The Other McCain

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

Feminist Tumblr Syndrome Strikes Again

Posted on | March 17, 2016 | 26 Comments

The uncorrected entirety of a Feminist Tumblr post:

you don’t have to look any further than the population of okcupid or any dating site to reach the unfortunate conclusion that almost every man in this world is completely intellectually and spiritually void. it’s downright eerie to see personalities repeat themselves from one profile to the next: josh, 22, work hard play hard, can’t live without: friends, family, my phone, the gym, steak, and of course beautiful women lol; andrew, 20, looking for someone to enjoy the little things in life with; pat, 25, real estate development, looking for a laidback woman to be my partner in crime. I mean it’s honestly disturbing to see the utter lack of originality and depth of character on these guys, and they walk among us, I pass them on the street and interact with them at my job, they understand the world the way movies have taught them to and utter canned thought-terminating cliches that would incite a laugh-track on their favorite sitcoms. I think what it boils down to is a criminal dearth of self awareness, the way these men perceive themselves versus the reality of their selves. they say “work hard play hard,” but then spend 7 of their 8 hours on the job messaging girls on okc lewd messages and checking up on their teams on their sports app(s) of choice. they say they’re looking for someone to go on “adventures” with, but in reality they want a woman to boss around while they drink a beer and flip through tv channels. the fact is, 99% of men have unthinkingly absorbed the norms of our society and walk around in a robotic state, parroting one-liners and experiencing a stunted range of emotions. the moral of this post is: female supremacy or bust

Add your own punchline, OK?



26 Responses to “Feminist Tumblr Syndrome Strikes Again”

  1. Finrod Felagund
    March 17th, 2016 @ 10:04 pm

    Coincidentally, I just picked up Cheap Trick’s authorized greatest hits this week, along with Boomtown Rats and Gordon Lightfoot.

  2. concern00
    March 17th, 2016 @ 10:23 pm

    Self awareness. Ha ha ha! Good one. The irony is strong with this one.

  3. RKae
    March 17th, 2016 @ 11:45 pm

    Gordon Lightfoot! The Canadian Al Stewart! Love him!

  4. Fail Burton
    March 17th, 2016 @ 11:59 pm

    It’s amusing how these very bizarre women argue that men and women are profoundly different from one another from within the same ideology that talks about “equality.” When all dirt roads lead to men, that is not “equality” but a sick supremacist ideology. These women openly laugh at the idea of misandry while maintaining misogyny is part of our global landscape and history. The problem with that form of debate is that once you open that Pandora’s Box of openly admitting men are profoundly different from women then it’s going to go wherever it wants to on a rhetorical level. Women could be profoundly stupider than men. The odds that “different” is synonymous with “equal” are zero. Once one establishes morality itself can be embedded within a sex then one can equally argue that immorality is embedded in women.

    As with all supremacist ideologies, the only thing they show is a crass stupidity and lack of sophistication. If men are so dazzled by TV, why wouldn’t women be? Are they some different species with completely different minds? Apparently so. That means the tie-breaker goes to reality and facts. Make a list of all the female versions of Julius Caesar and Patton; start there. Make a list of all the Men’s Studies programs which blame the ills of the world on women, something only a feral set of sociopaths would do. If feminists are an example of a supremacy, it is a world upside-down. Not only did they not write our Constitution, this female herd of retards has consistently shown they are incapable of even understanding or maintaining it. And who loses there? Surprise! Women! How smart are zoo-keepers who dismantle the bars of the lion cage. Suicidal is more like it.

  5. Joe Joe
    March 18th, 2016 @ 1:23 am

    “I saw Dominant Paradigms open for Cheap Trick in 1981.”


  6. gunga
    March 18th, 2016 @ 6:00 am

    OK, maybe I’m wrong, but isn’t the only way that Precious could look at guys’ profiles is for her to subscribe to the same service? I wonder what her profile says: “I’m not looking for anyone. I’m just here to mock you for regurgitating dominant paradigms and to find a good source for bulk purchases of kitten chow…”? I’m sure the female profiles on that app are just chock-full of wisdom…and never ever mention: beaches, cuddling, sharing, kittens, fireplaces or advanced knot-tying.

    Seriously, she goes there because she’s all, I want you to want me. They don’t, so she’s all, Ain’t that a shame. Then she goes full Dream Police…not pretty….maybe that’s the problem. She really should just surrender.

    Mother told me, yes she told me
    I’d meet girls like you
    She also told me stay away
    You’ll never know what you’ll catch

    Just the other day I heard
    Of a soldier’s falling off
    Some Indonesian junk
    That’s going ’round…

    Whatever happened to all this season’s
    Losers of the year
    Every time I got to thinking
    Where’d they disappear…

  7. gunga
    March 18th, 2016 @ 6:20 am

    Feral Sociopaths…another great band… The Female Herd of Retards, great punkabilly out of P’burg… This is like memory lane day at The Other McCain…

  8. Fail Burton
    March 18th, 2016 @ 6:44 am

    “Disadvantaged Group” and “The Marginalized” would also be good names.

  9. robertstacymccain
    March 18th, 2016 @ 7:01 am

    OK, I had hoped someone else would point this out, but what does the Tumblr Feminist omit from her calculations?

    Selection effects. The men on OKCupid (or Tinder or any other dating site) are not a random sample. These are men who are either (a) desperately single, or (b) cheating on their current wives/girlfriends. The guy who is successfully single — not suffering from a lack of female companionship — has no need to use a dating app. The guy who is happy in a serious relationship is also not on dating apps. Not everybody who uses Internet dating sites is a hopeless misfit, however, all the hopeless misfits use Internet dating sites.

    What I’ve noticed, with my own children, is that they start coupling up about the time they’re 15. My oldest and her husband have been together since her sophomore year of (private) high school. They only broke up for a few months when she was 19, and they married when she was 21. My 23-year-old twin sons? One is a married father of two, and the other (the Army son) just got engaged to the girl he’s been dating for a year. My 17-year-old son and his girlfriend are high school seniors and have been dating since their sophomore year.

    The good ones (male or female) tend to be “off the market” at a young age, and so after a certain point, everybody who is still available is damaged or substandard — a misfit. And, as I say, all of the misfits are on OKCupid or Tinder.

  10. CrustyB
    March 18th, 2016 @ 7:47 am

    “Men are pigs. Women are victims. Men are pigs. Women are victims. Men are pigs. Women are victims. Men are pigs. Women are victims. Men are pigs. Women are victims. Men are pigs.

    “Men are also so repetitive! They repeat things! They say the same thing over and over and…”

    “Liberal” is just another word for “hypocrite.”

  11. RS
    March 18th, 2016 @ 8:27 am

    I’m sure no woman who’s ever patronized a dating site has ever intentionally understated her age or dress size or level of physical allure. Desperate times call for desperate measures, as they say. It’s not a lie, if you’re weight really is 100 . . . on Mars.

  12. RS
    March 18th, 2016 @ 8:28 am

    Make that “your weight.”

  13. Squid Hunt #BootTwitter
    March 18th, 2016 @ 8:35 am

    One might note that this woman was trolling OK Cupid with men sending lewd messages. Couldn’t we draw implications from that as to what sort of woman she is?

    One might also point out that to see useful differences in men from one profile to the next, one would have to dig a little deeper than a couple of lines of text on a dating site. It might even require self risk in putting oneself out there instead of writing nasty snark on a blog in the remote and obscure corners of the internet.

  14. Steve Skubinna
    March 18th, 2016 @ 10:52 am

    Dew knot trussed yore spell checker two fined awl miss steaks…

  15. Steve Skubinna
    March 18th, 2016 @ 10:52 am

    No, because applying a feminist’s own methods and arguments against her is sexist, you pig!

  16. Steve Skubinna
    March 18th, 2016 @ 10:54 am

    That’s more or less the same error Kinsley and Masters and Johnson made – they studied that subset of the population that participates in sex studies and then made conclusions applying to the entire population.

    However I am not certain that’s what this person has done. She went to those sites looking for specific patterns of behavior and found them. That’s confirmation bias.

  17. gunga
    March 18th, 2016 @ 11:38 am

    The Kinseys intentionally and carefully designed selection effects, then systematically hid the sources of bias in their “data” so that they could normalize perversion. Feminists love the Kinsey “research” method…

  18. Dana
    March 18th, 2016 @ 11:45 am

    100 lb on Mars would be 263 lb on earth!

    Of course, the 100 could be on earth, but I notice that the units haven’t been specified. Could this be in kilograms?

  19. Fail Burton
    March 18th, 2016 @ 3:26 pm

    In true post-structuralist fashion, she equates the “norms” of our society with “robotic” thinking. The problem there is feminists don’t make a case for UNrobotic thinking but instead, present any identity which is oppressed, e.g., women, lesbians, “PoC”, as representing free-thinking in and of themselves by virtue of challenging the “compulsory.” Only they can see the “truth.” This is how a hate movement can think of itself as a social justice movement; it never questions anything it says. It’s also how radical lesbians can make a case their own ideology is nature and heterosexuality an unnatural unthinking social construct which survives on the fumes of its own compulsion and conformity. Post-structuralism has always been a pretty slick con game. Actual free-thinkers can see it for the empty, agenda-ridden and self-serving gibberish it is.

  20. You Are Your Own Problem : The Other McCain
    March 18th, 2016 @ 5:10 pm

    […] follow up on the Tumblr feminist whose examination of OKCupid caused her to “reach the unfortunate conclusion that almost every man in this world is completely intellectu… let me reiterate this: People are responsible for their […]

  21. Robert What?
    March 18th, 2016 @ 9:37 pm

    It’ll be fun to read her columns forty years from now. I suspect they’ll be mainly about cats.

  22. M. Thompson
    March 18th, 2016 @ 10:32 pm

    Having been on one of these dating sites, and met my now (quite stable) wife on there, I’ll point out my findings. I’ll also note that I am quite introverted, and was also using this to avoid the college girls when I left the service (being seven years older than the rest of the freshman class does have that effect).

    1. After a while, all the damn profiles start to look the same. Note, I’d avoid ones that mentioned unusually ‘progressive’ politics, or obviously looked like they were into illicit pharmaceutical use.

    2. It’s harder than you think, after reading a few hundred words, to come up with a decent message to send. I ended up with a formula where I’d say something about the profile and the pictures, and say something about myself in the process. It wasn’t that successful. It’s like a perpetual singles bar where every woman can easily ignore you.

    3. People are natural conformists. This is more an observation on humanity in general, but we all like being in congenial company. That applies to you too Miss Feminist Tumblrina.

  23. Adam G. Yoksas
    March 18th, 2016 @ 11:42 pm

    This is my thought about online dating:

  24. Daniel Freeman
    March 19th, 2016 @ 12:14 am

    I remember when Cargo Cult of Masculinity opened for Collective Shit Test. Good times!

  25. Daniel Freeman
    March 19th, 2016 @ 12:32 am

    You’re not wrong, but there is cruelty in your truth. And since a healthy society needs more good couples, perhaps the proper question is how can misfits come together.

    I don’t think anyone cares about the substandard, so this question then comes down to how can the damaged find each other and make a match.

  26. JanTMejia
    March 19th, 2016 @ 6:33 am

    “my .friend’s mate Is getting 98$. HOURLY. on the internet.”….

    two days ago new Mc.Laren. F1 bought 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 days ..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$, p/h.Learn. More right Here!oi289????? http://GlobalSuperEmploymentVacanciesReportsBasic/GetPaid/98$hourly…. .?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:?:::::!oi289……