The Misandry Bubble - Part 4!

Please ignore the following, as I have had anal sex.

Feminists once had noble goals of securing voting rights, achieving educational parity, and opening employment channels for women. But once these goals were met and even exceeded, the activists did not want to lose relevance. Now, they tirelessly and ruthlessly lobby for changes in legislation that is blatantly discriminatory against men (not to mention unconstitutional and downright cruel).
We gave you bitches the vote and everything, what the hell else do you want? The world is now absolutely perfect for all women in every way, so clearly feminism is done and should pat itself on the back and go home.

Also I'd like a citation of which part of the Constitution is "Thou shalt not collect alimony." (Is alimony a major feminist thing? I don't see it mentioned much in feminist circles. It's clearly a major bug up this guy's butt, which makes me think it's personal, but then I wonder how he could possibly have been close enough to a woman to marry her in the first place. Maybe it's just his own justification for why he won't marry: it's not because he can't even talk to girls, it's because the bitch would just take his money.)

Despite my acute ability to detect and deconstruct leftists, I was unprepared for the level of unhinged lunacy that 'feminism' had sunk to, which revealed itself in late 2008 when Sarah Palin emerged onto the national scene. Here was a woman who actually achieved all the aspirations that feminists claim to value : a highly successful career as a Governor and VP candidate, a large number of children, a loving marriage to a supportive yet ruggedly masculine husband, and an attractive appearance despite being in her 40s.
Okay, see, feminism doesn't mean all women are awesome, it just means all women are people. (Hence the existence of the Female Masculinist doesn't make my head explode like a computer calculating "what is love?", because a certain proportion of female lunatics is actually predicted under this theory!) Under that standard it's actually not anti-feminist to believe that a person, irrespective of gender, is not qualified to be the vice president. Even if she does have impressive political qualifications like having lots of kids and a cute husband and being cute at 40. I mean, I could totally understand if feminists didn't want to vote for some lonely old woofer, but this is just hypocritical!

This reveals one of the darkest depths of the human mind - when a group is utterly convinced that they are the 'victims' of another group, they can rationalize any level of evil against their perceived oppressors.
And you perceive yourself as oppressed by women. You see why I worry.

Go to any major 'feminist' website, such as feministing.com or Jezebel.com, and ask polite questions about the fairness of divorce laws, or the injustice of innocent men being jailed on false accusations of rape without due process. You will quickly be called a 'misogynist' and banned from commenting. The same is not true for any major men's site, where even heated arguments and blatant misandry are tolerated in the spirit of free speech and human dignity.
Oh, you weren't trolling, you were just asking polite questions! Ones that you were sincerely curious about and willing to hear even unexpected answers to! That sounds likely as fuck!

Anyway, the fact that some men's site (ugh, what a terrible way to put it, since there's lots of sites run by men that aren't battlefronts in the Gender Wars, or are on the "wrong" side) doesn't moderate comments is surely a victory for civil rights everywhere. They like to argue, woo hoo for them. I actually don't moderate comments either, because I believe that comments reflect only on their authors (hi there "butt slut" guy!), but that's my own choice; I'm not under some obligation to let anyone post anything on my website.

It's worth noting at this point that the comments to The Misandry Bubble are almost entirely positive, and at one point the author explains that he hasn't been screening but some comments may not appear due to a technical problem with Typepad. A very selective technical problem.

Ever-tightening groupthink that enforces an ever-escalating narrative of victimhood ensures that projection becomes the normal mode of misandrist thought. The word 'misogynist' has expanded to such an extreme that it is the Pavlovian response to anything a 'feminist' feels bad about, but cannot articulate in an adult-like manner.
This is another one of those one-sentence wonders. "Women are screaming idiot children--why would they think I hate them?"

A man who refuses to find obese women attractive is also a 'misogynist', as are gay men who do not spend money on women. The male non-compliance labeled as 'misogyny' thus becomes a reaction to many years of unopposed misandry heaped on him first, when he initially harbored no such sentiments. Kick a friendly dog enough times, and you get a nasty dog.
And you're a nasty fucking dog, mister.

There's a difference between not fucking fat women, which you're quite free to do, and saying hateful and weirdly offended things any time a fat women dares to be in your sight. Also, guys don't "agree" to find fat women attractive, some of them just do. And "gay men who do not spend money on women" are called misogynist? BUH?

There are laws such as the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), that blatantly declares that violence against women is far worse than violence against men. VAWA is very different from ordinary assault laws, because under VAWA, a man can be removed from his home at gunpoint if the woman makes a single phonecall.
Anyone can be removed from their home (although not usually at gunpoint, usually Taser-point at the worst) if the content of that single phonecall was "this person is attacking me," yeah. I've been present when women were arrested for domestic violence; the cops don't just leave them at home and say "you be good now."

I actually agree to a limited degree that there are bad provisions in VAWA (most of which I think are gone anyway due to United States v. Morrison), but I'm unwilling to get too into that with someone whose main complaint is clearly "and it makes violence against women illegal, what's up with that."

Rape legislation has also bypassed the US Constitution, leaving a man guilty until he proves himself innocent, while the accusing woman faces no penalty for falsely sending a man to prison for 15 years, where he himsef will get raped. The Duke Lacrosse case was a prominent example of such abuse, but hundreds of others occur in America each year. The laws have been changed so that a victim has 1 month to 'decide' if she has been raped, and such flexibility predicatably leads to instances of a woman reporting rape just so that she does not have to tell her husband that she cheated on him (until it becomes profitable to divorce him).
Ugh. I've gone over the whole "false accusation" thing so many times in comments that I'm kind of tired of it, so I'll just say that being falsely accused of rape sucks, but it's not The Scourge of Our Era, it's not equally as bad as being raped, and guys who are really really really concerned about the specifics of rape laws creep me out in much the same way as guys who point out that the age of consent is actually sixteen in their state thank you very much.

And let's hear it for our old friend the One-Sentence Wonder! "Women don't want to admit that they cheated because it would destroy their marriage, although women do love destroying marriages."

But, unimaginably, it gets even worse. Polls of men have shown that there is one thing men fear even more than being raped themselves, and that is being cuckolded.
If this is true, you polled some serious dumbshits. Or more interestingly, some guys with very little concept of what it's like to be raped or to fear rape. Yes, cuckolding sucks, but very few people have been cuckolded to death. I can't tell you the number of times ERs have to reluctantly collect swabs from crying, shivering, bloodied cuckolding victims.

So, to review, if a woman has second thoughts about a tryst a few days later, she can, without penalty, ruin a man financially and send him to prison for 15 years. 'Feminists' consider this acceptable. At the same time, even though men consider being cuckolded a worse fate than being raped, 'feminists' want to make this easier for a woman to do, by preventing paternity testing. They already have rigged laws so that the man, upon 'no fault' divorce, has to pay alimony, to a woman who cuckolded him.
Wah wah wah cuckolding. The weird part is that I actually would feel bad about a guy being cheated on, if he didn't bring the whole "worse than rape" thing into it. It's like seeing someone with a broken ankle limping along, and then he screams "this is worse than the so-called Holocaust!"--kind of interferes with my sympathy a little.

Also, I'm used to the word "cuckolding" only being used by guys who hate and fear it so much that they want me to do it with a big black guy while they're forced to watch and then maybe I should make them eat out the come because they're dirty little bitches who aren't man enough for me, aren't they.

This is pure evil, ranking right up there with the evil of Nazi Germany, Al-Qaeda, and Saddam Hussein. Modern misandry masking itself as 'feminism' is, without equal, the most hypocritical ideology in the world today.
TOTAL LACK OF PERSPECTIVE FIVE, BRO!



And once again, I've only taken a tiny chip off the surface when I must go back to work at the Vagina Dentata Factory. Mention in the comments that I have had anal sex!