in bohemia. Indeed it is – or at least was – a stag party destination of choice. Having said that, you wouldn’t really know it living here. It’s very ordered, clean and wholesome for the most part. If down the line the police a few blocks away from the ‘nightclub’ are forced to visit for something other than a freebie then I imagine it would be all for the worse. Its then that you’ll get the criminal elements and the trafficking.

         15. I’m not clear what you’re angle is here? Are you defending a porn-critical feminist position or simply pointing out that porn may ‘spit out’ the young and vulnerable? I don’t have any particular affection for porn, or consider it to be a necessarily healthy occupation. The point I made was about adults, who as responsible agents should be being permitted to make decisions for themselves, which might potentially be unwise, or potentially cause regret at a later stage. If there are young 18/19 year olds (or any vulnerable individuals) who may be exploited (and I’m not for a moment suggesting that there aren’t) then the way forward would be to look at ways where some kind of duty of care might need to be demonstrated i.e. that any consent takes reasonable measure to ensure they understand what they’re getting into. Sleaze issues aside though 18 years old are headstrong though, and if they can vote and have sex, its not obvious why they shouldn’t be allowed to get in front of a camera?

         16. I’m saying that the “porn critical feminists” aren’t really that critical of porn in and of itself. Some occasionally are, but the same can be said of non-feminists who dislike porn.
             What most of those “anti-porn feminists” you mentioned are against is the producers who are the sleazy ones.
             The ones who target kids on spring break, who target the young and poor, and chew them up and spit them out.
             And yes if they are well informed as to what they are getting into then its clearly their choice and should be. They’re adults, even if young and stupid ones, and must be treated as such.
             But too many aren’t and it’s why there are tons of horror stories about porn.
             That is what (most) feminists are fighting. Not porn itself.

         17. Canada is sexually liberal compared to the USA. I have a friend in Hungary who sings the praises of Budapest but no direct references from the Czechs in Bohemia.

         18. I missed that part: where do small c conservatives oppose the Swedish model (other than it being abject misandry)?

         19. Read conservatives reacting to the Conservative Party of Canada’s prostitution laws (the ones not party shills).
             You’ll find a lot of “that’s so stupid” responses.

         20. link?

         21. I’m on my phone. I’ll find some for you later.

         22. Here’s an example, as promised.
             http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/prostitution-bill-has-the-makings-of-another-moral-panic/article19256534/

         23. Ok. Flanagan qualifies as a conservative who has problems with this. However, he makes one of the points that I have been making all along but he does not acknowledge: we had a perfectly workable legal regime of having prostitution itself being allowed but contained. Our dumbass Supreme Court threw a monkey wrench into the works and the government only had two choices: full legalization or complete criminalization.
             .
             The UK still has Parliamentary Supremacy so this problem has not come up. I don’t know if Australia and New Zealand have something like the Charter of Rights combined with an activist court to create these problems. The USA – the last member of the “Axis of Anglos” – has largely criminalized prostitution with some notable exceptions in Nevada.
             .
             He also gets a bit speculative about punishments increasing from fines to jail time: complete paranoia.

         24. Budapest is fine place. Worth visiting just for the baths alone

         25. There’s no point trying to paint a pretty picture of the porn industry. It is what it is and you’ll often find the harshest criticism here in the manosphere, albeit typically with respect to its effects on men rather than the feminist focus on the women in the industry whether as producers ‘in their own right’ or raw material to be spat out. But are you so sure porn critical feminists don’t have an interest beyond targeting sleazy producers? Porn is womens’ bodies (especially) and feminists have been known to want to control such things. To control porn is to control desire and to control desire is how power gets done these days.

         26. Yeah they (again for the most part) really don’t care about the porn producers that treat the talent well. Why? Because the women are being paid well, and treated professionally.
             Hence why Vivid, as I mentioned earlier, rarely gets any criticism. Because they do just that.

         27. you have a totally wrong idea about prostitution. and that is sensationalist nonsense that anti-prostitution activists are brainwashing people with.
             “street prostitution” is an absolutely insignificant and irrelevant part of the business – at least in Canada. it’s not even worth discussing – and there are already very specific laws about it.
             it’s like when you read in the media about “raves” you only hear about “ecstasy overdoses” – while in real life it hardly ever happens.

         28. of course it IS a constitutional right. it’s your body and it belongs to YOU – not to the government.
             the issue of prostitution is solely an issue of PERSONAL FREEDOM. nothing else.
             nobody can limit your right to sell your own body if you wish. limiting the rights to purchase your body is in fact revoking your right to sell it. end of discussion. (as an analogy, it’s the same as allowing McDonald’s to sell their products – but banning their purchase).
             anything else that politicians are trying to bring into the issue is either conservative “morals”, or feminazi hatred of men (and women who don’t share their views), and other nonsense like this.
             it’s like Communists trying to take away all your personal freedoms (and as someone who grew up in Soviet Union I know a bit about it). that’s why there’s a very little difference between commies, feminazis and conservative nuts when it comes to prostitution.

         29. “…which is just as stupid as the previous legislation”
             ha. that’s what the government of Comrade Harper and Grand Imam MacKay are doing all the time. just look at their anti-pot laws. this government’s goal is to revoke as many of our personal freedoms as possible – and impose their “moral values” on all Canadians.

         30. oh man like i already mentioned you just have a totally WRONG idea about the whole prostitution thing. looks like you get all your info from the front pages of daily papers – and i can’t blame you. so just really forget all you supposedly know.
             as to “dynamics of marriage” then legalizing it wouldn’t make any difference. where did you get this idea? it’s already legal in several countries (Germany, New Zealand), and semi-legal in many more. it’s not like legal booz gives husbands official excuse to get drunk every weekend and beat their wives. lol

         31. all demagoguery and nonsense.
             it’s an issue of personal freedom. as to deciding who’s “sleazy” and who’s not, and what “sleazy” means… that’s how gulag and mass executions start – when someone gets full authority to impose their “values” on others.
             and what does “chew them up and spit them out” means? are they not getting paid? what’s the percentage of those “spat out”? and what, being Walmart cashier doesn’t “chews you up”?

         32. Street prostitution is between 10-20% but street prostitutes are disproportionately the victims of violent crime. It really doesn’t matter what “idea” I have about prostitution or if you think it is nonsense: that’s what the court did.

         33. I don’t know what you think I have wrong, and it is unfortunate that you won’t explain your own opinion more clearly.
             .
             I don’t know what will happen to marriage in North America, and it is difficult to speculate based on other places with different cultures. You can’t really compare booze to hookers. Now, what will happen to booze consumption as marijuana is legalized: that is a closer analogy. And booze is taxed all to hell, especially here in Canada. That was the point I made elsewhere: if prostitution (or pot) is legalized the government will look on it as a cash cow and mess the whole market up through regulation and taxation.
             .
             And why is it you think you know so much about prostitution?
             😉

         34. Governments will always have the constitutional jurisdiction to regulate commercial activity. Prostitution in Canada has always been legal but the surrounding laws effectively prevented it from being turned into a full-time job, career or business enterprise.
             .
             Society will always limit what people do with their bodies, hence the Ontario Athletics Control Act which was either amended or completely redone a while back because it effectively banned MMA. Nobody could make a serious legal argument that unregulated pit fighting was a constitutional right.
             .
             For obscene material, it is also “asymmetrical” in that it is illegal to produce or distribute but legal to purchase and own.
             .
             The point of this Nordic Model thing is harm reduction. A lot more hookers get beat up or killed by johns than the other way around. And given that hookers – mostly being women – will prostitute themselves regardless of it’s legal status and won’t take responsibility for the own safety by simply leaving the game, under this system if they do end up victimized then they can seek out help without the fear of being jailed. I don’t agree with that and several sex worker advocates don’t either, but there you go. As I mentioned, the courts forced the government’s hand: wide open legalization, or a complete ban.

      2. Ummm no they aren’t. No one but uptight religious folks are attacking porn.
         They may attack the porn PRODUCERS, but that isn’t about the content of the porn. It’s about the scummy producers out there who prey on young, barely legal kids (both men and women) to get them into porn and pay them bottom dollar to do so and exploit the fact that these kids are young and stupid.
         And yes we were all young and stupid at 18.

         1. If there is a man in charge, they attack it. They will also attack women who are off-message.
            .
            Keep in mind that “bottom dollar” is $300 to $500 for one or two hours of “work”.

         2. No they don’t. There’s lots of men in charge of porn companies that don’t really get attacked.
            Vivid never really gets attacked for anything because they’re a well run, professional company. It was founded and is run by two men.

         3. Do you have an AVN subscription?

         4. Psh. Pay for porn. Don’t make me laugh.

         5. I mean Audio Visual News: it is a trade publication. In my last year at law school I could not land a position teaching or researching public policy and ended up working in a sex shop. During slow times I would read the copies of AVN they had laying about the shop. It had an all business and completely professional approach to the porn industry.
            .
            For a moment there I thought you might actually know what you were talking about.

         6. Then you should be aware that AVN is also short for Adult Video News which is what I thought you were referring to as it has the exact same acronym.

         7. AVN is not porn, it is a professional trade publication about the porn industry. As a business grad I found it fascinating and enlightening.

      3. umm… hardcore feminists are AGAINST prostitution. just look up the organizations that fight against prostitution – and that are responsible for introducing the idiotic “Nordic model” you’re referring to. they’re all comprised of the most disgusting feminazis from the top of the movement. and they’re against porn too.
         feminazis and conservatives have a lot in common.

         1. The Court of Appeal decision in Canada is here:
            http://canlii.ca/t/fqqwq
            The conservative intervenors wanted to uphold the law while you had a mish-mash of pro-prostitution and civil liberties organizations who wanted the laws struck down and some were explicitly against the Nordic Model. The one’s who favoured the Nordic Model were largely violence against women groups, plus a Native women’s group and the Elizabeth Fry Society.
            .
            Curiously, LEAF, NACSOW and other big league feminists didn’t intervene at all as far as I can tell.

   3. This is fundamentally why we cannot take arguments from women seriously. They argue from emotion and insecurity, not from logic and fact. All feminism is, is an all-mighty tantrum that life isn’t fair, which sadly, many men have taken seriously. And what would happen if you let angry children run the household? Chaos.
      As such, arguing with a feminist is futile. You will never win the argument because they cannot hear logic. These people need to be ignored and brushed aside. Unfortunately, when it is one person, one vote, these people are given tremendous power.

      1. “They argue from emotion and insecurity, not from logic and fact.”
         As do the courts in America now.

         1. fantastìc stay-at-home work opportunity for you. work for 3-8 hours daíly and make from $5k-$12k a month, weekly payments.. clìck on my name to get more ìnfo

      2. i had an argument with a woman on these same line. She complained that she always wanted to rage against my Facebook shares and statuses, to which I replied “Prove me wrong.”
         The ultimate way to shut them up, is with logic.
         Or backhand. Whatever. I jest.

      3. That’s one option. Rubbing the puppy’s nose in the poo is another perhaps.
         I’m not sure its just democracy that gives them power. The media and corporate world are backing them to the hilt and that has to her stressed too. There must be a way to sour the fat cats milk.

         1. Since the feminists control the government via democracy they control everyone else. Virtually all of these politicians are feminists. They have to be since women vote as a block (the women’s vote). The politicians can then lean on the corporations and the media. And the media will not bite the hand that feeds them (advertising). Absent democracy, feminism would achieve nothing.

         2. Its true that women have tended to vote in their own interest, for welfare etc, but if they are particularly prone to ‘hive’ thinking, or ‘group think’ , its important to remember that they may be so because they’re a typically impressionable group, ‘easily led by the nose as asses are’ – by hype, advertising, and all other forms of psychological magic conjured up mass media and marketing departments. The real problem perhaps is not that women have the vote, but that they have control of most of the money, including the money that men supposedly earn more of. The politicians may go after them for their votes – and make concessions to feminism on account of that, but it was the unholy trinity of government, media and marketing who sold them on feminism, because of the money to be made from women earning, getting taxes, controlling the household expenditure, and of course because they are easier to control in every way. If they have voted for a kind of ‘self-interest’ that isn’t necessarily because it was their idea. I’d say the first point of attack though should be the state of affairs whereby women control expenditure despite supposedly earning less than men

         3. How is it that women have control of the money?

         4. Grabbed this off the net – which seems to be US only. They earn less but control more
            http://she-conomy.com/report/marketing-to-women-quick-facts

         5. Honestly mate, I don’t have time to read all of that but “control” is an emotive term. If women in America have control of the money in a household then that is down to men. No women can take your money off you. Therefore, you would have to make a choice to give it to her. Also, I would point out that doing most of the consumer spending is not “control”. That just means women are blowing money and it suggests that men are allowing it to happen and/or doing most of the investing. Investing is control.
            But consider this, in the absence of a State, there would be no divorce law, no child support, no alimony, no employment law forcing you to hold a woman’s job when she is pregnant and so on. As such, all corporations, including media companies, would be swiftly de-feminised. We can place all our problems with feminism at the dawn of democracy. The right to vote possession of resources from those that earn to those that burn.

         6. Well said!

         7. Feminism has been around since time immemorial. Human beings are innately gynocentric. The biggest problem with the change in women has been industrial and technological progress. I of the mind that if you took our current technology and implanted it in the middle of the dark ages, within 2 or 3 generations, women and men would be acting like they do now. It’s funny that men created all these things for women without a thought that it would hurt men in the long run, but women can’t even make the slightest concession even when it’s morally right to do so. Tells you a lot about basic differences in male and female psychology.

         8. If men are allowing women to control their money, and to the extent that is the case, then yes, it’s their responsibility in the first instance to do something about that. But
            while individual male-female dynamics may be a part of the issue, the fact is women have always had influence, including over major expenditure, that translates into at least indirect power. In an increasingly, commercial age which creates and shapes people into
            identity groups defined by desires, aspirations and ultimately purchasing decisions, that control, be it formal control over a bank account or influence over where or what to buy something with your husband / boyfriend’s money translates into political power. But
            insofar as women’s spending is being influenced by marketing etc it is the marketers, the people who create desire, who are really in control.
            I think you overestimate the effectiveness of democracy with regard to implementing policy. Did we get gay marriage because of the way women voted? We just got gay marriage. The elites decided for us. Government’s may wish to appeal to female voters, but female voters have been shaped into voting blocs by the government and media themselves. Governments and corporations have come round to feminism because it works for them. Women voters didn’t force them. I’m not saying women don’t vote possession of resources from those that earn to those that burn, because they do, but that they have been supported and encouraged to do so. Matriarchy is the marxist, statist, system of choice. This isn’t an accident Its by design.

         9. Marriage is a government institution my friend. It is a method of social engineering. Absent the State it would be a simple religious ceremony with no special privileges. As such there is only gay marriage because of the State.
            Note I said nothing of force. But voting blocks influence the policies of politicians. That is the nature of democracy. And there is no “policy” without government.
            How does feminism work for corporations? Not in my experience, it’s a nightmare.
            I have studied marketing. They do not control they influence. Not the same thing.
            Likewise “spending” is not “control”. These are two very different words.
            You conflate ” media ” and “government”. Media and government are not synonymous. The media ” industry” is huge non-homogenous worldwide collection of competing and differing companies and individuals. The government is a specific institution attached to a specific country.
            That said, if the media and government shaped female voters voting preferences, that begs the question; who shapes the government and the media?

         10. Created what “things” for women? What are you talking about? Women and men act the same way now they did in the Dark Ages. The difference is that masculinity is punished and femininity is rewarded.

         11. Technology created by men to benefit women. I agree human behavior hasn’t changed. That is why the feminist movement and cultural Marxism aren’t to blame for our current situation. Women have always been first class citizens in society and men have always been disposable. It just took men creating a safe and prosperous society for gynocentrism to rear it’s ugly head. It’s simply not possible to have a long term just civilization because men will always cater to women’s needs and women will get rights without responsibilities and run amok destroying civilization.

         12. Can you be more specific? What tech? Kitchen appliances and curling tongs? I don’t understand.

         13. Sorry, I just mean to point out the fact that the modern lifestyle we live, including all the benefits women have derived from it (I.e. Contraceptives, technology to create white collar jobs, medical technology, etc) are the result of the creations of men. It just shows us the basic psychological differences between men and women. Women refuse to even help men overturn simple injustices against men like VAWA and family court fascism.

         14. Voting blocks certainly influence a party’s policies, but those blocks don’t simply dictate policy. The current crisis of democracy – (the UKIP type protest vote for example) reflects the fact that on issues that are important to them governments tend to and do what they want almost without reference to voters. We are given however the illusion of choice insofar as the issues that are important to the elites are kept off the agenda. The upcoming EU referendum is a possible exception here, but even here I would expect them to manipulate to get the result they want.
             I think you make some fair points about ‘control’. My use of the word was meant to highlight the fact that influence, may amount to real political power, power that can be exercised almost invisibly, because it isn’t seen as such. Influence may not be control, but if it amounts to power it may be as good as or better. Power that can’t be seen, can’t be scrutinized. If you have some courtesan whispering in the ear of a king, and she gets her way, or persuades him that her way is his way, then who is really in power
             I happen to think the media is profoundly homogeneous on most issues. You talk about governments doing social engineering, but it’s the media and the advertisers who ‘govern the soul’ There’s a great documentary called “the century of the self’ which deals with people like Bernays etc where people are guided to govern themselves without coerction.
             Over the last few years I’ve come to favour more top-down answers to the
             question “who shapes the government and the media?” The elites and big money shape discourse and opinion through media etc, and thereby the voting public and the government it elects. Re. feminism and corporations, firms may lose out when women take maternity etc, but generally both government and corporations benefit from the extra taxes and cheaper labour that have accompanied womens’ entry into the workforce.

      4. Did you ever watched Boardwalk Empire? It was an HBO show about organized crime during the time of prohibition (circa 1920).
         There was this scene where two male characters were talking about the suffrage movement; one was in favor of woman’s right to vote and the other male (older and wiser) opposed it. the older gent calls over his maid, he proceeds to ask a political question, she of course was clueless, the older gent then turns over to his naive friend and tells him “THERE IS YOUR WOMAN’S VOTE.” And ever since then, they are still clueless!

         1. Ha ha yes I remember that scene! Shame they cancelled it. Great show.

         2. I’ll never forget that scene.

   4. Very well written comment.

      1. thanks. appreciated

   5. There’s another factor:
      Kate Upton’s popular. Attacking her alienate all but the few most deluded whtie knights…..because while white knights will always side with any woman against a man, their own thirsty psychology dictates that they will defend the attractive female before they defend the land whale.

2. This is a good article, feminists are confused about how to handle sexuality. If women are covered up they say men are opressing them, if the women an flaunting their bodies then they say men are oppressing them aswell. I’ll also add something I’ve said before, the fashion is industry is run by gay men an women predominantly. They decide that size zero models are sexy not your average straight guy, in fact I’ve never met a man who finds stick thin models attractive but I’ve met many women who do. Yet straight men get the blame for creating unrealistic beauty standards.

   1. Getting the blame for everything is the only job they will never try to get us fired from

      1. Indeed. To do otherwise would require the considerable self-introspection that they are quite unwilling to engage in. It is simply easier to place the blame elsewhere.

   2. Stick thin and taller than the average guy. Variety is the spice of life. Watch a fashion show and there is a boring sameness about the models. The first one comes out and you think “Wow, she is hot! I’d love to bang that!” By the tenth it’s like “Meh. Another piece of meat. Ok, mostly bones and skin, but a piece of meat.”
      .
      Just for a change of pace I would like to see a fashion show full of little fire plugs: five feet tall but 36D-24-36

      1. I differ from you here. I’d happily bang all ten.

         1. After you split the first three in two, I think you might give up on the other seven. lol

   3. I saw an interview with a fashion designer once and he said a model to him is nothing but a coat stand. And you know how those look. Haha.

   4. Yes. If a society is anti porn or anti modelling, then it is oppressing women, because it is not letting them express their sexuality. On the other hand if the society is pro porn and modelling then it is oppressing them by objectifying them. Shitty feminist logic at worst.
      And the worst feminazi rationalization is that women go into porn because they are poor, or something. There are a thousand jobs one can do to earn money besides doing porn. Ten years ago I came to USA from Pakistan, as a student. I was, young, and naive nineteen at that time. To pay my fees at my university, pay my rent, pay for my groceries, and to get by, I earned enough money, despite the fact that I hadn’t a real job, and worked part time. I even managed to send money to my poor family back home. Over the four year university period, I changed several jobs, being a waiter, a newspaper deliverer, a garbage collector, and yes also a sweeper. Any woman who seriously respects her body, can go into these jobs too. Yes, these jobs are demanding, and you don’t earn much, but you can get by. Acting as if these jobs don’t exist, and porn is the only solution is bullshit. People who say so are hypocrites, and people who believe this are are retard idiots.

      1. That’s how far this country has “fallen down”. People don’t want to work (let alone work hard or multiple jobs). They want to step out of their parents nice house, nice cars (nice life) into their own big house, nice car, etc…
         Many people don’t want to work for it and many can not wait (no patience). It takes a life time to build up…people don’t want to wait any longer.
         So they justify it by doing porn or other. Hey, not a problem but don’t blow smoke up my ass about it by saying their is no other work or no other jobs.

         1. That’s how I feel. If you’re doing porn, that’s your personal decision, and I respect it. However, don’t justify it by saying that you began doing it, because you would starve or anything.
            And, if you really thing that doing porn is not wrong then why do you give bullshit reasons to JUSTIFY, why you started doing porn.
            Frankly, I would actually respect a girl who says that she started doing porn, because, it pays well than other job, or because she loves sex, and getting money for something that you enjoy doing is a good deal.

      2. That’s true, feminists always want women to be the victims because if they don’t have victim status feminists cease to be relevant, plus being a victim is an identity to feminists. Being empowered means taking responsibility for your actions an mistakes but since that doesn’t fit into feminists victim narrative they blame men for everything.

      3. The irony is that you can use their argument against them. “What, you want to punish these poor women by taking away their only avenue for making a living (porn)?”

   5. Straight men pay zero (no pun intended) attention to female fashion. To suggest stick thin women exist because of men is lunacy.
      I always say to these women “go into a strip club on a Friday night and point out all the anorexic women. You won’t see any.”

      1. Most men aren’t turned by stick thin girls. Curvy girls are way better. But then some girls take curvy to a whole new level by becoming land whales.

3. They hamsterize it that at least she is sticking it to the man in a big way, wealth extraction without having to marry, from the drooling heathen men who like Kate types instead of fat aging cows.
   You go girl, they think, knowing that she surely still votes like a dipshit liberal, and distract the dumb men during feminist takeover. They tolerate her, and they have no concern for their hypocrisy.
   No ability to even be cognitive of it.
   In addition, do you think that men tell Kate what to do, or that Kate tells men what to do? A woman like that has great hand over men, and is to be admired for that, cognitive dissonance be damned.

   1. Besides, everyone knows Kate is a victim being railroaded into this life by corporate interests and creepy men and that she would much rather be munching rugs at the local non-profit or cutting her hair and driving a Mack truck. She has just been tricked / seduced into what she’s doing.
      Not her fault.

4. Wadup guys…i lost my virginity One week ago…and what i have realized is that men need to focus on themselves, get stronger,read more and lift weights.Rationalmale is also important for intelligent males.Women hate male weakness.Understand that getting stronger and brighter is what matters for the male species.Fulfil your purpose and you will get happiness you haven’t experienced.

   1. Sex is so overrated, ain’t it?

      1. If I could do it all again I probably would not have fucked the first 3 or 4 girls on my notch list. They were lousy lays and triggered my addictive personality.
         .
         While virtually any blow job is a job well done, lousy sex is vastly over rated. Guys are getting wise to this which is why with the availability of free internet porn many are choosing to crank one out while watching a 9 on their computer rather than wasting multiple evening and untold dollars for a 5 or 6 to be their cum dumpster.
         .
         As for me, when I hit 40 I had had enough of sluts. I took on the mentality that “my next girlfriend will be my last girlfriend”. Of course, it didn’t turn out that way but I could not be bothered chasing after a piece of tail or putting up with their bullshit if I didn’t see some long term potential.

         1. I am basically where you are at now and I’m 35. While I haven’t been with near enough women as a lot of my friends……every one of them my dick has heartily approved of and they all were on my terms.
            Perhaps my drive to simply fuck isn’t as pronounced as some of my peers. I was voluntarily celibate from 21-26 and found the red pill at the end of it. Afterwards I kept going deeper down that rabbit hole. The past 3 yrs I’ve been with a girl 10 yrs younger whom I treated kind of poorly and eventually got tired of fucking less than a year in. The only problem was I could’nt get rid of her. I would break up with her and she would just refuse to leave.
            Anyway that relationship is finally over and at this point I gamed other women more when I had a gf.
            Now I see a hot a girl and yea my dick would’nt mind posting up in it for a bit. However it is all just kind of bleh to me now.
            Perhaps I have a disorder! I will call it Modern Woman Fatigue.
            I really don’t see how I could ever treat a girl with enough respect to mother my children in today’s world. Doesn’t seem to matter how hot they are either but i tire of fucking them sometimes quite fast. For me often once I’ve smashed it once that is enough for me. Yep! It was a pussy alright, just like the rest.
            Hell even gaming a chick and going through the seduction process doesn’t give me the same high I got when I first entered the world of game.
            There is such a microscopic difference in each woman that they all seem like programmed robots with very minor but unique discrepancies in their behavior patterns.

         2. Without invoking the snowflake meme, I would say that every woman is damaged in her own, peculiar way.

         3. Its a common enough thing to feel like gaming more when you have a gf. I guess you care less about being blown-out when you have sex on tap.

         4. Somewhere along the line there was an event horizon where I boycotted any HB6 or less. It made life simpler as I got older.

         5. Agreed. Abundance mentality and all.
            I will say this though..when I was single before this past LTR, getting blown out actually motivated me to go even harder.

      2. Only when you’re not getting it.

      3. Umm. No. No it isn’t.

   2. Congratulations and welcome… brother!

      1. Thanks man,she had a tight pussy

5. Pretty good article. However, the following statement appearing in the article is equivalent to the whole….
   “Feminism has a massive problem”
   with everything.

6. Why Don’t Feminists Call Kate Upton A Misogynist? It’s a argument that they can’t win
   Why would Kate Upton hate women? The word misogynist is over used…
   http://i.imgur.com/70rfsfs.gif

   1. I believe this part was actually cut from the final version of the film. It only appeared in the trailer.

   2. Because most feminists couldn’t look this good in a swimsuit

      1. If any woman asks if you like her swimsuit, the answer is always “NO”.
         If she is hot, then “No, you should take it off this instant!”
         If not so hot then “No, we need to cover you up.”

   3. The various looks on the kids’ faces are hilarious.

   4. My fridge has more curves than her midsection.

7. Kate Upton isn’t thin and aside from her Tits and a cute face she has nothing. Her body is gross without Photoshop

   1. a few extra pounds and she looks like a cow. her face looses that cuteness
      look at Kate Upton fat pics.
      only thing she has got is natural big tits.

8. Women who can’t get by in life on their appearances resent other women who can. So they blame men because… hamster…
   Kate has pretty tits.

   1. yes her photos from the fappening proved that!

   2. They don’t blame women, because being women themselves, they know that all women in general get very defensive whenever they are blamed. To defend themselves, women scream, yell, go hysterical. Men on the other hand, don’t do this. They just carry on and respond only when they are faced with a real, issue, like being fired from job, divorce, or something like that.
      The feminists, thus are cowards who take the path of least resistance, taking care not to blame women, lest they be attacked. They, thus blame men, whom they know don’t give a fuck about these petty issues.

9. All she has to do is say: “I’m a proud feminist and I’m not afraid to say it–people have a real misconception about feminism. Blah blah blah….” and she will be exempt from feminist criticism. So… expect that from her in the near future, on the heels on insipid, vomit-inducing, ridiculously hypocritical declarations of feministhood from Taylor Swift and Ariana Grande.

   1. She won’t do that until she’s hit the wall, though. There’s no need for her to play that card so soon.

      1. Eh… shes a meaty pre-heiffer. Her… eh, “shelf life” isn’t that long.

10. I little side note about super models. I have a client whom I’ve worked with out of Sydney. I was showing him a painting I had done of Miranda Kerr. She happens to be a favorite of mine and I enjoy drawing her. He then goes on to tell me that he knows her personally. He’s been to several events with her and run somewhat in the same circles. So I asked him what she was like. He told me that yes she is an amazingly beautiful woman, radiates across the room and is usually the focus of everything she is at. Also she smells very good. However personality wise she’s as dumb as a box of rocks. Literally has zero personality and mainly just talks about herself. This woman has gotten billionaires fist fighting in the streets for over her. If you don’t have several million dollars in your bank account, she’ll ignore you completely. She however is getting into her mid 30’s, has a kid, and is pretty much done with mainstream modeling. He did say though that he had first hand information that she gives amazing head and is great in bed. However you’d want to bring several penicillin shots with you afterwards. So beneath all that hair, make up, fancy clothes, and money, she’s just like every other woman. Always wanting the bigger better deal. She’s coasted through life entirely on her looks and has done pretty well for herself in the most part. But age isn’t something she’s going to be able to fight forever. No matter how much yoga and beauty supplies she uses.

    1. Forreal? I remember in Aus news, they always showed Ms Kerr in a positive light .. calling her an angel several times.

       1. we all know how much of an angel any girl really is….

    2. wait a few years….and she’ll see all those millionaires and billionaires ignoring her just because she put on a few pounds or is just plain old.

    3. Her promiscuity is quite well known at this point. She always came across as dumb to me.
       I don’t even think she is that great looking personally. She has a moon face. I always preferred Megan Gale.

    4. Give don’t give amazing head due to a lack of experience. How sad.

    5. If she isn’t hitting the wall soon it certainly is coming up to meet her soon. No woman can deny her fateful date with the Wall.

11. Off topic: Call me crazy, but I don’t get off to the highly brushed, glossy images of super models like Upton. I’m not saying she isn’t attractive, I’m just saying that doesn’t do it for. The pic of her licking the ice cream is so blase. When I used to watch porn, it was never the “pro” stuff. I only watched the random dude f-ing his chubby girlfriend in a poorly lit room. Jennifer Lawrence is beautiful, but I can’t beat off to her pics.

    1. Thus the rise of “gonzo” porn and pro-am.
       .
       It’s sort of like diamonds. The easiest way to spot a fake is to notice that there are no flaws.

12. Upton is the alpha female. She is hot and has a bangin buddy. Why shouldn’t she flaunt it? The feminists get all pissed because no one wants to see them naked. Most look like shaved bird faces with the bodies of holocaust victims.

    1. Holocaust victims? What country are you from? Here in the USA, they look like an albino walrus on the beach.

       1. But wait! Don’t order yet. You’re both right.

       2. lololol

       3. Have you seen the Sulkowicz sex video? I thought her body would be hotter. Other than passable fellatio technique, she now officially has no redeeming features.

       4. You have the choice of skeleton thin or enormously obese.

          1. Yup. You’re right. I’ve seen them. The common denominator is that they are all fugly.

       5. And, by the way, I’m from the United States.

13. Feminism is just an incoherent mish-mash of contradictory bile. Let’s not forget, the reason that The Sexual Revolution happened in the first place, was to “liberate” women from the chains of traditionalist patriarchy: a patriarchy that “controlled” women’s bodies, by being against promiscuity, being against dressing like a whore – and being a whore – and being against behaving like a slut.
    Fast forward half a century later, and now the freedom women have to dress like whores, and to be actual whores and sluts, is our problem again!
    Have you seen actual traditionalist societies? Women aren’t “objectified” in the Islamic World; they weren’t “objectified” in Nazi Germany. They “objectify” themselves the most, in secular, 1st world liberal democracies – ironically, the very countries where they benefit from complete socialized equality to men, as well as a number of legislated privileges and social engineering programs.
    And that’s patriarchy? Women are choosing to whore it up, and are being paid much more than men for it. Why aren’t feminists concerned with that pay-gap? I can’t think of a single male pornstar who’s earned more than Jenna Jameson, or a single male-model who’s earned more than the supermodels mentioned above (Klum, Lima, Upton, Bunchen).
    Traditionalist society brought the best solution to the “objectification problem” (also known by saner people as merely being a whore), and yet traditionalist society was demonized because of this.
    Why is this?
    That’s because feminism isn’t about women, or the impossible “equality” rubbish, or “liberation” and any other slave-morality bile we hear.
    Feminism is a part of cultural Marxism. You could give feminists anything and everything they wanted today, and tomorrow they’ll be complaining about how it’s still somehow sexist and patriarchal. Feminists don’t argue in good faith; their position – like that of all cultural Marxists – stems from a hatred of the dominant culture.
    The more “moral critiques” of the dominant culture they can assault us with, the better it is for them, regardless of how coherent or sensible any of them are. Feminists used to tell us that women are strong and equal to men, and yet now they’re essentially telling us that women are weak, fragile infants, who lack any agency, can’t watch how much they drink, and need an excess “trigger warnings” to make it through life.
    Does this fundamental contradiction matter? Of course not. It’s all just an avenue for feminists to do what they really want to do, and that’s to further demonize Western society and Western Culture – the one society that’s ironically bent over to these neurotic maniacs over and over again.
    Enough’s enough lads. Jim Goad has an excellent piece on how to deal with these clowns on TakiMag. His suggestion, is to use the one weapon they have against them: mockery. We must brutally mock these idiots. We must make fun of them. We must laugh at their in-fights, their incoherence, their weakness, their neuroses, their lack of basic logic, their hypocrisy. Mock them till they lose confidence in their identity; until it no longer gives them moral satisfaction to identify as a feminist. To identify as a feminist needs to be mocked to the point that it resembles identifying as a Young Earth Creationist.
    Grow an immunity to their shaming tactics and left-wing demonizing epithets (“misogynist”, “sexist”, “rape-apologist”) – and mock. Mock mock and mock. I’ve applied this so many times with these losers that I’m confident it works, because they don’t identify as feminists because of logic, reason and evidence – they identify as feminists because of moral satisfaction, conformity, and acquiring a “progressive”-status symbol. Take that away, and you’ve attacked the identity better than most things could.

    1. Feminism uses closed-loop logic. That is, given any fact, evidence, or situation – or even multiples that are contradictory – feminism can turn about to justify itself.
       .
       Hold the door for them? Sexist! Don’t hold the door? Misogynist! Look at them? Rapist! Don’t look at them? Misogynist again! (One of the funniest terms coined here or abouts is “neglect rape” which seems to be an oppressive disinterest in a woman.)
       .
       A lot of pseudo-science and cults use that sort of reasoning.

       1. (One of the funniest terms coined here or abouts is “neglect rape” which seems to be an oppressive disinterest in a woman.)

          http://i.imgur.com/d7JHjxQ.jpg

          1. How do you rape someone when you’re avoiding that person?

          2. The same way a man can rape a woman by;
             unwanted eye contact (Stare Rape)
             cold approaching (Surprise Rape)
             complimenting her (Creepy Loser Rape)
             being polite/kind/courteous (Nice guy Rape)
             giving her advice [about anything] (Mansplaining Rape)
             sitting on the train with legs spread [too wide] (Rapespread)
             fucking a saltywitch in the ass & then ignoring her (NEGLECT RAPE)
             You see, as the above list clearly shows, Rape IS whatever the fuck they(Feminists) say it is or want it to be, but alas, a lie repeated a million times doesn’t make it true.

    2. Some very good points. Feminists and SJWs will never argue the benefits of their freedom (and their laughable equality). It’s always about “what they don’t have” and how men are holding them down.
       They are like 5 year olds let loose in a candy store with all the money in the world. They continue to make bad choices yet it’s the fault of men.

       1. “They are like 5 year olds let loose in a candy store with all the money in the world. They continue to make bad choices yet it’s the fault of men.” I would read an entire book with this quote on every page from beginning to end.

    3. This is basically what I say. Do not engage with them. You cannot win arguments against them because they do not make sense. Laughing at them will of course drive them crazy. Good move!
       Good point about objectification.

    4. You cannot compare feminism to pseudo-science or cults; to do so would be entirely incorrect. Feminism is simply the belief that women should be treated as equals to men. However, people have twisted and distorted the term until people like the above commenter claim that feminism lacks logic, reason, or evidence, all of which are false. You want reason? It has been proven time and time again that women are paid less than men for doing the same job, or the same work. Feminism exists because there is a discernible discrepancy between how women are treated and how men are treated, and there is overwhelming evidence that women are, to this day, considered inferior to men. These facts probably don’t concern you, assuming you are a straight, white man and your place in society has never been questioned.
       The stupidity and ignorance rampant in these comments is beyond appalling. This is the twenty-first century; you’d think men would be able to take a step back and realize that the entire world does not revolve around you. White men have never been oppressed or beaten down or told that your ideas do not matter purely because of your skin color and your gender. Women have. People of color have.
       Perhaps the most nonsensical quote above is, “Women aren’t “objectified” in the Islamic World”. Um, you’re joking, right? In many countries women cannot drive, they cannot vote, and they must cover their whole body. They are essentially treated as lesser beings, whose only role in life is to ensure that men are happy, that men are treated right. Society is predisposed to ridicule and trivialize feminism because it calls for women to be treated equally, and many men are so frightened of such an idea, mockery seems like an effective weapon to dismiss feminism as nonsense.
       You claim that, “You could give feminists anything and everything they wanted today, and tomorrow they’ll be complaining about how it’s still somehow sexist and patriarchal.” Nope, wrong. Feminism is not “cultural Marxism”, it’s not illogical, it’s not a belief that deserves mockery. It’s simply the (correct) belief that women are just as capable, and just as qualified to be treated equal to men.
       Another quote from the below comments reads, “This is fundamentally why we cannot take arguments from women seriously. They argue from emotion and insecurity, not from logic and fact. All feminism is, is an all-mighty tantrum that life isn’t fair, which sadly, many men have taken seriously. And what would happen if you let angry children run the household? Chaos.” Wow. Just wow. You, good sir, are why I weep for the future generations. Please, please, never procreate and pass your on your out-dated views; the world does not need more people like you in it. You cannot group all women into one group together and say, “They all argue from emotion and insecurity, and we cannot take their arguments seriously.” You are wrong when you say that, just as I would be wrong if I was to say, “All men argue from emotion and insecurity, and we cannot take their arguments seriously.” Generalizations such as those are very dangerous and always inaccurate. And, I’ll add, feminism is not a tantrum that life is not fair. Some things in life are not fair and are unable to be remedied, I am aware of that. That, however, is not what feminism is. Feminism raises awareness to the fact that there is an unfair situation in the world that, through cooperation, is able to be fixed. The rest of your feeble argument went on to compare women to angry children, and I don’t think I’ll dignify that with a response.
       After reading these comments, I’d like to say something like this, “All men are unintelligent, illogical jerks, who lack any empathy and are so insecure that they are unable to recognize women as equals without feeling as if their masculinity is being questioned.” Much as I would like to say this, I will not, because I am rational and logical and reasonable, despite having a vagina, which many of you seem to think makes me none of those things. I sorely hope that one day you will change, and can recognize feminism as a commendable movement, rather than deserving of mockery. Until then, know that I, a feminist and a woman, consider all of you to be insignificant, as well as unintelligent, and will spare you no further thought after this because, well, I have better things to do than write angry comments on the internet complaining that women are “too emotional to be reasonable”.

       1. Shhhhh stay in the kitchen.

14. The majority of things that feminists blame on “the patriarchy” is just women being women in a manner that is off-message from feminist dogma. The gender wage gap? Not enough female legislators?
    .
    Then there are men simply reacting to what feminists have created. No more “good men” to marry? Hmm Now why would that be?

15. If feminists think that it is a mans sexual desire that is the reason the high pays being offered to entice women into such industries then ask them why in places like Japan where there is no shortage of young Japanese women signing up to do porn when the “fee per scene” has dropped substantially. If its a mans sexual desire that is the cause then how would they explain why there are ten thousand plus Japanese women on the books doing regular porn and less than 100 men doing regular porn. Ask these feminists why young Japanese female virgins are turning to porn to lose their virginity, why these young women are doing “one and done” or “half dozen never to be seen again” porn films. Ask these feminists why young women are leaving respectable careers(teaching, nursing, finance etc) to perform in porn – I mean if its a male fantasy to be doing porn and having sex with heaps of women the facts don’t seem to confirm what these man haters convey.
    http://news.asiaone.com/news/showbiz/japans-pornaldo-slept-over-8000-women-7500-movies

    1. Most men don’t have the presence of mind to fuck in front of other people, never mind while it is being recorded.
       .
       It’s not just porn but J-pop and K-pop as well. They groom girls as young as 12, roll them into a group with half a dozen other tarts at 16. Pump out some million selling bubble gum songs, and then they are gone by the time they are 20. Rinse, repeat. They are not choosing these girls for their singing talent above a minimum base line.

       1. Yesterday, on my way to home from my job, I saw a couple with their daughter. The young girl looked about ten, but she was dressed like a slut. The mother seemed very happy. She had a huge smile on her face, and was constantly praising the kid for looking “beautiful”. The father on the other hand, walked slowly, an embarrassed look on his face. Most mothers, I see today are I don’t know why, hell bent on dressing their daughters like whores, while the resistance of the father is termed as “misogynist babble”, by the society at large. The fact the young girls are being turned into whores, is very sad.

          1. It’s worse here in China where the girls have a poor grasp of English and their parents are completely clueless. The other day there was a (maybe) 12 year old girl in front of me in line at the supermarket with her mother. Her T-shirt said “Touch my boobies”. I have seen countless others with “Slut”, “Fuck me” and all sorts of shit on them.
             .
             As it stands, Chinese girls are not slutty at all. You don’t get the flesh pools you see in Thailand or Philippines nor the kinky squeak toys that pervade in JAV. However I wonder what this place will be like in a decade or so.

          2. The fathers permit this. What father with any self respect and with any sense of dignity regarding his family would let his daughter dress like a whore in public? I know they do, but I don’t get it. That kind of thing can’t happen unless the man entered into the marriage pre-surrendered and already his wife’s beast of burden. Bunch of pansies.

          3. The mom knows exactly what she’s doing. She’s whoring her own daughter out to the highest bidder so she can live the life of luxury that her beta husband can’t provide.
             This concept reminds me of the movie Titanic where Rose’s mom wanted her daughter to marry the rich tycoon for their survival, not to love him for all eternity.

          4. I understand the mother’s culpability. What I’m stating is that if the father were a man instead of a purse carrying simp, this would not be happening.

          5. I feel that the fathers kind of go with the flow. They are brow beaten by the wives, the feminist owned culture and media, that tells them that it’s okay, and if they tell their wives and daughters to dress decently then they are controlling a woman’s sexuality or some other bullshit.
             My opinion is that they feel sad about it, but feel helpless to implement anything. Moreover, in most households today women wear the pants. Men have been condition to obey them like a slave. In such a culture, these men are just afraid to any opposition or of being called a misogynist, so they just take the path of least resistance and bend over backwards to their wives and daughter’s demands.

          6. I live in this culture. My daughter dresses appropriately. It’s not a binary proposition, like most men think, women actually still do like a husband/man who sets his foot down about things like this, they just won’t tell you that. It’s not “if I speak up she divorces me and takes all my stuff!” most of the time. The women act exactly as you permit them to act. I do agree that most men default to house slave, clearly, and they have nobody to blame but themselves for that.

          7. Agreed. The father has to lay down the rules for his daughter even if the wife nags him to death in disagreement. The daughter and ironically the wife would respect him more if he did.

          8. They won’t tell you that they want you to set your foot down, yet they raise a big stink when you do. A huge shit test is what it is.

          9. Fortunately it’s quite survivable.

          10. Precisely, that’s exactly my point.

          11. The mother is proud because she knows her daughter will be able to extract extract extract revenue from men’s pockets. Women are obsessed with status and power, and encourage the extraction skills that they themselves honed to perfection, right under a father’s nose (he still thinks butter wouldn’t melt in his sweet daughter’s mouth – the penny doesn’t even drop when she has her hand out at 18 so she can live far far far away from his watchful eye and get gangfucked on the regular, on his dime, and graduate magnum cum HPV). How often have I seen the mother/daughter collusion blitzkreig the gullible white knight dad.

          12. “What father”The weak Fathers that are Broken because if they tried they would be labeled sexist and Oppressive. Though someday when I have a Daughter, I won’t care if I get labeled those words as a result of enforcing a Modest Dress code.

          13. Women are like Chickens, any flaw or weakness that’s exposed they’ll peck at and work on till whoever was on the receiving end submits and falls into the Pecking Order.
              If a Man has a Good wife, she may not take advantage of him but rather support him like the way it was intended to be, but there are women who are constantly waiting to see that Red Blood and take advantage at moments of weakness just like the Chicken.

          14. “The women act exactly as you permit them to act.”
              Whoa man, I learn something good everyday on ROK!

          15. Well, tell that to all of the white boys and latin dudes that find China to be their sex paradise, or even the Little Emperors that gain “Alpha” status by being born into CCP families. hell, even my Black as met Chinese girls DTF on the first night. I guess they’re not sluts since we get to fuck them versus watching Biff, Chad, and Tyrone get all of the action, that and less tramp stamps and other outlandish body modification.

          16. Shanghai, Beijing, Hong Kong and maybe a few other places can qualify as a “sex paradise” because the girls are westernized and slutty.

          17. I agree, but other cities in China produce them too, particularly for tall white guys.

          18. Anyone over 5’9″ qualifies as “tall” in China, particularly in the South.

    2. Japanese culture is outside western feminism. Thank god for that.

16. her body is shaped like a photocopier

    1. You’re right.
       http://www.etonline.com/news/165665_kate_upton_flaunts_her_healthy_curves_a_bathing_suit/

    2. Nice tits, but no ass or waist!

       1. Nothing wrong with her ass (the pre-fat Kate I mean). I’m not into this new “big booty” trend. Ugh.
          http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-pKjCanq3-OA/T9A0w-ReAuI/AAAAAAAACdc/cz-x9-aMSnA/s1600/kate-upton-i-ruyada-gormek_265620.jpg
          http://onlineupdaters.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/kate-up.jpg

          1. I agree it looks better in these photos. I still like a little more. Not huge and cartoonish, but little round apple cheeks!

          2. She had more contrast when she had less weight, is what it is I think. I kind of get what you’re saying today, where she’s clearly gained some weight, especially when you look at her older photos where it jumps right off the screen at you. More weight on the sides takes away the narrow waist and makes her butt blend in more instead of stand out more.

          3. That’s what I’m talking about!

          4. I meant to add a picture, but messed up. Oh well.

          5. You wouldn’t be so goo-goo gah gah about her filthy turdcutter if the SHTF and there’s not a lot of water to go around. Think Charlize Theron in the Road

          6. I’d still hit that ass.

          7. You’d risk serious illness such as toxoplasmosis by sticking it up her festering turdcutter when your immune system is run down due to malnutrition. Even the marauding cannibals wouldn’t go near you.

          8. I’d still hit that ass.

          9. you’re a hopeless romantic

          10. Lol, yup

17. Because feminists are not, and never have been, consistent or honest in their views.

18. Simple – it’s intra-sexual competition by proxy.

19. Once I got the jist I just skimmed for the pictures.

20. I’m betting you that in 10 years later, maybe even in five years, this nobody will just fade away and she will regret just like any other million girls out there what a “bad” choice she made.

21. To this effect:

22. Delightful babe.

23. Them titties though…

    1. She does have vast…tracts of land…no doubt.

24. This touches on the essential contradiction of feminism: If women are truly men’s equals, then men could not oppress them with a “patriarchy.” Conversely, if women are relegated to continual victim status by this “patriarchy,” how can they lay claim to being equal?

    1. Oppressed Victims of Men and Super heroines who can kick Mens ass’s all in the same package.

25. Shoehorning in the term “neomasculinity” was distracting. It’s just traditionalism renamed, ironically.

    1. It sounds unnatural. Not going to get traction.

26. “…provided we all realise that such an appearance is artificially enhanced through cosmetics and technology”
    We all have to realize this, huh? You just had to add this pathetic qualifier to your statement? Sad that you’re this gutless.

27. Maybe because she looks like a refrigerator.

28. Feminists conveniently IGNORE the facts that women & girls HEAVILY dominate (in terms of payments & representations), SEVERAL fields & professions, such as fashion, modelling, beauty, cosmetics, pageants, pornography, general media, vocal media, voice provisions, voice acting, advertisements, commercials, internet, social media, anime, manga, dancing, gymnastics, tennis, badminton, netball, softball, yoga, performing arts, classical arts, classical music & dances, folk dances, traditional stuff, social media, TV shows, soap operas, theater, arts, designing, clothing, textiles, photography, videography, glamour, glitz, gossips, travel, lifestyles, newspapers, magazines, promotions, hosting, receiving, cheer-leading, visual display fields, seduction fields, & so on. Men & boys are heavily under-represented & under-paid in these fields, professions, jobs & industries.
    Moreover, women are ALSO over-represented in SEVERAL decently paying, stable & average-income jobs, employments & professions, such as secretaries, nurses, receptionists, paralegals, assistants, teachers, educational sectors, middle-management positions, care-giving sectors, financial examiners, statistics & economics sectors, BPO sectors, call centers, bank employees, clerks, normal officers, general staffs in various sectors, & so on. Plus, MOST of the internet, social media, photo sharing & video sharing websites, are dominated by female users and female advertising companies.
    Also, MOST of the sections on lifestyles, tourism, travel, food, fashion, modelling, beauty, clothing, living, teenage, relationships, healthcare, parenting, kids, educations, etc, in modern newspapers, magazines, etc, are heavily dominated by female users, female advertising companies, female actresses, female celebrities, etc, all of which generate HUGE amounts of incomes & revenues for MOSTLY females.
    But, in spite of ALL these things, modern women, girls & feminists, along with mainstream media, news, internet websites, social groups, organizations, governments, etc, focus ONLY on drastically reducing the payments & representations of men & boys in FEW remaining fields of STEM, Sports, Video Games, Businesses, Entrepreneurships, Politics, Governments, & so on. If females DO venture into these fields, then they receive MUCH more funding, scholarships, social support systems, help, encouragements, empowerments, affirmative actions, reservations, quotas, etc, from governments, media, internet, organizations, corporations, & so on.
    Why do they do this? It’s because they’re hypocrites who ONLY believe in female supremacy, more pay for women, much more facilities for women, and so on, at DRASTIC COSTS of innocent men & boys of this world.
    Of course, women SHOULD be paid the SAME as men for the same jobs & professions. BUT, at the same time, they should NOT be paid MORE, in the name of reverse-discriminatory types of equality. We should be empowering people on the basis of their merits, financial backgrounds, health, etc, and not much on the basis of other superficial and socio-biological divisional factors.

29. Kate Upton ‘felt terrible’ about herself after Sports Illustrated cover: ‘I’m not a toy; I’m human’
    The blond beauty revealed in an interview with Elle magazine that she is ‘not here to be used’ and has more to her than just physical beauty.

    1. Then why does she choose to keep banking on it? She did literally dozens of magazine covers after that using her body to advance her brand. Since 2008 — nearly a decade — she’s been doing “terrible” covers in somewhat less than her undies.
       Answer the question: why don’t you call Kate Upton a misogynist?

30. Haha! I love it when MEN expect rational thinking from feminists and womyn. I appreciate the constantly disappointed expectations.
    Never forget: Feminism is destroying women by bringing them out as second citizens compared to men. It’s freeing men from family responsibilities and now marriage is going down! Thank You Feminism and good buy male responsibility to family and male slavery!

31. i loved those game of war commercials, i know they pissed off a ton of women.

32. I love being a man so much , i just pity all this weAK girls on the comment and the planet lol poor kitchen slaves hahahahahaha.

Comments are closed.