If You Know So Much How Come You Ain’t Rich?

On Poverty in America


It was said to me recently, that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.  The person who made this assertion in a public forum turned actively hostile and dismissive when I went on my usual, “But what does that mean” kick.  The person was so convinced that it was self-evident that the poor have it worse and worse as time progresses that my question was beneath contempt.  I repeated my question as to what metric we were using to measure “poor” and “poorer” when he digressed into assumptions about my political affiliation, lineage, sexual orientation, or whatever ugly things people pull out after “republican” when their online targeting sensors detect someone not of their party line and devout allegiance. 


While that conversation quickly turned into character assassination, someone else came along and presented as irrefutable fact of the % of people living below an arbitrary delineation of poverty.  Even if the entire population save for the vilified “1%” are below that delineation, it still is an arbitrary distinction.  To say that this is the line now, this is the line then, and tomorrow the line will be here doesn’t really mean anything. 


Historically poverty was defined in more along the lines of Maslow’s hierarchy.  People who didn’t have enough rice to eat who stayed in improvised shelters were poor.  People who had a well-made roof and enough staple grain weren’t.  Easy distinctions. Now in America we are at a point where the people we consider to be poor are really just poor by comparison of the richest people.  Compared to the richest people in America all non-oil princes are poor.  


The new definiton of poor is those who can’t afford the best of everything all of the time.   The fact is the poor are getting richer, just not at the rate that the rich are getting richer.  The wealth gap is certainly increasing, but that doesn’t imply that the poor are getting poorer by any sane measure of the word.  There is no acceptable financial metric where the poor aren’t better off now than they were when LBJ named the war on poverty.  


The minimum wage is 7.25.  That has the buying power that with a day’s untaxed wages, a person can afford more than a month’s worth of beans, rice and tea.  Where exactly is the cutoff of poverty here?  I mean that’s how people used to live.  Now someone subsiting on watery soup and rice would be something unheard of in our culture.  Common people lived on staple grains.  Now that’s unheard of.  I’m not saying that poor people shouldn’t be able to afford bannanas and eggs and whatnot.  They certainly should and they certainly can.


The question we are now left with is what is the real poverty in America.  I believe it to be a cultural and spiritual poverty.  The advocates of the poor in the US lack perspective.  Happiness doesn’t come from material possesion.  I’ve observed this in children.  Children don’t care about money.  Anywhere in the world where you go, if the children have enough to eat and clean water they play and are happy.  They might be in a bomb crater playing with refuse, but they are happy.  That’s why material wealth is not in maslow’s heirarchy.  One doesn’t need a pimped out Caddy to become self actualized.  What a person does need to be self actualized is safety.  Instead of handing checks to the poor, what we should be doing is making the streets in shitty neighborhoods safer.   


Also, there aren’t any poor.  See there are roads that someone built.  If you have a succsessful business you didn’t do that, someone else made that happen.  You have teachers and schools and all kinds of resources that make everyone rich.  If you’re poor, you did that. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Why Poor People Are Fat

It has been suggested to me that the reason that poor people are fat is because they can’t afford healthy food.  That’s bullshit.  Poor people are fat because they eat crappy food out of choice, not economic necessity.

Consider this.

1 Banana has 90 calories.  If we estimate fairly generously a banana weighs a half pound and a pound of bananas costs 60 cents.

I don’t know how much a serving costs but I know Krogers brand corn flakes costs 99 cents a box for like 20 servings.  I’m not talking about the shitty bag either, I’m talking about the box, because for some reason that makes it better or

something. So we’ll be generous and say 15 cents.  and half fat milk (not even skim, the regular 2%)

Which at 3 dollars a gallon / 16 cups in a gallon  = 19 cents

1 healthy breakfast under a dollar.That’s like 300 calories and has all the various nutrients a body needs to go through till dinner if necessary.

That’s not what poor people want to eat though.  Speaking as a poor person this is the kind of thing I am likely to have for breakfast.  Seriously doesn’t this look better?

1 McDonald’s Mc Double   cut it up

take 3 eggs

and some butter in a pan

 add some table cream (because regular cream just isn’t good enough)

Coffee, because the cholesterol isn’t enough for THIS AMERICAN HEART

Now fold into an omlette and add more cheese, because fuck McDonald’s.  I’ll decide how much cheese I want with my hamburger omlette


Aside | Posted on by | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Why Atheists are Stupid (and so is your face)

There is a movement among atheists to connect their movement to science, yet none of the people involved seem to understand the idea of science.

Here is another case where we are going to have to define our terms before we dive headlong into the flood again.  For the intents of this conversation, we’re going to define Atheism as someone who is sure there is/are no God(s).  It seems every time that this discussion comes up someone has to rush out and explain how words work.  They say, “Well actually, theist means one who believes god exists and prays to him so anyone who doesn’t is by default an A-THEIST.”  If you are that guy and you happen to be reading this, you should know that everyone hates you.  I don’t mean that everyone on the other side hates you because that’s such a huge hit on their argument, I mean everyone.  You’re doing 3 annoying things simultaneously.  You’re doing the WELL ACTUALLY, thing about shit no one cares about, you’re derailing a conversation, and on top of it you’re correcting someone while being wrong at the same time.  No one will ever care about your shitty little nugget of shit.  Even you didn’t care about it, not in the abstract sense you didn’t.  You just latched on to it when someone else said it because it was something you could repeat and sound “smart” because you know what a fucking word means.  Everyone hates you.  I hope you kill yourself.  If there was a way to prove that the babies that Kermit Gosnell delivered then killed with scissors were going to grow up and do that, no jury would have convicted him.

And with that bullshit out of the way…

Atheism is a stupid and illogical position.  It can never be scientifically proven that god doesn’t exist.  Opposing an illogical position isn’t automatically logical.  This is where most internet atheists will point out that you can’t prove unicorns don’t exist and that’s another example of why atheists are usually stupid assholes.  The reason why that’s a dumb argument is that it is provable that unicorns don’t exist if, in fact, someone wanted to prove that badly enough to plunge the whole Earth into nuclear winter and freeze the planet to check for them.  To imply that belief in a divine creator is as foolish as belief in an imaginary kind of horse that would be frequently spotted prancing about on rainbows is disingenuous at best.

Therefore to believe there definitely IS NOT a god or a higher being of any kind, is not only arrogant and foolish, but requires faith as well.  Faith in nothing is just as illogical as faith in something.  The difference is that having faith in non existence while bashing someone for having faith in something is assholish hypocrisy.  So you don’t believe in any higher powers.  That’s fine just like it’s fine to believe that the universe came into being because some being willed it, but pretending you’ve discovered this via the scientific method is a lie, and not a very clever one.

Think about this for a moment, the super scientists of pretty much every atheist community on the internet were exposed as dumbasses by ICP.  They ask the question, “Fucking magnets, how do they work?” Some people thought it was funny to ask such a question in such a manner and made fun of it.  People jumped on it and the fat one said this to the press when asked about the internet sensation that was miracles, “I know this sounds crazy, but I’m being as honest as I can: We planned all this out.”

A novelty act from the 90’s springboards itself back into relevance by trolling internet atheists while r/atheism thinks they are the ones making the joke, while being the joke.


Furthermore, and the embarrassing part, no one knows how fucking magnets work.  I mean there are some theories out there about ferromagnetism that make a lot of sense, but they rely on other ideas in quantum mechanics that may or may not be reliable.  The atheist crew descended on this like stupid locusts and gave them all the hype they wanted while declaring themselves to be the super smart because they can DESCRIBE a magnet.  Describing something isn’t understanding how it works.  People said “HA HA AH POLAR ATTRACTION YOU STUPID SHITS” but saying opposites attract and likes repel is just describing what a magnet is, not how it works.  It’s like saying you know how a car runs and then saying it has a steering wheel, 4 tires, and 2 pedals that interact.  That’s right, but you’re describing something, not explaining it.  To the atheists out there proselytizing to the internet, when your movement is getting trolled by idiots who paint their faces like clowns, you might want to consider closing shop.

Now I know that the people who thought they knew how magnets worked still do, because it’s damned near impossible to convince an idiot they don’t know something, but let’s continue playing.  This is a randomly selected part of the quantum formula that is the basis of the hypothesis on ferromagnetism.  This is the dumbed down version.  Anyone who made fun of ICP for the magnets thing and knows where this fits in is excused from the mocking I am dishing out:

In short:


The atheists found on the internet are idiots, and the reason I have issue with them is they constantly proselytize.  Atheists on the internet proselytize  more than any other faith based belief system, and they do it just to be obnoxious and unpleasant.  When some misguided member of an Abrahamic religion tries to proselytize to me they believe they are attempting to save my immortal soul.  Whether they are right or not is debatable, but from their point of view it’s something that must be done.  What the hell are atheists doing when they do the same?  Trying to keep people from missing east coast football games?  Where is the motivation?

Other talking points internet atheists have are equally stupid.  They claim all wars ever were about religion.  There hasn’t been a large war over religion I can think of.  I mean there were probably a few, but none of the big ones.  The big wars are always about there was some group of people and they saw another group of people and the first group was pretty sure they could take that shit away.  Sometimes it’s money, sometimes power, usually land, but it’s about taking away shit from other people.  Back in the old days they told the foot soldiers it was about religion, but that’s because they were ignorant and illiterate and were going to die at 32 of infection anyway.  Anyone who believes it was about religion and not taking away the shit from the other people is as ignorant as the illiterate dark age foot soldiers.

Another thing the atheists like to claim is that Christianity stifled science, when in actuality the only reason all of the ancient science, math, chemistry et al. made it through the dark ages was because it was protected and guarded by Christian monks.  A monk named Gregor Mendel came up with genetic theory.  Another famous Christian was Charles Darwin.  Darwin while writing The Origin of the Species, was a Christian trying to explain how animals find their way to a more perfect state of being as intended by the god described by St Augustine.  Most of the types I am describing also are super into Darwin.  This can be noted by the bumper stickers that are of the dinosaur eating the truth fish eating the darwin fish eating the Jesus fish, but what these people don’t realize is that Darwin was wrong about everything.  All modern science indicates that species don’t change slowly over time.  It’s all wrong.  I’ve actually seen a Darwin fish eating the Jesus fish on the same car as a COEXIST sticker and that’s why people hate atheists.

It’s easy to hate shitty idiocy trying to pass itself off as science, see also “I fucking love science”  I clicked on that two days ago to see what the fuss was about, and the two most prominent things on the page was a link selling T Shirts and this:  

Because knowing that penguins and tuxedos both exist is indicative of the scientific method

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 5 Comments

Clarity of Point, Saying Not All Men Are Rapists is Not Rape Apology

Some people took umbrage to the approved Doc Carnage message that it’s ridiculous to preach “Teach men not to rape” because men aren’t rapists, even though most rapists are men.  I’ve gotten a few messages in response to this, which I won’t bother to individually acknowledge because they were literally, “But rapists ARE men”.  Yes.  Yes most rapists are men.  No one said otherwise, but A implies B doesn’t mean B implies A.  That’s basic fucking logic.

Second we have to define rape.  This literally could be the whole article, so I’m going to make this as short as is practically possible.   If we define it as “unwanted sex” there are problems.  According to the Journal of Sex Research, more than 46% of men have had sex they didn’t want to have.  I don’t think we’re going to call that rape.  To do so belittles victims of legitimate rape.

The problem is we’ve watered down the word.  If you want to blame anything for rape apology, blame that.  If you want to get published in medicine discover a new disease.  If you want to get published in cosmology discover a new planet.  If you want to get published in gender studies discover a new kind of rape.  I’m not exaggerating either.  The statistic 1 in 4 women are raped originally comes from a study done by Mz. Magazine where one of their operational definitions of rape was if during a make out session the man moved his hand to the pants and the woman didn’t want that.  It finally hit critical mass with gray rape.  That’s where the woman isn’t sure if she was raped or not, but the man is still guilty for not knowing.  That’s how far it had to get before some of the hard line feminists were like, OK, well that is, in fact, stupid.

Because of this we have to define what rape is in greater detail.  “When someone has sex they don’t want to have through some kind of force, to include blackmail, or a situation where the victim is for all intents and purposes unconscious  is going to be our definition.  Right now that’s what the word rape means.

Now down to the meat of the issue.  “Teach men not to rape” means that it is in the nature of men to rape, and we have to chase educate the devil patriarchy out of them with prayer teaching and baptism  feminism!


Maybe you’ve heard this one before.  The Catholics call it original sin.  It’s just as illogical as that.  Now there are two more words I want to define before we move on that are just as abused as rape.  Those words are antisocial and psychopathic.  Antisocial doesn’t mean someone who is shy at parties.  I don’t know how that one came to be other than just possibly out of sheer ignorance.  Currently it is the “pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood”, but that will probably change in a couple weeks when DSMV comes out.

Clearly this sounds more like the type of person who rapes than “someone with testes”.  There can be little argument about that.

While antisocial behavior disorder is a disorder unto itself, it’s too broad for me to tackle.  Let’s instead focus on psychopaths.  People have ideas in their head about what a psychopath is or isn’t, mostly based on TV movies about serial killers.  While serial killers are interesting as bad guys, they aren’t representative of psychopaths in general.  The new DSM will hopefully better cover this subtype of Antisocial Personality Disorder, but for now there is no definition to cut and paste into here.  Here are the big bullet points that make it different than just ASPD:

1) Lack of empathy.
2) Glib charm
3) Sexual misconduct, inappropriate seductiveness, promiscuity
4) Manipulativeness
5) Impulsiveness
6) Irresponsibility and failure to consider repercussions of action and inaction
7) Low threshold for boredom and high novelty seeking behavior
8) Egocentric behavior or attitudes

I’ll be the first to admit that’s not a comprehensive list.  I’m just an ex army Doc and, not some headshrinker.  I just read a book every once in a while instead of just gawking at the TV.  I’d make a good bartender, but a lousy therapist.

Back to the point at hand think about that list.  Think of all those things, especially number 1, and how they would relate as a subset of  ” a pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood”.

Now there are other personality disorders that are similar, and really psychopathy is weakly defined as of right now, but just follow me on this.

To end rape, we don’t have to teach men not to rape, we need to teach men not to have criminal antisocial personality disorders.  That doesn’t have quite the same ring to it, does it?  Anyone with normal human empathy and respect for the rights of others won’t rape. To say men are rapists because rapists are men, is to say that the state of being a man is a form of antisocial  personality disorder, which is clearly sexism in levels not seen since the turn of the 18th century when they used to say women were mentally inferior because of brain volume.  Claiming men are born to be rapists, which is a clear lack of regard for the rights of others and a failure to empathise with the pain of others, is normalizing rape, and therefore rape culture.

As I have previously stated the idea that “all the cool kids are doing it” makes the behavior more likely.  In fact on college campuses they are educating students that their peers aren’t binge drinking as much as believed and it lowers binge drinking rates.  It’s reasonable to believe that the correlation might run the opposite way and that raising the belief of prevalence of the behavior may in fact raise the behavior.

Stop calling all men possible rapists, and stop skewing statistics and definitions to make all women rape victims.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Driving the Point Home

A few days ago I told you how to roast a roast.  That was a bit advanced and just to make sure you get it, I’m going to teach you again with a chicken, which is way easier than beef.  If you fuck this up you are trying to fail.


Buy one chicken, one bag of carrots, and a 5 pound bag of potatoes. Together they should cost about as much as a take out Chinese meal.

I swear it’s really this easy:  Peel some carrots, cut some potatoes and put them in a dish so they look sort of like this



Pour some olive oil over them, then put salt and pepper on it.  I also put some powdered garlic on them because I’m fancy.  A lot of people think they don’t like carrots.  Carrots are great.  What those people don’t like is a carrot that has been tortured in boiling water for hours until all the sugar and flavor has been cooked out and it’s a mush suitable for old people with no teeth or taste left in their mouths.

I also put the potatoes cut side up because I think they finish better that way, kind of like home fries.

Moving right along


Set the oven for 350 and open the chicken package.  If you are feeling really fancy put some oil on the skin so it bakes up crispy, and put some salt and pepper on that.  (what you see here is actually crawdaddy seasoning, but regular salt and pepper works just fine)

Cook the bird and the vegetables at 15 minutes per pound of bird or when the skin turns brown, whatever comes first.


It’s that easy you ridiculous shambling manchild.  You don’t have an excuse for not being able to make basic sustenance for yourself or others ever again.  Cooking is just taking some food and making it hot.  Seriously make a damned chicken and earn your white belt in not being a pathetic moron who is afraid of bad magic that comes from the kitchen.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

As Far as Feminism Goes

I just posted about what is wrong with the MRA movement, now to discuss why it exists, and or what is wrong with feminism and why MRA exists.

I wanted to post about what I did with the other third of that roast.  I wanted to move on to give another Chef Carnage rung on the ladder, but I have to get this off my chest first, don’t worry, the good Dr. saved pictures and maybe I can write it up later.


A campus in Canada was having a men’s rights conference, a fairly small affair really, probably even smaller than the pokemon club, and a number of women showed up to protest it.  Why did they protest it, I have no idea.  Why does Fred Phelps protest soldier’s funerals, why does anyone do anything?

What if she was a victim of sexual assault, what if Fred Phelps was buggered as a baby?  I don’t know, but I know the level of anger people like that have about someone discussing how they feel they should be treated isn’t rational.  I mean can you really believe someone is this angry about the oppression of dish soap commercials?

She has since made her facebook mostly private save for this.


Should disenfranchised men really trust that feminists have the interests of equality at heart if this is the message some are putting out there?

Feminists regularly cherry pick misogynistic argument from sewers like http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/ so what say they when the shoe is on the other foot?  She doesn’t speak for us?  I mean I can’t imagine them saying the disproportionate male suicide rate is indeed less of an issue than dish soap commercials

I don’t know why feminists would be against men worrying about their own health issues without them, but you know, Toronto.  The thing is she goes on about how feminists are already working toward any goals men could have for their own health, well being, and societal position, and when confronted with statistics about men’s suicide, dismisses it by singing.  Of course the men’s right’s goons don’t know what to do with this and are yelling “GO LOOK AT GRAVE SITES” or whatever morons say, but that’s a problem.  There is an automatic assumption that it’s just better to be a man.  Everything is roses for men.  Suicide is a joke, as long as it’s privileged men pulling the trigger.

If dish soap commercials are as far as feminism goes into gender equality, then how can they argue against men having a meeting on campus?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Masculism as Satanism

The men’s rights advocates are making a huge tactical error right from inception, which is to counter feminism with feminism from bizarro world.  For those of you that don’t know, Bizarro World is from the DC comics universe where Superman lives.  The Bizarro World is the backwards version of our world.  It’s not actually the opposite, it’s identically constructed with details being opposite.  Like the Bizarro World US president lives in the Black House which is identical to the White House, but black.

 Feminism is not a logical construct and to argue against it with an identically framed system is to lose the battle before it’s begun.  It’s all right there in the name, kids, “feminism” not “feminology” or “Equity Theory” but feminism.  Right there in the name it’s an ISM and as an ism there has to be a basic core belief.  That core belief in feminism is a false belief in an oppressive anti woman dogma called the patriarchy.  Basically all feminism is rooted in the idea that women are victims and men are the oppressors.  When you flip feminism on its head, you have to make the claim that men are victims and women are oppressors.  While that may be equally true, I’m not here to decide if that is in fact, the case.  I’m here to say that the public perception is never going to align with that, and it’s a pointless exercise.  Think of feminists like religious people, the only difference in their fervor is that religious people will admit that their beliefs are based on faith and aren’t logical.

Forming a pro-male feminism of some sort is not a productive way to pass the time.  A bunch of people tried to do something like that once, and we call them satanists.  For those of you who don’t know, with the exception of some crackpots back in the hippy times, Satanists are Atheists.  I once had a knock down drag out brawl with someone on facebook over this cartoon from the oatmeal.

He agreed that the face of radical atheism looked like that.  I said it looks to me like more like burning churches in Norway.  The guy was incapable of understanding how atheists were worshiping Satan when atheists don’t believe satan exists, and it just went to absurdity involving him throwing a tantrum and blocking me, so I am going to explain this very slowly, because it seems some atheists are too stupid to understand simple logic and get offended on levels usually reserved for zealotry.  Satanists are a fancy kind of atheist who use Satan as a symbol for their independence from god  and their ceremonies aren’t to a dark lord in whom they believe, but they are a copy of what christians do to make them look ridiculous.  Trying to do this with “masculism” is exactly what the Satanists were up to and it’s pretty obvious they made zero headway in their crusades and sat around and preached to each other.  If anything they only proved to the devout that they were right and the enemy was among them.  That’s what Men’s Rights are.

That’s not to say that there are no issues there to address, there certainly are, but modeling it in a way that mirrors feminism isn’t going to work, because feminism requires an appeal to emotion that isn’t available for most people.  Feminism isn’t a study, it’s a lens by which people see the world.  People don’t easily give up their lenses, because it’s the framework for how they perceive the world, and in fact, think.  It doesn’t matter if it’s catholicism,  atheism, feminism, communism or any ism.  Once someone has committed their mind to an ism, it’s tougher to get out than a badger in his hole.

For example a hot issue is the gender wage gap.  The president of the US was on TV not too long ago claimed that women make 77 cents on the dollar as compared to their male counterparts.  When I looked at the number as corrected by NOW which the white house put out I figured out what number they were using by looking at the department of labor’s website.  They were comparing male college grads to female college grads.  In other words they were putting MBAs and BAs in Celtic Studies on equal footing.  Women are far more likely to pursue degrees in fields that pay non monetary benefits like Art History.  Women are also far more likely to do well in the school system designed and run mostly by women and go on to college at all, so the men that do go to college tend to be better than average.

Politifact, which has historically been Obama friendly, rated this as mostly false.   People still believe this though, and that’s why masculism can’t work.  Fighting against their ism with an ism is Brer Rabbit and the tar baby.


(the african folklore version not the horrible horrible racist thing made by Disney in the 40’s.  I guess we can be thankful the artists decided against giving it a mouth)

Once on the path of arguing numbers the argument is already lost.  Men make more money than women because the measure of a man is how much money he makes.  Men make more because they are encouraged to make money where women are encouraged to find fulfilling work.  Second wave feminism was about giving women a choice.  They got their choice and they chose.  Now feminists are trying to convince women that they are victims because as a gender they make less money than the other gender.  Feminists generally cherry pick by getting offended whenever there is a difference and reverse engineering why it’s patriarchal oppression.

The truth is the ones who as a group are doing the most damage to women, are the feminists.  By teaching women to constantly see themselves as victims who are getting shortchanged, they are effectively making women feel small and powerless for personal gain.  Think of the feminists as tent revival charlatan ministers.  They offer solutions, monetize the fervor of the crowd to fill their pockets, then split for the next town.  It doesn’t matter what the issue is, they will bring the same tired shit to town.  Patriarchy blah blah blah.  You can tell when someone is pulling this because they point out flaws without giving a portrait of how it should look.  For example if a feminist said that the pay gap should be closed by encouraging women to make longer commutes, work more solitary and or dangerous jobs, and men should look for shorter hours and less fulfilling work until the pay rate, suicide rate, and amount of free time are all in parity among the genders, that would be an appeal to equality.  No feminist would ever say that because it points out that the “male privilege” either has a parallel female privilege or is a result of individual choices that people can opt in and out of regardless of gender, and once women are portrayed as anything other than the victim, there is no argument.

Feminists even have a lexicon intended entirely to stop any discussion about male disadvantage.  First of all any time a man points out that the systemic advantage of males, as in the case of the pay gap isn’t really an advantage but a choice they will be accused of “derailing”.  If they further point out for example men have a lower job satisfaction rate they will be answered with “What about the menz?” a phrase meant to systematically marginalize these arguments without addressing them.  If anyone tries using hard data after that they will be excused of “mansplaining” which is such a horribly stupid word it makes my skin itch every time I see it.  It’s not even clever and doesn’t even make sense to anyone that doesn’t think man is synonymous with condescending rapist.  They control thoughts with repeated mantras like a cult.  The most vitriolic is teach men not to rape.  In just that sentence, they paint all men as rapists.  No other crime is talked about like that.  We don’t say teach men not to bank rob, because we all inherently know that most men aren’t bank robbers and all men know bank robbing is wrong, but some people just take what they want.  The rape culture is a construct made by feminists, in order to gain power and attention at the expense of actual victims.

“The truth is that both sexes participate in unwanted sexual activity. A feminist who was brave enough to ask these broad-based questions of both sexes astonished herself to discover that 94 percent of the men (as well as 98 percent of the women) said they had an unwanted sexual activity by the time they were in college. Even more surprising was her finding, reported in the Journal of Sex Research, that 63 percent of the men and 46 percent of the women said they had experienced unwanted intercourse. By feminist definitions of rape as unwanted sex, virtually everybody has been raped. And that’s how rape begins to look like an epidemic. It’s also how rape gets trivialized.” –Warren Farrell PHD, 3 time board member for the National Organization for Women

Men call it coyote ugly, women call it a mistake, feminists call it rape.

This constant reinforcement of the idea of men as rapists is not just damaging to women, but what kind of message is that to send to our young men?  All men rape?  It has been proven that thinking the rate of deviant behavior is more common than it actually is, increases the likelihood of  engaging in that deviant behavior.  College campuses have been distributing information about the rate of binge drinking, and it correlates with lower levels of binge drinking because people otherwise assume binge drinking is more common that it is.  It’s called social comparison theory.  If boys are constantly told they are something, they grow up into that.  It’s feminists that truly make rape culture a prevalent thing, and that’s because every movement, every ism needs a boogeyman.

I mean, I’m just tired of being wrong all the time just because I’m a guy. I mean how many times can everybody tell you that you’re the oppressive, prejudiced enemy before you give up and become the enemy. I mean a male, chauvinist pig isn’t born, he’s made, and more and more of them are being made by women. After long enough you just roll over and accept the fact that you’re a sexist, bigoted, insensitive, crude, cretinist cretin. Women are right. You’re wrong. You get used to the idea. You live down to expectations. Even if the shoe doesn’t fit, you’ll shrink to fill it. -Chuck Palahniuk, Choke

The key to arguing with feminists is to argue real equality.  Not to spot check them and point out the patriarchy is just as advantageous to women and men, and therefore is stupidly named, the only way to fight for men’s rights is to fight for rights period.  Arguments for honest to goodness equality are a lot harder to shout over with “WHAT ABOUT THE MENZ?”

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | 2 Comments