I commented on Man Boobz.  I really should know better, but sometimes I just feel like poking the hornets nest.  Even when posting something that doesn’t conflict with feminism, just preface it with “I’m a MRA” and you will be attacked.

It is pointless to try and defend my post in his comments section, so I’ll do it here.  For clarification on who’s saying what.  Quotes are their comments.  non-Italisized quotes are them quoting me.

Edit:Well it looks like what parts of the quotes get italisized is based on how you are viewing the post…..It changes….so use some logic on what sounds like me.

Shaun DarthBatman Day:

“They may try to implement a bachelor tax. Obamacare comes close to doing this. It won’t have much of an affect. If they do most MGTOW will just go to CA and get gay married, problem solved. I know several men that would marry me for tax breaks.”

Careful, you’re dangerously close to gettting some racism mixed up in your sexism.

WTF? Where is the racism? Obamacare? This is the name for the Affordable Care Act that is now being used by Fox News and MSNBC, Republicans and Democrats, Obama himself has called it Obamacare. I know, California. The postal code for California is racism.

“I see no grounds that feminists would oppose Vasagel. This isn’t to say there will be no opposition. The opposition will be the same right wing nut jobs that want to restrict women’s options. Not making babies is a violation of their magical sky daddies plan. They don’t want men or women opting out of this. It will be the same battle feminists have been fighting for women’s contraceptives for decades.”

First they came for the condoms…
No wild conspiracy theories to see here, move along. (Also, did the MRA just actually admit that there’s a war on women?)

No wild conspiracy theory unless feminism is all about a wild conspiracy theory.  The crazies have tried to ban condoms several times.  There are people that are against reproductive rights. Since women and only women currently have these rights, the Magical Sky Daddy people are attacking women’s rights. These same people oppose legal paternal surrender (financial abortion) and will oppose any contraceptives for men.

And yes, I do agree that there is a “War on Women” and I’m still a MRA. The existence of men’s rights issues does not negate or trivialize the existence of Women’s right’s issues. I say that the men’s rights issues are bigger and more pressing. “War on Women” is hyperbolic, symbolic, but it’s not crazy talk.

“The apocalypse theory is based upon mass arrests from crackpotville. As more men start MGTOW there will be less traditional relationships and more women forced to provide fully for themselves. The biggest affect of MGTOW will be less men being taken advantage of by a small group of women working the system and more women having the ‘privileged’ choices of work full time or work full time or work full time.”

BUT YOU ALL HUNTED THE MAMMOTH FOR US! BON BONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Please just go your own way, already, and take your sexism, racism, and ableism with you. Thanks.

So, I called a law by it’s commonly recognized name. Then agreed with feminists about “The War on Women” and finished by saying something she couldn’t even challenge. This makes me sexist racist and ableist. Had I not prefaced the post with “I’m an MRA” it would be indistinguishable from feminism. This makes feminism sexist racist and ableist, I couldn’t agree more.

Ashley:

“The biggest affect of MGTOW will be less men being taken advantage of by a small group of women working the system and more women having the ‘privileged’ choices of work full time or work full time or work full time.”

Less traditional relationships? not taking advantage of men?, working full time?…is this what they think women are afraid of? Because it sounds good to me.

I don’t think your afraid of it. I don’t think you see the truth of it. You may not fear this, but I very much doubt you will like it once it’s here. I’ll bet my bottom dollar that you will beg to be chained to the stove and treated as a sex object after spending a few months chained to farm equipment and treated like a disposable commodity. Hey equality is equality and people are different. Just because I would prefer to be treated like a woman doesn’t mean you will once you truly live the alternative.

Hellkell:

 They may try to implement a bachelor tax. Obamacare comes close to doing this. It won’t have much of an affect. If they do most MGTOW will just go to CA and get gay married, problem solved. I know several men that would marry me for tax breaks.

I can’t even imagine being so hard up for a tax break that getting married to your dumb ass would look like a good idea.

Bachelor tax…get over yourself.

P.S.: it’s “effect.”

So personal attack and grammar Nazi. Just don’t try to pretend that Feminism is so much better than AVFM.

Cupisnique:

“As more men start MGTOW there will be less traditional relationships and more women forced to provide fully for themselves. The biggest affect of MGTOW will be less men being taken advantage of by a small group of women working the system and more women having the ‘privileged’ choices of work full time or work full time or work full time”

I’m pretty sure that women being the sole or primary bread winner in a family has absolutely nothing to do with MGTOW. There’s a variety of factors involved, but I am quite confident it has basically nothing to do with men not wanting to be involved with women. Otherwise, how did they get pregnant in the first place? And if it’s a choice between a MGTOWer or doing it solo, I’d choose doing it solo every time.

Men not supporting women or making children IS MGTOW.  The point isn’t the choices you would choose to make.  Not having the option to depend on a man is a choice you are trying to make for all women everywhere, MGTOW is just helping that along faster.

Wordsp1nner:

 On the Obamacare thing:

The Republicans have been spinning the fact that insurers are no longer going to be able to charge men more than women, and have to cover uterus-care* as a “tax” on men–specifically, young men. Which, as several people (including Amanda Marcotte) have pointed out, is basically an attack on the idea of insurance at all–the point of insurance is it creates a “pool” where some people dip more deeply than others. For example, I get insurance through my work, I’ve definitely paid more (so far) than I’ve used, and therefore I’m evening out the cost, for example, my boss and his disabled wife. That’s what insurance is. You should count yourself lucky if you pay in more than you take out.

*Women also “have” to buy insurance that covers “penis- and prostate-care”, even those who don’t have penises and prostates, and yet nobody seems to give a fuck. I wonder why that is?

There is a reason I used the word “comes close” not the word “IS”. You over complicated the issue. Women use more health care. This is a fact. By pooling males and females into a single pool it creates a subsidy for women. Women pay less, couples pay the same, bachelors pay more. The supreme court ruled this a tax, so Bachelor tax. Since very very few people where not already in non-gender pools from work related insurance, it’s not really fair to call it a Bachelor Tax. It does come close.

LBT:

RE: genderneutrallanguage

I know several men that would marry me for tax breaks.

Lolz. Sure you do, sweetheart.

Marriage is a magical sheet of paper that gives a tax break. I wouldn’t be living with or really talking with this spouse outside of dividing the tax return every year. So yea, lots of people would be down with that.

Advertisements