From the Special Moderation Queue

MRA edition. This one’s just so perfect, because it hits every! single! point! in the MRA agenda.

I have no problem with women working. Although I do have a problem with paying child support and alimony to ex-wives that no longer put out, or do anything for their ex husbands. It is a waste when that money should go to support the new children and wife in the next relationship. Children should automatically go to the father, and our famous feminist bitches would figure out a way to save the marriage. Perhaps she would cook more, put out more, do the duties of a good wife, more, etc.

Nowadays having the children go to those who can least afford it, is, well a complete disaster. Men are being treated like sperm donors and wallets, I’m sick of it. I want a bitch that is loyal to me, and the family. Not a woman that just needs a sperm donor, or a wallet. To me that is heartless, despite the fact said behavior happens with reckless abandon.

I just can’t imagine why his wife left him.

Though he does lack a certain flair. But maybe our friend who wanted to cut off feminists’ “tittes” set too high a bar.


Similar Posts (automatically generated):

41 comments for “From the Special Moderation Queue

  1. August 18, 2006 at 9:41 am

    What’s “MRA”?

  2. Q Grrl
    August 18, 2006 at 9:58 am

    What a squawking mass of contradictions. Children should automatically go to the fathers. But fathers paying money to support their own children when momma ain’t doing teh nasty with them anymore? Bad. Children go to the lowest income parent, but men think they’re only viewed as wallets. So, lemme see. Men are only wallets when WOMEN ask them to support their own children. Men are not wallets when they’re driving home the bacon every night and momma’s in the kitchen waiting to fry it up.

    One has to ask: why’d the fuckwad get married in the first place?

  3. Buffalo Gal
    August 18, 2006 at 9:59 am

    Nice to hear one of these jerks admit out loud that they don’t think they have an obligation to support their children.

  4. Thomas
    August 18, 2006 at 10:04 am

    why’d the fuckwad get married in the first place?

    Because folks told him it meant a servant to fuck and dump housework on. The better question is, why did someone marry him? And I think we all know the answer.

  5. j swift
    August 18, 2006 at 10:06 am

    MRA = Men’s Rights Asshole?

    Sometimes it boggles the mind why women even get involved in serious relationships with these idiots. I just don’t understand it.

    Oh and Q because he was looking for a mommy plus someone to fuck.

  6. Shankar Gupta
    August 18, 2006 at 10:07 am

    I want a bitch that is loyal to me…

    Gosh, is that so much to ask?

  7. August 18, 2006 at 10:18 am

    our famous feminist bitches would figure out a way to save the marriage.

    Right…because it’s the job of the woman to make sure everything works perfectly – on top of the job she has to do outside of the hosue to make sure bills are paid, on top of the child-rearing, on top of “pleasing her man”, and on top of whatever else he wants to heap on her.

  8. August 18, 2006 at 10:25 am

    Evidently he sees children mainly as a way to blackmail his wife into continuing to have sex with him and do his housework.

  9. August 18, 2006 at 10:28 am

    It is a waste when that money should go to support the new children and wife in the next relationship. Children should automatically go to the father,

    Let’s not forget this part either. So now it will be the new wife’s responsibility to not only take care of this guy and their children, but now she’ll have to take care of this guy’s previous children as well? Cause no doubt child caring will fall on the woman’s shoulders and not his.

    It is one thing if this is all by choice but something tells me coming from this guy it would be expected.

  10. Em
    August 18, 2006 at 10:30 am

    I don’t know how you maintain the stomach to deal with this kind of stuff. I find it hard to get past the phrase “put out” and the attitude of jilted ownership attached to it.

    Oh but wait–she DID put HIM out, didn’t she? To the curb! Not quite what he was talking about, I’m sure.

  11. Dennis
    August 18, 2006 at 10:37 am

    Wow. The alimony bit makes some sense (though I think there are some decent arguments in favor of it in certain cases), but child support? Outstandingly good show by this chap. A true trailer park hero.

  12. August 18, 2006 at 10:47 am

    Ya think maybe his wife dumped his loser ass because he refers to women as bitches? And that he wants a bitch? And that maybe she was tired of his entitled attitude? Maybe if he wasn’t such an entitled fuckwit, she would have stuck around.

    And it’s interesting how he thinks his obligation to his kids should end if their mother–who no longer puts out–has them. Obligation to kids ends when unlimited access to wife’s pussy ends. Nice.

    Shocking that he’s single. Utterly shocking.

  13. August 18, 2006 at 10:52 am

    I want a bitch that is loyal to me…

    Get a dog.

  14. caitlin
    August 18, 2006 at 10:55 am

    Children should automatically go to the father, and our famous feminist bitches would figure out a way to save the marriage. Perhaps she would cook more, put out more, do the duties of a good wife, more, etc.

    He totally makes the assumption that the guys are the ones initiating most divorces, and that they are doing it because their wives are frigid, slovenly bitches. What an intelligent, charming fellow. I should introduce him to my sister.

  15. August 18, 2006 at 11:05 am

    He wants a “bitch,” and then complains about “heartlessness.” Damn, sugar, make up your frickin’ mind.

  16. zuzu
    August 18, 2006 at 11:12 am

    I think that may be in reference to Heartless Bitches International. We got someone in the pick-up artist thread complaining about them and linking to a “nice guy” site that featured a lot of stuff about “Ameriskanks.”

    Also, Amanda Marcotte informs me she’s gotten this same comment and commenter several times. Looks like someone wants some blog traffic.

  17. bmc90
    August 18, 2006 at 11:13 am

    I snip job, blow up doll, and life time supply of Bud should solve every problem he could ever have. Hell, I’ll pay for the snip job and the first case of Bud.

  18. Silver Owl
    August 18, 2006 at 11:22 am

    LOL! The guy is obviously quite pissed that the universe does not revolve around him and his dick.

  19. piny
    August 18, 2006 at 11:38 am

    Though he does lack a certain flair. But maybe our friend who wanted to cut off feminists’ “tittes” set too high a bar.

    Well, and then there was that guy who _also_ showed up at BFP’s place. He was even more violent.

  20. dragonsmilk
    August 18, 2006 at 12:12 pm

    Shorter dumbshit:

    I want a bitch….[n]ot a woman.

  21. Mikey S
    August 18, 2006 at 12:13 pm

    I really enjoy the special-moderation wackos. Can femiste/feminist/pandagon join together and start a ‘sexist troll of the day’ blog? Just to give them a home/cage?

  22. YooHooligan
    August 18, 2006 at 12:50 pm

    We got someone in the pick-up artist thread complaining about them and linking to a “nice guy” site that featured a lot of stuff about “Ameriskanks.”

    I love the Manly Men who completely write off half a nation because their last partner didn’t give them the deference they thought they were due simply by being born with a cock and a sense of entitlement.

    Now, ladies, because of our uppity-ness, they’re going to be forced to search abroad for the women who won’t view them as merely a wallet! All we can do is shamefacedly await the next expose article — no doubt featuring an undercover journalist heading to Japan, or Dubai, or Sweden to find a sweet-tempered, economically independent mate. That’ll show us.

  23. piny
    August 18, 2006 at 12:53 pm

    Yeah, like, “Oh, no, Mr. Super Stud, please don’t outsource your penis! Whomever will I do? Wherever will I find someone to go down on?”

  24. bmc90
    August 18, 2006 at 1:27 pm

    Oh, yeah, some 22 year old from the former Soviet Union living in a tin shack is going to want him for his facinating conversation, not his money.

  25. August 18, 2006 at 1:58 pm

    Golly, maybe the state should provide fellows like this with subsidized housecleaning (performed by big, burly men if at all possible) and detailed instructions on masturbating. That way, they wouldn’t have to abuse anyone but themselves.

  26. Sara
    August 18, 2006 at 2:12 pm

    For evelyn in #13:

    Now now, let’s not encourage animal abuse :p

  27. August 18, 2006 at 2:26 pm

    I read that Ameriskanks page. He has a Japanese girlfriend and is fetishizing her into a Perfect Obedient Oriental Servant.

    But, of course, once us Ameriskanks hit 35 we turn into human beings again! Funny how that works.

  28. August 18, 2006 at 2:46 pm

    Gosh, I hate running into my ex-husband online.

  29. Mikey S
    August 18, 2006 at 2:48 pm

    Here’s the Ameriskanks link, as best I could google. We need a post on this in a big way.

    http://www.the-niceguy.com/

  30. ilyka
    August 18, 2006 at 3:28 pm

    I think it’s been done, Mikey; the dude’s mildly infamous. Personally it’d bore me because (a) it’s not as though anything said about him by, eww, feminists, is going to change his mind and (b) it’s just going to set off a flurry of posting at his other site, the feministing “parody” one.

    Every time I hear about that guy I want to create a “We’re So Sorry” web site to apologize to Japan. Sorry, Japan. :(

  31. Kate
    August 18, 2006 at 3:45 pm

    Sometimes it boggles the mind why women even get involved in serious relationships with these idiots. I just don’t understand it.

    Bate and switch. Their behavior deteriorates over time. Fortunately, I didn’t marry or have kids with my mistake.

  32. August 18, 2006 at 4:03 pm

    Oh, yeah, some 22 year old from the former Soviet Union living in a tin shack is going to want him for his facinating conversation, not his money.

    Exactly, b. A guy who worked with my dad married a woman like that once. As soon as she was able, she took off. She didn’t take his money, but she had a green-card and was free as a bird.

    The asshole showed up at our house with a gun, looking for her.

    It was sick and sad.

  33. August 18, 2006 at 4:24 pm

    feh–he’s just verbalizing what a lot of guys do anyway. Leave, start a new family, then conveniently forget the first family they co-created.

  34. KnifeGhost
    August 18, 2006 at 6:17 pm

    God, I’m so glad I got rid of any Nice Guy tendencies when I identified them. And I’m glad my feminist leanings run deep enough that I can’t remember a time in my life when I would have thought it was ok to dismiss women as gold-diggers and whatevers.

    Catch ’em while they’re young. If you get ’em hooked on Feminism before sexual frustration sets in, you don’t get Nice Guys.

  35. August 18, 2006 at 6:18 pm

    DTMFA, indeed.

  36. exangelena
    August 18, 2006 at 6:33 pm

    For everyone disgusted by the “nice guys” site:
    http://www.bigbadchinesemama.com/home.html
    And I don’t know if Natalia has it up at her new blog, but she had a great post at Indiscretions called “Natasha from Russia” sort of on this topic.

    As for “Ameriskank”, I wanna make myself a t-shirt that says “Asian-Ameriskank” and watch as the Asiaphiles’ heads explode.

  37. KnifeGhost
    August 18, 2006 at 7:34 pm

    Word up.

    I had a fwe fun conversations with my Filipina friends last year. They get both the sweet demur Asian and sassy Latina sterotypes. They colide very nicely and make all kinds of fancy sparks.

  38. Sierra
    August 18, 2006 at 10:45 pm

    It is a waste when that money should go to support the new children and wife in the next relationship. Children should automatically go to the father

    Because wives and children are objects that can be replaced at the man’s discretion.

    Nice contradiction, too. My money should go to my brand new family only, and I should also get to keep those other kids, whom I will support with the money I don’t think I should spend on them.

  39. August 18, 2006 at 11:18 pm

    Thanks exangelena! I’ve actually just re-published and archived that essay on my site. I tried to deal with some typos while I was at it.

    Here it is.

  40. August 19, 2006 at 2:07 am

    If there was any justice in the world every woman this guy started dating would get a copy of that post slipped under her door.

  41. Pingback: Natalia Antonova

Comments are closed.