The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

The Pump-and-Dump Feminist

Posted on | January 22, 2016 | 154 Comments

 

Reina Gattuso (@reinagattuso on Twitter) is a Harvard-educated feminist and a compelling argument for why men should be warned to avoid Harvard-educated feminists. If it were up to me, heterosexuality would be strictly prohibited at Harvard University for the very reason that no man should ever have sex with the kind of women who attend Harvard University, of whom Reina Gattuso is a typical example.

Actually, Ms. Gattuso is a typical example of many things, none of them good. She is an extraordinarily bad human being, which is why she was chosen as a student speaker at Harvard’s 2015 Class Day:

Reina has spent the past four years studying Comparative Literature and Studies of Women, Gender, and Sexuality; co-founding a feminist magazine, Manifesta; reading poetry at The Harvard Advocate; and writing for The Crimson, where she co-founded an inclusivity and diversity working group. . . . She is looking forward to spending next year on a Fulbright-Nehru Student fellowship in Delhi, India. But first, Reina is looking forward to outing herself to her grandmother on Class Day.

Yes, American parents, this is why you should send your daughter Harvard (annual tuition $45,278), so that she can celebrate her graduation by “outing herself to her grandmother.” Just in case anyone missed her baccalaureate coming-out speech, however, Ms. Gattuso wrote a column for the Washington Post in which she mentioned that she “has publicly admitted to making out with half the lesbian, queer, bisexual, bicurious and questioning women at Harvard.”

That column, in which she describes herself as “selfish” and “reckless,” was published with the headline, “Why monogamy’s not for me,” which is a rather transparent sour-grapes rationalization. Has anyone ever sought a monogamous relationship with Ms. Gattuso? Of course not. To borrow a line from an old Steppenwolf song, she is evil, wicked, mean and nasty.

No decent person would seek an intimate association with Reina Gatttuso, certainly not on a permanent basis. The Ivy League is decadent and depraved, but she is a very bad person even by Harvard’s abysmally low standards. Among the notorious graduates of Harvard, she is perhaps not as bad as Ted Kaczynski (Class of 1962), but the Unabomber wrote only one manifesto, whereas Ms. Gattuso issues her demands sequentially and in installments as a columnist for Feministing, where she delivers such empowering messages as “Romantic Love Is a Patriarchal Conspiracy,” “My Vagina Is Tired of Compromise” and, best of all, “Sexual Objectification Is an Evil Male Plot for World Domination,” which includes this astonishing sentence:

I literally cannot talk to other women about how upsetting I find being street harassed without part of me feeling a little smug about it.

“Literally.”

This is an astonishing sentence, I say, because it is difficult to imagine that Harvard University would award a diploma in literature to someone who would write such a sentence. As much as I enjoy mocking the Ivy League — meritocracy, my ass — is it too much to expect a Harvard graduate to avoid this ignorant juvenile habit of haphazardly dropping “literally” into sentences as an intensifier? At least Ms. Gattuso did not commit the common error of using “literally” when she meant “figuratively,” but if we ask what function “literally” serves in that sentence, the answer is, none whatsoever.

Would you say that I am being pedantic? Nitpicky and hypercritical? Yes, and deliberately so, because I do not like Reina Gattuso, and one way people communicate hostility is through this kind of fault-finding attitude, where everything the other person does is subjected to mocking criticism and ridicule. This is how feminists treat men, habitually, yet they will start shrieking in panicked victim mode — “Harassment!” “Abuse!” “Misogyny!” — if any man dares call them out on it.

Feminists are simply women who do not like men. They have converted their anti-male hostility into a simulacrum of a political ideology, and expect the rest of us to take their rants and screeds seriously. In the feminist’s mind, she is in the position of a tenured professor and we are all a bunch of clueless kids who have signed up for her Gender Studies class. She is an expert, and we are in need of her enlightenment. The subject of today’s lecture is the same as yesterday and the day before: “Men Are Bad and Stupid, and You Should Hate Them.”

It really is as simple as that. The feminist is a grievance collector, who spends her life cataloguing the wrongs and evils for which men are responsible — that is to say, everything — and encouraging other women to do the same. This endless repetition of gripes and complaints about men is occasionally interrupted by endorsement of some other trendy progressive cause (global warming) as well as predictable electioneering efforts on behalf of left-wing candidates.

For example, whenever CNN goes off one of its periodic white-cop-shoots-black-teenager binges, feminist bloggers will reinvent themselves as experts on racial injustice and after the storm of made-for-TV protests blows over, feminist bloggers go back to ranting about abortion rights and “rape culture.” Their interest in politics is similarly episodic, following whatever is in vogue among progressives. When Bush was president, feminists pretended to be experts on terrorism and foreign policy, but once Obama was elected, feminists suddenly became experts in health-care policy. Currently, feminists seem intent on convincing the world that Donald Trump is the Worst Racist Sexist Homophobe in the History of the World, Ever. However, if Trump should lose the Republican nomination — to Cruz or Rubio or whoever — then feminists will discover that, contrary to their earlier judgment, the GOP candidate who beats Trump is actually the Real Worst Racist Sexist Homophobe in the History of the World, Ever. But I digress . . .

In addition to “making out with half the lesbian, queer, bisexual, bicurious and questioning women at Harvard,” Reina Gattuso also occasionally decides to subject herself to the patriarchal oppression of heterosexual intercourse, and she has written an 1,800-word column explaining how and why she generally despises the men she has sex with:

Alas, friend of mine, you have had an orgasm and are falling asleep. I have not had an orgasm and am not falling asleep, which means I am awake, which means I am now going to lecture you about feminism.
Who are you? (Big questions.) You are anyman, everyman, you are one of any number of lucky bastards with whom I have happened to roll into bed because baby, it’s been a few months and none of the cute activists are texting me back. Or maybe you are a cute activist who texted me back — in which case listen up, buddy, because this one’s for you, too.
Who are you? You’re a decent guy. You’re solid. I do not feel like you are going to rape me. (Yay! Let’s throw a party!)
No, you’re not a bad guy. The sex wasn’t particularly bad, either. And I know bad sex. I know sex that tastes like coercion and I know sex that tastes like endings and I know sex that tastes like hand sanitizer, which is a bad thing to put on your hands before you finger someone.
No, friend, it was not bad sex. It was normal sex. Normal, boring, vaguely dehumanizing hetero sex.
Which is precisely the point: The normalcy.
Believe me: I enjoy having someone mortar-and-pestle me for a few minutes as much as the next ornery bisexual. But friend, I feel that you can do better. . . . .

Here I will interrupt to explain that I can find no independent corroboration that Reina Gattuso has ever had sex with a man. Or a woman, for that matter. Of course, I can understand why anyone would be reluctant to admit that they had sex with a Harvard feminist, but that’s not my point. What I’m saying is I was unable to find a column anywhere with a headline like, “I Banged Reina Gattuso,” so that what she says about having sex with men (or women, or transsexuals, or whatever) is unverified. She claims to have had sex with men, but no men have stepped forward testifying to the truth of her claim. With that stipulation in mind, please continue, Ms. Gattuso:

Because there was something in the choreography of the whole thing that just struck me as, I don’t know — unsatisfying in a way only feminism can remedy.
Yup, I’m talking about the orgasm deficit. . . .
Sex is now over. Sex is now over because you have decided it is over. You have decided sex is over because you are a man, and because this choreography that favors men with penises — man becomes erect, man penetrates woman, man ejaculates — is what we have been told sex is.
Because we’re brainwashed.
Ever heard of a thing called patriarchy? . . .

Your boyfriend is a loser and, therefore, patriarchy.

How many times do we have to read variations of this same tired theme? Anything and everything that any feminist decides to complain about is always blamed on “male supremacy.” Everybody has been brainwashed by the patriarchy, we are expected to believe, and therefore we need feminists to tell us The Hidden Truth of the Oppressive Conspiracy that, in this example, has cheated Ms. Gattuso out of her orgasm. But the Oppressive Conspiracy of male supremacy is so vastly powerful that it can explain whatever irritates or annoys a feminist. The patriarchy is the Swiss Army Knife of feminism, an all-purpose tool of theory and analysis. After several paragraphs of ranting about the patriarchy, Ms. Gattuso finally reaches the, uh, climax of her argument:

We f–k until you come, I do not come, you do not ask if I would like to come or if you can help make me come, and then we’re done f–king, because you have decided we are done f–king, and everyone is supposedly happy.

OK, enough. Anyone who wants to subject themselves to the rest of Raina Gattuso’s lecture can go read the whole thing, but let me suggest that if she is accurately describing an actual experience, she may have misunderstood it.

“Pump and dump” — this is a phrase that the pick-up artist (PUA) community uses to describe a situation in which a guy decides to make a move on a woman who interests him only in terms of a one-time opportunity for sex. This kind of play is also known as “hit-it-and-quit-it,” and may be part of a PUA’s general strategy of running up his number just for the sake of the game. It’s Tuesday night at the local sports bar, not a lot of action available, and here’s this woman who’s giving him green-light signals. She is not the kind of woman he would consider for anything like a actual relationship, but (a) she is clearly signaling her interest and (b) it’s Tuesday.

What the heck, why not? Run up the score. “Pump and dump.”

That’s how the PUA sees it, but — plot twist — he doesn’t want the woman to realize how low she rates in his estimation. The game is about psychology, and the shrewd PUA realizes that the woman flashing him the green light is probably hoping for more than just a one-night stand. In all likelihood, she has in mind some kind of audition, where if everything goes well, he will want to develop a relationship. In that kind of situation, you see, there isn’t much incentive for the PUA to make any extra effort, to be sensitive and considerate. He doesn’t love her. He doesn’t respect her. He has no reason to do anything more than the necessary minimum: “Pump and dump.”

Now, the key to the PUA’s success is this: She never realizes it’s a game. If a player is really skilled, his targets don’t even suspect he’s a pick-up artist. Everybody thinks of PUAs in terms of the bar scene, but a master of the game could be just any guy anywhere. Nobody suspected Asheville, N.C., coffee shop owner Jared Rutledge of being a PUA master during the months he was running up his number:

In 2013, he hooked up with 15 different women, and in 2014, he achieved 22 “scores” (a new woman every 16 days, on average).

Alas, the damned fool decided to brag about his conquests on an “anonymous” blog, and thereby destroyed himself. What was interesting was that some of Rutledge’s targets insisted angrily that they had real relationships with him that weren’t “just about sex,” so that even after they were told they had been played, they still didn’t fully realize the nature of his game. Even though all decent people must deplore Rutledge’s unethical behavior, his remarkable success demonstrates how easily women can be deceived by a skilled player.

And this is what Raina Gattuso doesn’t understand about the men who play her as a “pump-and-dump.” Whether or not any of them would describe themselves as PUAs, they are treating her the way we might expect a player to treat a woman he regards as a “low-value target.” She directs her feminist “orgasm deficit” rant toward “any number of lucky bastards with whom I have happened to roll into bed,” evidently with no thought of how these “lucky bastards” viewed their encounters with her. Does she think they were all incompetent and clueless? Or was it the case, as we might more readily imagine, that these guys didn’t feel the need to waste any extra effort on a casual “hit-it-and-quit-it” score?

An alternate theory is that Raina Gattuso has a (not uncommon) combination of bad judgment and bad attitude. Such women exude a general hostility toward men, a chip-on-the-shoulder attitude that is a sort of pre-emptive defense against unwanted attention. In their minds, they are signaling how “strong” they are, but others just perceive them as rude and bitchy. (Males commit similar errors as, for example, the guy postures as cool and aloof but is perceived by others as merely sullen and hostile.) A woman who tries to strike the “strong woman” pose will, quite predictably, be avoided by most men. What this type of woman will typically do, however, is to aggressively pursue men who strike her fancy, and this is where her bad judgment comes into play, in that she invariably chooses bad men or, at least, men who are wrong for her.

Recall that Ms. Gattuso described herself as “selfish” and “reckless,” which is to say that she is impulsive and irresponsible and makes bad decisions. She has apparently never been in any enduring or stable relationship with any of her lovers, male or female, and what else would we expect? When a young woman makes this kind of attitude and behavior her habit, it is unlikely she will ever change, especially when she has made this the basis of her political identity. Ms. Gattuso has gone out of her way to publicize herself as a promiscuous bisexual feminist — “outing herself to her grandmother” as a graduation stunt at Harvard — and perhaps you can imagine her repudiating her self-created identity, but I can’t. She is utterly doomed to become a crazy cat lady.

Knowing that the comments at Feministing are moderated, I decided to use the system to communicate some useful truth:

The real problem — and I say this merely for the benefit of whichever editor is assigned to delete my comment — is that (a) Reina Gattuso does not actually like men and yet (b) she continues to have sex with men, while (c) believing that the men she has sex with are too stupid to figure out her game. Given her avowed lesbian preference, why is Ms. Gattuso having sex with men at all? In a word: narcissism. She enjoys being the center of attention, and if no lesbians are available to serve her narcissistic need, she’ll settle for whatever male is available. Assuming that these men are even minimally perceptive, however, they can see exactly what kind of game she’s playing.
Well, OK, buddy: You have been invited to worship The Bitch Goddess, who views you as an abject and inferior servant — a mere instrument for her pleasure — and you can either (a) humiliate yourself in masochistic supplication to her imperious demands, or (b) just get it over with and try never to be so foolish again in the future.
While it is futile to offer advice to the omniscient Ms. Gattuso, who already knows everything, I hope the editor assigned to delete this comment will heed my suggestion: Stop treating men as if they are your moral and intellectual inferiors, simply because they are male. Any honest and intelligent man will refuse to be treated in such an insulting manner. This is why the anti-male prejudices of feminists tend to become self-fulfilling prophecies: Feminists treat men badly, and good men therefore avoid feminists, and then feminists wonder why all the men they meet are so bad.

That’s the bottom line, really. For women like Raina Gattuso, feminism is just a political rationalization of their sadistic tendencies.

UPDATE: Linked at First Street Journal and the Political Hat and by Maetenloch in the AOSHQ overnight threadthanks! — and welcome, Instapundit readers!





 

Comments

154 Responses to “The Pump-and-Dump Feminist”

  1. robertstacymccain
    January 24th, 2016 @ 9:44 pm

    What has happened, really, is that feminism quite explicitly condemns femininity, and encourages its followers to adopt masculine attitudes — to be competitive and aggressive — and teaches them that specifically feminine pursuits (marriage and motherhood) are unworthy. This is pure evil, and its advocates are satanic.

  2. robertstacymccain
    January 24th, 2016 @ 9:48 pm

    Men don’t give oral sex to shark-eyed prostitutes either.

    Yeah, you have to wonder what caliber of “lucky bastards” she’s rolling into bed with. It seems they all have a low opinion of her, as they certainly should.

  3. robertstacymccain
    January 24th, 2016 @ 9:49 pm

    I’ve seen other pictures of her where she looks better. She has rather large breasts, so there’s that.

  4. Colonel Gunter Brumm
    January 24th, 2016 @ 9:59 pm

    You make alot of threats online dont you?
    Right Marty Chosenbaum?

  5. Colonel Gunter Brumm
    January 24th, 2016 @ 10:09 pm

    sluts and orgasms and killing goyim in every comment you make. Psycotic

  6. mole
    January 24th, 2016 @ 10:44 pm

    I wonder if she has considered her poor partnering problems might be related to the reputation she has where she works?
    Lets face it if you did a 5 minute search into what your ‘swipe right” has online and crap like this come up then you arent trying to impress anyone, you know you are pre-judged as a pestle to her mortar.

    A bad reputation means ‘good” boys stay away, and cads have their target already marked out for them.

  7. Instapundit » Blog Archive » MOTHERS DON’T LET YOUR SONS DATE HARVARD FEMINISTS:The Pump-and-Dump Feminist….
    January 25th, 2016 @ 12:18 am

    […] MOTHERS DON’T LET YOUR SONS DATE HARVARD FEMINISTS:The Pump-and-Dump Feminist. […]

  8. Ken Mitchell
    January 25th, 2016 @ 12:25 am

    I’m sorry; shouldn’t that have been “evil, mean, and wicked, BAD, and nasty”?

    And ugly, too, but most college-aged men are incapable of discerning such….

  9. Fail Burton
    January 25th, 2016 @ 12:29 am

    It’s hard to escape the conclusion the most virulent advocates of TWF wish they were men. Judith Butler must be delusional to look at her chest in a mirror and conclude “reproductive heterosexuality” is a “fiction.”

    Of course they want nothing to do with the freezer warehouses and military cemeteries part. Me having personally eye-balled those two things reveals a thing called “statistical zero.”

  10. Fail Burton
    January 25th, 2016 @ 12:32 am

    I’ve turned down blatant offers of sex from women far better looking and less hateful than Reina. Her problem is she thinks what she gets is what there is to get. Wrong. She is attracting the sweepings. I’m out of her league and I’m nobody. You can then imagine who she’s sleeping with.

  11. Misanthrope
    January 25th, 2016 @ 12:37 am

    Overlooked is the fact that a man would have to be nearly dead drunk to crawl into that harpy’s bed.

    I bet she has an extensive arm collection.

  12. Richard Cranium
    January 25th, 2016 @ 12:38 am

    Greater than that implied by your comment.

    It must suck to be you.

  13. Daniel Freeman
    January 25th, 2016 @ 12:39 am

    I bet both of these are true:

    1. She thinks it’s wrong for good men to be racist against sluts.

    2. She is racist against men with less experience than her.

  14. Paul
    January 25th, 2016 @ 12:43 am

    “Arm collecton”?
    What do you mean by that?

    I hope you don’t mean arms collection. A person less likely to have a decent gun collection I doubt I would ever see.

    Ooh, I get it. Any man who would wake with her arm under him in the AM would chew it off, rather than awake the harpy. Even so, I think two would be the limit of her collection.

  15. Misanthrope
    January 25th, 2016 @ 12:50 am

    Coyote.

    Love.

    I don’t know if she would have more than two in the collection; but I’m certain nobody contributed more than one.

  16. JJS_FLA
    January 25th, 2016 @ 1:08 am

    Wait ’till she tries to get a job!

  17. Finrod Felagund
    January 25th, 2016 @ 1:12 am

    I wouldn’t go to any DQ that she managed.

  18. Praelium
    January 25th, 2016 @ 1:13 am

    Excellent essay and enlightening comments. Thank you. “The feminist is a grievance collector.” True. Thus, a person who wishes to be labelled a “feminist” is spineless. Reading Simone de Beauvoir allows a person to understand that feminism is created by men to keep women in chains. Rather than give women chains, Pope John Paul II gives everyone hope and wrote a Letter to Women in 1995: “From the heart of the Church there have emerged women of the highest calibre.” For example, rather than blame men for her tragedy, Joan of Arc used her suffering to find her inner vision and natural calm that saved France. On the contrary, some “ladies” allow themselves to become used and passed around in order to get into Harvard. You would think one person at Harvard would have the decency to send the student mentioned above to an orthodontist.

  19. Shawn Smith
    January 25th, 2016 @ 1:13 am

    You know what would really help this woman with her sexual dissatisfaction problems? If she could develop a stable, long-term sexual relationship with one guy, in which she could grow comfortable enough to address these problems as a conversation, not just a feminist lecture. Of course, most guys in such a relationship would probably prefer she not get involved with other guys, so that would be something of a sacrifice. But she’d probably end up getting more sexual fulfillment out of it.

    That sounds like exactly the kind of relationship that’s for Reina. There’s probably a word for this kind of relationship, but for some reason, it’s escaping me at the moment. Anyone out there got an idea?

  20. Finrod Felagund
    January 25th, 2016 @ 1:16 am
  21. Finrod Felagund
    January 25th, 2016 @ 1:17 am

    I once had a coworker where all he wanted was a plain girl with big breasts.

  22. David K Dwyer
    January 25th, 2016 @ 1:47 am

    Well with the Big O, importing professional street harassers from the Middle East that may soon be untrue. I recommend concealed carry and like Navy says:”Shoot First. Shoot Enough.”

  23. FrancisChalk
    January 25th, 2016 @ 4:48 am

    She is angry that she’s a lesbian, pure and simple.

  24. FiscalCon
    January 25th, 2016 @ 5:09 am

    You literally had me laughing out loud. (No, I really mean it.)

    Methinks that Ms Reina (what an appropriate name) will meet some reality in working in Delhi. Let’s hope so. She certainly didn’t at Harvard.

    KTF and keep hittin’ em hard.

  25. IP
    January 25th, 2016 @ 5:23 am

    Thanks for the post. My thoughts:

    1. Wife’s sister is a lesbian, and displays some domineering tendencies, wanting to control other women and weak men and compete with regular men etc. which in some lesbians can become sadistic, or certainly lead to domestic violence. This might help explain why some lesbians have the U- Haul ready for move-in the first day in a relationship (emotional needs of a woman, urge to dominate like a man).

    2. If this woman isn’t a lesbian, you’re probably right, she doesn’t have a man to pay her any attention, and her sex/love/relationship/kids needs aren’t being met, which is just sad. Why else broadcast such failure to the world?

    3. Either way, the world don’t fit her, and she ain’t fitting the world, so something’s got to fill the hole. Ideology like the ‘personal is political’ is right there.

    4. In the past, she might have gone into a nunnery, though the call of academia’s there too (the alignment of desire to change everything and then make that desire totalizing and political/ideological makes sense for people like this)

    5. For promoting a stable, healthy society, people like this ought to be either ignored, tolerated, and maybe even rewarded for intellectual/work achievement or when they get into a decent relationship, but not given a megaphone, just allowed their freedom like the rest of us

    Obviously, if this twit gets the megaphone, then some of our best institutions and most important platforms are controlled by intellectual lightweights, emotional toddlers and sadistic crybabies.

    If the people running our institutions can’t run them better, they shouldn’t be running them, and hopefully won’t be for long.

    Or we won’t have our freedoms.

  26. 2+2=4andalwayswill
    January 25th, 2016 @ 6:12 am

    The sad thing is that hook-up culture, promiscuity, one-nighters makes it hard for women to have orgasms – I think there was some research about that last year but it’s pretty obvious anyway.

    What this all comes down to is that as usual, feminists lies are making women very unhappy, and Communist indoctrination tactics have created a generation of women who haven’t the thinking skills to see through those lies.

  27. Kathryn Norfleet
    January 25th, 2016 @ 7:09 am

    3?my neighbor’s mate is getting 98$. HOURLY on the internet?….

    A few days ago new McLaren F1 subsequent after earning 18,512$,,,this was my previous month’s paycheck ,and-a little over, 17k$ Last month ..3-5 h/r of work a day ..with extra open doors & weekly. paychecks.. it’s realy the easiest work I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months ago and now making over 87$, p/h.Learn More right Here
    4qeb……
    ??
    ??? http://GlobalSuperEmploymentVacanciesReportsTop/GetPaid/98$hourly?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.

  28. Vizzini
    January 25th, 2016 @ 7:20 am

    Wow. She is strikingly unattractive. I don’t know that I’d even hit that at closing time on Tuesday.

  29. Wes
    January 25th, 2016 @ 7:55 am

    You got to feel a little sorry for her. She must have had more than one old girlfriend tell her about some guy who banged her all night long, night after night, it was great. And all she ever gets is pumped and dumped, by drunk men with bad eyesight. Guys who all have a strong desire to run out of the room before sunrise

  30. Colodny
    January 25th, 2016 @ 7:58 am

    Aw, Hell. Nobody harassed on the street–but she knew they were thinking it at her.

  31. Bandit
    January 25th, 2016 @ 8:23 am

    Why would any guy need a warning to reject her? How drunk could you be?

  32. Harvard feminist: two words that mean “run away quickly”
    January 25th, 2016 @ 8:57 am

    […] I’ll admit, blaming the patriarchy for your being an attention whore is unusual, but not as novel as she probably thinks it is. […]

  33. m a
    January 25th, 2016 @ 9:47 am

    So, nobody ever told her that the one constant in all your bad relationships is you. If every relationship is bad….

  34. m a
    January 25th, 2016 @ 9:52 am

    So— she turned herself in a sex object/toy and is surprised she was used as a sex object/toy? Funny how much feminists worship at the altar of abortion, a means of converting men’s view of a woman as a mate and potential partner for life to viewing her as a sex object to be willingly used and discarded, even at the cost of her children.

  35. Dude1394
    January 25th, 2016 @ 10:03 am

    I have never understood how men are supposed to be responsible for female orgasms. If you want to have an orgasm, make the effort to have one, don’t just lay there and wait for it. And if it doesn’t happen the first go, go at it again, only take responsibility for it.

  36. Dana
    January 25th, 2016 @ 10:53 am

    If it’s just boobs men want, they will attract boobs.

  37. gekkobear
    January 25th, 2016 @ 12:03 pm

    The answer is simpler than that.
    Masturbation has side effects. This is a known and simple answer.

    Ladies, none of you have a grip as tight as my left hand…
    No insult intended.
    It’s just not physically possible; so there is a desensitization issue.

    Men, none of you are ribbed/ridged for her pleasure, AND 10 inches long AND curved to the appropriate angle AND vibrate.

    Well, mostly none in any case.

    If you do meet either criteria; you likely have other issues.

  38. Art Deco
    January 25th, 2016 @ 12:29 pm

    It’s still tommyrot, but the feminist discourse blames socially adept brainiacs who join fraternities, not brainiac nerds. An occasional nerd or midrange chap will get swept up in this (see the Chinese fellow at Vassar, or, perhaps, Owen Labrie), but they’re generally beneath notice (though very vulneralbe to morning-after regrets).

    I’m going to wager that the sort of people who garner employment in magazine journalism or its equivalent very seldom have attended inner-city high schools where you find gangbangers in appreciable numbers. Slum gangbangers are a danger to their neighbors, for the most part, and only once in a while to women resident elsewhere.

  39. kishkeyum
    January 25th, 2016 @ 1:27 pm

    “Feminists are simply women who do not like men.”

    Also, they are usually women who men do not like. The photograph attached to this article shows why.

  40. A_Nonny_Mouse
    January 25th, 2016 @ 1:36 pm

    Dear Spaminator–
    Please take your useless drivel elsewhere.

    PS- And then, commit seppuku. Thx.

  41. Kaiser Derden
    January 25th, 2016 @ 2:20 pm

    she actually hates herself …

  42. SineWaveII
    January 25th, 2016 @ 4:00 pm

    LOL That comeback is absolutely perfect. It’s a true work of art. They should frame that and hang it in the Louvre.

  43. DrGreatCham
    January 25th, 2016 @ 4:44 pm
  44. Quartermaster
    January 25th, 2016 @ 7:23 pm

    I think it starts with the letter ‘M’ but that’s as far as I’ve gotten so far.

    Seriously, she’d have to a full core dump of her soul and purge all databases to be able sustain such a relationship. She’s far too poisoned now.

  45. Quartermaster
    January 25th, 2016 @ 7:25 pm

    I seriously doubt orthodontics would help her. Much of her trouble is cosmetic, and multiple crowns are what would be required.

  46. Quartermaster
    January 25th, 2016 @ 7:30 pm

    I remember that too.

    Carrol Lefon, who used to blog under “Neptunus Lex” until he was killed at NAS Fallon in March of 2012, used to use that pic for fund raising to pay for bandwidth on his blog.

  47. Dave M.
    January 25th, 2016 @ 7:36 pm

    Has there ever been a study done linking the frequency of orgasm to to the level of “feminism” to which a woman commits? I see a good PhD thesis.

  48. Shawn Smith
    January 25th, 2016 @ 8:17 pm

    You’re right. It would take an amazing change. On the other hand, I do believe in a God who does miracles and redeems filthy sinners. I have to because if he doesn’t, I’m lost.

  49. PhonecardMike
    January 26th, 2016 @ 12:07 am

    Not sure if you will read or respond, but it is also terrifying to them because they would not know what to do. They possess a worthless skill that no one would pay them a living wage. If she wasn’t tenured she might have to accomplish something meaningful to survive. Instead she can just bully men and any women that disagrees with her.

  50. Valerie Stewart
    January 26th, 2016 @ 12:33 am

    That, too.

    From my observations on relatives being sucked into quackery and the like, they didn’t want to admit they were wrong, which was what made them so stubborn to the point of fanaticism. I’m happy that one got out and the other is getting there, but I hope and pray the others will finally realize that being wrong isn’t the worst thing in the world.