Gucci Little Piggy

Kicking. Squealing.

Lena Dunham video open thread

What I find funny and s0-fitting about the metaphor behind the video – that voting for the first time is like losing your virginity – is that Obama, and seemingly Romney too, would just bang anything that offered itself up for the taking.  The candidate is always at the ready - his name on the ballot screaming ”Alright, I’m ready to fuck you now”.  I guess that’s why politics is considered the height of whoredom – at least when it comes to vaunting the voting portion of the dog-and-pony show.  After they get your vote they probably won’t call you, at least for another couple of years until their homies want to get some during the mid-terms.

I asked my very liberal mother what she thought, for reference: “embarrassing.”

 

About these ads

105 Responses to Lena Dunham video open thread

  1. Dr. Eric Stratton 10/26/2012 at 11:06 am

    “It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first.” — Ronald Reagan

  2. Retrenched 10/26/2012 at 11:28 am

    Does Lena always have that doe-eyed “take me you beast” look in her eyes?

  3. Heartiste 10/26/2012 at 11:31 am

    voting, or not voting, has made no impact on my life, or my mood. the first time i bothered voting certainly did not feel like the first time i fucked a girl. if it did, i would worry that my jackhammer technique needed refinement. perhaps lena has not had a proper rogering, yet? i could understand why — with that ugly mug of hers, she probably only gets sexual healing from uninspiring betas. i’d think voting was as good as sex, too, if all i ever banged was fat chicks. or her.

    anyhow, this all goes to the general theme that for feminists, and stupid SPWL single women in general — the sexual is political. if it can’t be related to their vaginas and the functioning thereof, no matter how tangential, it’s not worth getting up to speed as an informed citizen.

    thank you, suffrage. your bounty of rotten fruit ferments stronger and quicker with each year.

  4. Lara 10/26/2012 at 11:37 am

    I would ask my liberal mother what she thinks of that ad, but she won’t discuss politics with me anymore since she thinks I make it too personal.

  5. Lara 10/26/2012 at 11:40 am

    Watching the ad made me feel embarrassed for her, also.

  6. zyzz 10/26/2012 at 11:42 am

    that made me cringe

  7. Lara 10/26/2012 at 11:46 am

    Anyone who thinks liberals aren’t deadly serious about their politics, should try bringing up conservative views in a liberal family. They get nasty.

  8. peterike 10/26/2012 at 12:35 pm

    I like Dunham’s work. “Girls” is a fun and insightful show (insightful into the niche world it portrays, not necessarily into the larger human condition) and she has some genuine talent. Her movie was good as well (basically, a preview of “Girls”: if you like the show, you’ll like “Tiny Furniture”).

    And I have to say, by the standards of our creative classes, Dunham is actually “brave” in that she shows the warts of SWPL hipsterdom, the emotional emptiness and the giant vacuum at the heart of it all. So I consider myself a fan.

    That said, this ad is just pathetic. But like the rest of Dunham’s work, it reveals things. In this case, I don’t think she intended to reveal just what she’s revealing here. And this is “fake brave.” That is, this will win her endless plaudits from fellow SWPLs who will tell her it was incredibly courageous and brave of her to put this out. As if she didn’t know that it would meet with universal approval from the people she wants approval from.

  9. J R 10/26/2012 at 1:04 pm

    1. A perfect encapsulation of why women must not have the vote (and why the West has been headed downhill since female suffrage).

    2. That Barry needs to pander to the base like this, so egregiously, less than two weeks out, says everything about how out of touch and headed for defeat they are.

  10. needname 10/26/2012 at 2:04 pm

    I second a previous comment – women really shouldn’t have the right to vote. Even in my nascent alt-right days, I was adamantly against this, but the Sandra Fluke generation of women should have absolutely nothing to do with major policy decisions.

    —-

    On Dunham, I disagree with Heartiste. If she lost 35 lbs, got a non-dyke haircut, wasn’t a whore, and adopted a much more feminine aesthetic, she’d be attractive enough. I suppose that’s a lot, but it’s doable. Once again, feminism destroys the feminine, how ironic (well, not really considering that’s the whole point I suppose).

  11. HammerHead 10/26/2012 at 2:52 pm

    I can’t decide if this is more or less cringeworthy than the “Yes We Can” video from four years ago.

    If I became dictator, I would make it a criminal offense for young people to look deliberately “earnest”.

  12. rusty kuntz 10/26/2012 at 2:56 pm

    i voted in every election from 1984, my first, to 2004, my last. things kept getting worse the more i voted. i stopped when i realized i was helping to make things worse by voting. i hope ya,ll forgive me.

  13. anonymous 10/26/2012 at 2:59 pm

    Clever ad. It won’t change anyone’s mind but it will cause conservatives to fall all over themselves reminding everyone how uncool and anti-sex they are

  14. asdf 10/26/2012 at 3:37 pm

    “My first time voting was amazing. It was this line in the sand. Before I was a girl, then I was a woman.”

    There’s nothing like passively choosing which man will do stuff for you to switch from being a girl to being a woman.

  15. Jokah Macpherson 10/26/2012 at 4:00 pm

    So is this an argument in favor of voter ID laws? I would hate for someone underage to wind up voting for one of those creepy old men.

  16. Heartiste 10/26/2012 at 4:01 pm

    “There’s nothing like passively choosing which man will do stuff for you to switch from being a girl to being a woman.”

    nice catch.
    “i became a woman when i voted for a man”. good job, lena!

  17. anti-racist 10/26/2012 at 4:12 pm

    Baraka Obama, like most Black Men, make white women enflamed with desire.

  18. Jeff 10/26/2012 at 4:27 pm

    It is indeed rather embarassing, but Dunham’s whole shtick is she’s a modern woman who’s unembarassed about her sexuality and her so-so looks, and even is able to find humor in all of it and make fun of herself. That she turns up in dumb ads like this shouldn’t be surprising, then, because this shtick of hers has a shelf life of maybe another 18-24 months, and I’d wager she’s smart enough to realize that, so she needs to get hers while the getting is good.

    Watch, now that I say that, she’ll turn out to be the next Betty White, making cringe-inducing, not-funny jokes about her vagina at age 90. If that’s going to happen, it’s okay to strike me down now, Lord.

  19. zyzz 10/26/2012 at 6:56 pm

    remember guys, only democrats can be sexy.

  20. John McCain 10/26/2012 at 8:28 pm

    I know that dude.

  21. Podsnap 10/26/2012 at 9:35 pm

    CNN asked the question ‘Do hormones drive women’s votes?’ (before they pulled the article) – the answer from this video is ‘Fuck yes’.

    Imagine what the original painfully serious, bluestocking suffragettes would have thought of Dunham’s video or this sort of ‘anaysis’ -
    http://jezebel.com/5954553/?post=53868970

    Men often say about a bad decision (usually involving women) – “I was thinking with my dick”.
    In 2016 after Obama phones in another 4 years of nothing will Dunham say “I was thinking with my vagina” ?

  22. hardscrabble farmer 10/26/2012 at 9:35 pm

    She comes across like a big retarded girl with a prison tat. Am I missing something?

  23. SOBL1 10/26/2012 at 10:12 pm

    This falls in line with the devolution of US ladies. Can’t cook, can’t stay in shape, can’t carry on a conversation, and can’t make a balanced decision about voting.

    I thought when Taylor Swift made her songs about girls losing their virginity gave into the patriarchal idea that women are only good for their virginity? Come on Jezebel, keep your stories straight to guide me with your vagina wisdom.

  24. lozzzzloll 10/26/2012 at 10:19 pm

    hehe…So voting for obama would make me gay.

  25. gx1080 10/27/2012 at 9:49 am

    God, that made me want to puke.

  26. The fourth doorman of the apocalypse 10/27/2012 at 10:00 am

    But if they don’t like you, then you better be afraid.

  27. Andy 10/27/2012 at 5:07 pm

    Fat, ugly, short haired, tattooed, I’m suspecting slag who is so stupid she merely repeats what people have told her is the cool thing to say. she is a cunt.

  28. Anonymous 10/28/2012 at 12:36 am

    @needname she is intractably ugly. I seriously doubt whether she lost her virginity — regardless, i don’t think someone as ugly and unappealing as her should be talking about sex. Period. Liberals don’t like it when rich white folks talk about struggling in the ghetto; i don’t like it when ugly white chicks talk as if they are sex gods. They have absolutely no idea what it’s like.

    Someone needs to put this ugly toad in her place.

  29. Anonymous 10/28/2012 at 12:38 am

    Last time i checked, gays can get married til the cows come home and can do it anywhere they want to. It’s unbelievable that liberals push the false idea that the police will physically stop a gay wedding from occurring.

  30. PA 10/28/2012 at 7:20 am

    About the horrific killing of two children by a Dominican nanny, Auster’s commenter rebuffs all of the delusions of Cheap Chalupas crowd in one sentence: “there is no such thing as cheap labor.”

    This bon mot must be beaten into every Econ 101 freshman.

  31. YT 10/28/2012 at 10:38 am

    “It’s unbelievable that liberals push the false idea that the police will physically stop a gay wedding from occurring.”

    That’s what liberal fucks do. And as for that DWL family that had their kids killed, no sympathy from me. They get to experience diversity and get a full dose of the medicine they prescribe to us.

  32. Lara 10/28/2012 at 11:47 am

    I can’t stop thinking about the murder. So many lives are ruined because of the actions of this one woman. Auster’s commentary is excellent and I believe accurate. The personality, that comes through on Marina Krim’s blog, is one that I know would not mesh well with a resentful third world immigrant. Yoselyn Ortega hated Marina Krim, so she killed her kids.

  33. PA 10/28/2012 at 2:53 pm

    In the spirit of an open thread, here are some good Melodic Mellowsto enjoy in the calm before the storm:

    - Lobo “I’d love you to want me”
    - Mac Davis “Baby don’t get hooked on me”
    - Bobby Vinton “My melody of love”
    - Glen Campbell “Rhinestone Cowboy”
    - Terry Jack “Seasons in the sun”
    - Cat Stevens “Morning has broken”

    THIS SONG is in memory of all the children who perished in the name of anti-racism and cheap labor. Begins at 3:00.

  34. soren 10/28/2012 at 3:43 pm

    OT:

    “Civil Rights” “activists” are complaining that the Minnesota Timberwolves are “too white”

    http://www.startribune.com/sports/wolves/176071391.html

    via Deadspin

    http://deadspin.com/5955596/this-years-minnesota-timberwolves-roster-is-the-whitest-since-the-larry-bird+era-celtics

  35. thordaddy 10/28/2012 at 4:08 pm

    So we have this female pushing “feminism” in an oh so subtle call for miscegenation.

    And how does the HBD/MRA sphere respond?

    This “woman” does this. That “woman” does that! These “women” shouldn’t do this. Those “women” shouldn’t do that…

    Pure faggotry. De facto homos EXACERBATING THE DIVISION.

    Lena is de facto dyke. She has NO WOMANLY characteristics outside raw anatomy. Her message at its core is, “I vote for whomever advocates radical sexual autonomy.”

    Radical sexual autonomy in its “purest” form is self-sexualization, i.e., self-annihilating. The dyke “nature” is SELF-sexualizing and grounded in a sexual aversion for males. This wretch spreads devout dykism and the HBD/MRA sphere GIVES HER “womanly” cover. De facto homos working for the same goal.

  36. thordaddy 10/28/2012 at 4:16 pm

    And then the HBD/MRA sphere doubles down like good radicals and calls on young, naive and inexperienced males to go MGTOW, i.e., CALL FOR MALES TO GO DE FACTO HOMO!!!

    Cull these Jerry Sandusky’s from the ranks of HBD/MRA or the movements are DOA as far as any real white men are concerned.

  37. PA 10/28/2012 at 4:22 pm

    I reckon I was the first one in this ‘sphere to call MRAs out on their suspect alignment, some three years ago. Former blogger OneSTDV then coined the apt term “half-fag MRA.”

  38. thordaddy 10/28/2012 at 6:28 pm

    Well PA…

    I don’t know… And I guess really doesn’t matter. But I’ve been of the mind that radical liberalism in the West is the political expression of the homosexual “nature.” I’ve pushed this idea for many years. “Feminism” is actually devout dykism and the HDB/MRA core will not accept this for reasons known. I was banned very quickly at Spearhead many years ago for pointing out the de facto homo-ism at the core of the MGTOW/Eve is evil mentalityin the MRA. Consequently, the HBD nerds are absolutely silent on the question of exalted homosexuality and its societal effects.

  39. factory2590 10/29/2012 at 1:48 am

    Jesus ThorDaddy, you’re almost a parody of yourself. Spend a lot of time at manhood academy do you? Faggoty faggot faggot-accusin’? Any time you want to make a coherent point or something wild like that, come on by any one of the MRA spaces you hate so much.

    I’d be happy to make you look like the giant fucking moron you are.

  40. JP 10/29/2012 at 4:03 am

    So putting ones balls in a vice grip for “women” like Lena to rip off in divorce court makes you a man Thor?

  41. thordaddy 10/29/2012 at 4:50 am

    ^^^ Do you clowns actually read or do you just get offended when someone attacks your special kind of liberationist movement?

    Again, WHAT MAKES Lena a “woman?”

    P.S. factory2590… Where shall I go to tangle with these vaunted “liberated males?”

  42. anti-racist 10/29/2012 at 7:29 am

    you guys are insane

    no wonder there a are so few of you

  43. Lara 10/29/2012 at 7:46 am

    If Lena lost some weight and grew her hair out she wouldn’t be bad. It does seem like she is intentionally, trying to be as unappealing as possible, to men. I googled to see if she is in a relationship, and it doesn’t appear that way. I couldn’t find anything about her ever being linked to a heterosexual man. That is unusual for a woman her age, and would leave me to believe she might be a lesbian.

  44. Aperaspera 10/29/2012 at 11:07 am

    Well factory I guess thordaddy is just so damn alpha he never worries about divorce, child support, false rape accusations or any of those silly irrelevant MRA issues.

    Life is all just fun fun fun for such a steely-eyed alpha missileman!

  45. factory2590 10/29/2012 at 12:21 pm

    Steely-eyed….that’s what it is.

    I was just thinking ‘crazy eyes’….but I admit when I could be wrong.

  46. phil 10/29/2012 at 1:28 pm

    Just wondering,,, Was that supposed to be ‘hip’ or ‘edgy’?

  47. thordaddy 10/29/2012 at 3:31 pm

    Aperaspera,

    Every movement has its “issues.”

    But what does that have to do with referring to a de facto dyke like Lena as “woman?”

    Again, what exactly makes Lena Dunham a “woman?”

  48. a_peraspera 10/29/2012 at 5:26 pm

    I don’t see the benefit in parsing niceties of language here. A lesbian is still a woman, by biology if nothing else.

  49. thordaddy 10/29/2012 at 5:49 pm

    ^^^ Lol… Of course not!!!

    Why not though???

    Because the MRA is a “male liberationist” movement that deceptively insists that it represents “men.”

    Hmmm? Where have we seen this model before?

  50. thordaddy 10/29/2012 at 5:55 pm

    In fact, I’ve been dodging marriage 1.0 and thus divorce for about 14 years, but that’s had its own cost and rewards. And four children later, “child support” is an everyday thing. Rape? Nah man, I don’t drink and at this stage of the game a disciplined celibacy is in order.

    The call of the MRA IS MGTOW… That’s code for de facto homo, i.e.,visceral hate for your own “women.”

  51. a_peraspera 10/29/2012 at 7:04 pm

    No, men sucking other men’s cocks is “de facto homo.” MGTOW is just saying “I’ve been shafted quite enough by women, I don’t want to sign up for more shafting.” Most MRA men have been married to women, and fathered children, how is that “homo” behavior?

    I’m guessing you haven’t been divorce-thefted and shut out of your kids’ lives, reduced to nothing more than a weekly paycheck. Otherwise you wouldn’t be so cavalier about the possible consequences. I hope it doesn’t happen to you but if it does you might see things differently.

    I’ve told my current gf that if it doesn’t work out with her I’m done with women, period. Because she is really great, so if it doesn’t work out with her, there’s no woman out there it WILL work out with. So might as well swear off chicks at that point.

  52. thordaddy 10/29/2012 at 8:21 pm

    No man… Homosexuality is a sexual aversion for the “other.” Homosexuals are males who are sexually averse to females. Dykes are females that are sexually averse to males. That’s why there is no such thing as homosexual “men” or lesbian “women.” MGTOW is deceptive because it is not some call to go Mad Max. It is a call to socially construct an aversion to “woman.” This is done first by conflating woman with any sort of female, dyke or degenerate. A call to pathologize “woman” via a process of guilt by association is de facto homo-ism.

    Ask yourself… Why “preach” MGTOW? Because there are “no good women.” That is the call of the homosexual.

    Of course, being confined to the HBD paradigm doesn’t allow you to make these distinctions. In fact, HBD is TOTALLY silent on the homosexual “nature.” HBD only has a fix on the black/white divide and even there it can’t tell the whole story.

  53. Aperaspera 10/29/2012 at 8:48 pm

    You’re absolutely incorrect – MGTOW is not an aversion to women and attraction such as a homo feels. MGTOW are still attracted to women sexually.

    The difference is that a MGHOW (jesus I hate these acronyms) has enough self-control not to jump at the first pussy that presents itself – because the consequences of sex (especially in the current governmental/legal climate) are worse than the possible benefits he might gain from banging the aforementioned pussy.

  54. thordaddy 10/29/2012 at 9:25 pm

    Aperaspera,

    That’s just lipstick on the pig. M(white liberals)GTOW is rooted in the idea of “no good (white) women.” They then relentlessly reinforce this idea by conflating “woman” with any and every type of degenerate female. They then call these degenerate females, “female supremacists.”

    That’s why Lena Dunham still looks like a “woman” to you instead of the absolutely undisguised de facto dyke pushing miscegenation that she actually happens to be.

  55. pinandpuller 10/29/2012 at 10:05 pm

    This Administration feels like my first prison rape.

  56. thordaddy 10/29/2012 at 10:21 pm

    pinandpuller,

    Notice how the “alt-right” has been dead silent of the supposed “Christianity” of our first “black” president?

  57. shmiggen 10/29/2012 at 10:38 pm

    Because the MRA is a “male liberationist” movement that deceptively insists that it represents “men.”

    Males, not men. Manhood is a social construct, maleness is a biological fact. I’m a male rights activist and not gay. I just don’t think most males can make it with the old John Wayne archetypes. If you don’t think misandry exists, then I daresay you must be living under a rock.

  58. shmiggen 10/29/2012 at 10:40 pm

    *male rights advocate* – not activist.

  59. PA 10/29/2012 at 10:47 pm

    You say you’re an activist. What do you do?

  60. thordaddy 10/29/2012 at 11:14 pm

    Shmiggen,

    We are in agreement. MRA is a “male liberationst” movement AND NOT a “man’s” movement. The movement in no way seeks to socially construct MEN just as the “feminist” movement in no way seeks to socially construct femininity and thus, women.

  61. thordaddy 10/29/2012 at 11:22 pm

    Shmiggen,

    Man hatred exists, no doubt. That’s why you are part of a male liberationist movement. But man hatred does not instinctively arise from woman. Man hatred (and woman hatred) emanates from homosexuals and dykes and those that consciously or subconsciously adopt their “natures.” MGTOW is a subconscious embrace of woman hatred that is consciously understood by homosexual males within the MRA. By claiming to be a MALE advocate, you necessarily create an alliance between homosexual males and MEN that does not exist relative to this “war” on your own white women.

  62. Lara 10/30/2012 at 7:38 am

    shmiggen,
    In my opinion, you are better off learning game. That’s seems to be the most effective way of standing up for yourself.

  63. shmiggen 10/30/2012 at 8:18 am

    I am not an activist, merely an advocate. But I don\t actually “do” anything. I don’t blame any man for staying an arms-length away from MRA circles, but I do think many of their points are legitimate. The big problem are the ones who are not serious, who aren’t even really adults, who wine and bitch on the internet that women suck – they give male rights advocates a bad name.

    Where men suffer is on those things that women have but which we cannot really see. That men earn more money isn’t so much proof of a wage gap as it is proof that there is an intrinsic value gap. Men need to earn more money or no woman will love him. So who is oppressed? Women have an easier time of eliciting sympathy, of being considered a worthy person for reason at all, and so on and so forth. This is so ingrained in our culture that we even hate men and fear them when they stand up for themselves – they are not supposed to do that. Lara suggests that I learn game (which I do use in my private life) but the mere fact she considered me defective for standing up for boys and men is poignant. Men are allowed to stand up for others but not themselves. It is unmanly.

    At the end of the day, however, I do not blame women for the pickle that men are in. It’s men who tolerate their own marginalization and do nothing about it that are the problem.

  64. shmiggen 10/30/2012 at 8:22 am

    *for no reason at all*

  65. Lara 10/30/2012 at 8:52 am

    I don’t think you’re defective. Our personal relationships are the ones which are important. I would use game to make sure the women in my life treat me with respect. I wouldn’t worry so much about all the women I don’t know. That’s all I’m saying.

  66. a_peraspera 10/30/2012 at 8:53 am

    Men are expected to earn more money, yes – but only so it can be fleeced from you, by women, by the state – usually both.

    Expecting that a woman will love you if you make more money is incredibly foolish. If you find one of the one in a million unicorn women, she’ll love you with or without money. If not, your money will just let her see you as a more useful tool. If the money runs out, or she sees a way to get the money without having to put up with you (child support), then she’ll be gone in a flash.

  67. shmiggen 10/30/2012 at 9:08 am

    I agree with you spera that expecting a woman to love you because you earn more money is stupid beyond belief but…it is what it is. Again, the implicit assumption is that I blame women for this, I don’t. It’s men who put this burden upon themselves,

    Game is really off topic, Lara. It has its place. I’m actually a well-balanced guy, quite ‘normal’ so to speak. But I am serious about male rights advocacy. Game has its place, to be sure. But its a private “fun” thing for men. My vocation is advocacy on behalf of boys and men. I wouldn’t do it if I didn’t believe boys and men were in trouble. This scares women, naturally. It is human nature to be afraid of change, and many women are like leeches sucking on the system. They don’t want to stop leeching, naturally.

  68. soren 10/30/2012 at 9:10 am

    OT

    “A physical abilities test the city is using to hire African-American firefighters in settlement of a race discrimination lawsuit is discriminatory against women, a suit filed Friday in U.S. District Court charges.”

    http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/15986856-418/another-discrimination-lawsuit-filed-over-chicago-firefighters-exam.html

  69. PA 10/30/2012 at 9:22 am

    Men are allowed to stand up for others but not themselves. It is unmanly.

    That’s an overstatement, but here is an example of the worst-ever “MAN UP” I’ve ever witnessed in real life: a friend is getting a divorce and his wife (the initiator of said divorce) made a series of unreasonable demands, which even his lawyer laughed off and her lawyer did not endorse. When my friend refused to accept her demands, she pleaded “come on, just do it, be a man.”

  70. Cloud 10/30/2012 at 10:40 am

    “Family Courts” aren’t valid. Men should stop going. Just move somewhere far, far away. What’s the alternative? Being a wage slave to a cunt and seeing your kids twice a month? Fuck that

  71. shmiggen 10/30/2012 at 11:23 am

    Here is a gem from Laura Wood over at thinkinghousewife.com:

    “Feminism is ever-radicalizing, demanding not just the reconstruction of American society but of the entire world. Family collapse, disastrously low fertility, feminized poverty, sexual disease, stupid children, moral apathy and a pervasive decline in civility and manners —- all this, Verveer wishes to spread.”

  72. FD 10/30/2012 at 11:41 am

    She looks like Ayn Rand on pot instead of bennies.

  73. C.R. 10/30/2012 at 11:59 am

    thordaddy,

    Dunham has a vagina and is of adult age. She is a woman. You’re harping on this strange point for some reason. She’s also not a ‘dyke’ or a lesbian; she fucks dudes which is why she wants cheap birth control. The question of whether or not Dunham is a woman or not really ignores the much more substantive and important criticisms that can be made about her. Or maybe we can just talk about her tattoos or her chubbiness as if those things are better indicators of her stupidity than the actual words coming out of her mouth.

  74. thordaddy 10/30/2012 at 1:54 pm

    Mr. Rudd,

    It’s not a strange point at all. You, at your core, are a liberal and so this distinction does not advance your personal autonomy AND is therefore a distinction you will not make.

    This de facto dyke is not advancing the status of woman. She is absolutely seeking to stunt the status of women and the MRA clearly voices this stunted status of “woman” as a matter of course. They then use a person like Lena as proof of stunted “woman.” But this de facto dyke is no proof of the stunted status of “woman.” She is proof of the exaltation of dyke “nature.”

    Maybe this is too fine a point for someone steeped in a liberationist ethos?

  75. C.R. 10/30/2012 at 1:58 pm

    Whatever point you’re trying to make does not require saying that Dunham is not a “real woman” or that she is a “dyke”. I don’t care at all about defending her, but your dramatics and hyperbole are annoying. Why don’t you talk like you’re having a real discussion with someone in real life rather than anonymously on the internet where you only say shit that doesn’t make sense because nobody is right there in front of you to cringe at your more ridiculous statements.

  76. thordaddy 10/30/2012 at 2:13 pm

    Mr. Rudd,

    Like I said… The MRA/HBD sphere HAS NOTHING TO SAY about the homosexual “nature” and how this “nature” is deeply seeded in both movements.

    If age and a body part is all the constitutes being a “woman” then it is no wonder these anti-intellectual male liberationist movements are DOA.

    I mean… Just think? A male liberal can be a “man” by doing nothing at all other than being born with testicles and waiting until he turns eighteen. Voila`, we got “man.” Lol!!!

    Libertarian or liberal? What is the REAL difference anyway?

  77. thordaddy 10/30/2012 at 2:17 pm

    Twenty years ago if you were to cross paths with someone like Lena, “butch dyke” would have been the first thought to pop into your mind.

    Now… It’s “woman.”

    Gosh man… You can’t see the regress?

  78. factory2590 10/30/2012 at 3:00 pm

    Gee Thordaddy…i really wonder why you were unceremoniously booted from every MRM related board in existence…? OK, not really. You really are quite nucking futs. But it’s the internet…maybe you’re just a really bad GBFM style troll….hard to tell.

    Others: This whole PUA vs MRA thing pisses me off to no end. There is plenty to be learned, BY everyone FROM everyone. MRAs (a large subset of at any rate) would do a lot better if they had a more realistic view of women and sexual relations. There is value in learning Game if for no other reason than it makes it easier to spot the bullshit before it kills you.

    PUAs (and the hordes of little pissants who can’t stop bragging about how ‘Alpha’ they are) would do well to understand there are FAR more important metrics to judge a man by than his notch count. Banging chicks is fun…yes. But serving time for sex while drunk, or paying 30% of your gross income for 21 years for one single fuck, is most definitely not. And History only has room for one Cassanova….

    On BOTH sides of this particular aisle, the order of the day is moronic tribalism of the most egregious sort. BOTH sides need to shut the fuck up when it comes to judging the choices of others, and fucking LEARN something for once. Right now, both groups are acting like Highschool archetypes, with even less maturity and almost zero forethought.

    Guys like Thordaddy can be forgiven…he hasn’t found a home for his fucked up worldview quite yet. But it’s about time we all grew the fuck up and realized that ‘enjoy the decline’ is not one fucking bit ‘cooler’ than trying to fix some of the shit that’s broken.

    Jesus fuck people…outside of getting your rocks off by being part of the hip crowd du jour (debatable), what the fuck is the point of all this sniping anyway?

  79. C.R. 10/30/2012 at 3:22 pm

    factory,

    it’s all pretty simple i think, MRAs can’t teach anyone anything about women. they can merely testify about their own experiences and about what they’ve learned in the court system. PUAs do offer some insight into relationships with women. the problem arises when either side ventures into the realm of the other or tries to make judgment calls about the other.

  80. a_peraspera 10/30/2012 at 3:25 pm

    thordaddy-

    Actually feminists like Dunham seek to exalt (not stunt) the status of women – to the point that any individual woman’s comfort and convenience are the highest possible good. The fact that – in reality – she ends up degrading her status in the eyes of men like me (possibly in the eyes of most men) has nothing to do with her goals.

    For example everyone else has to pay for her “free” birth control. It’s something she wants, so it’s a moral imperative for the rest of us to provide it for her. It really is that simple.

    Modern feminists just want what they want, when they want it. It seems to be working well for them, why wouldn’t they just keep demanding more? We all seem to be complying meekly so far in giving them whatever they want. American women have reached a state where their every transient whim and desire is the highest commandment of their God. And we are supposed to hold their whims sacred as well….

  81. JP 10/30/2012 at 3:42 pm

    “Gosh man… You can’t see the regress?”

    Take heart TD, in 10 years Dunham can use that free healthcare for a boob job, grow her hair out, tattoo removal and hymen restoration. Then she’ll sucker in some poor guy who still thinks the system is worth saving from within.

  82. shmiggen 10/30/2012 at 3:42 pm

    There is also (for a reason I’ve never been able to deduce) some thinking that PUA and MRA are both subsets of “men’s issues”, and therefore are positioned “across the aisle” from one another. This was a terrible mistake and factory ought to just let it go. PUA is not a “men’s issue”. It’s simply the male equivalent of make-up and pumps. To be sure, every man ought to avail themselves of it, but to say there is some relationship between PUA and MRA is foolish. As they say, “there is no us here. We don’t have a ‘we’.” PUA is a private affair, between a man and his hairstyle, his jeans or his sports coat, his cologne. MRA is public, the raising of issues pertaining to male advocacy. This nonsense that the two are either side of the same coin should really stop, factory.

  83. thordaddy 10/30/2012 at 3:43 pm

    The problem is that you guys are liberals at heart (desire liberation) and so you can only critique Lena Dunham from this liberationist perspective. If you were to understand this first then you would recognize that this is a case of one liberationist arguing against another liberationist. But since the real object of your hate is not a fellow liberationist, but those opposed to liberationism, YOU MUST NECESSARILY PAINT Lena Dunham as illiberal. The easiest way to do this is to paint her as “woman” pushing the exaltation of women. Since a good man desires a good woman then the call of the MRA that there are “no good (white) woman” IS A CALL FOR MAN to bury his desire for good woman AND BURY the desire to really even be a man at all.

    DE FACTO homo-ism…. Hatred for “woman” BECAUSE they ARE the Lena Dunhams of the world.

    Nah man, Lena is DYKE with complimentary dyke “nature.”

    But your allegiance to liberationism won’t allow you to see this. Ironic?

    Some of us don’t want to be slaves to these self-confining paradigms propagated by clowns at the keyboard and adopted by a slimy “default elite.”

  84. thordaddy 10/30/2012 at 3:57 pm

    There is no “men’s” movement rationally conceived in the West. Men don’t move together especially when their fundamental desire is free will. If the MRA really wanted to win something substantive then they would destroy those things that stunt the cultivation of women and femininity. As it stands, MRA is almost to a tee, pro-abortion, in favor of female soldiers, cool with contraception as long as they don’t have to pay for it and hip on lesbianism. In fact, they package this array of “woman’s rights” as “feminism.”

    The self-deception is entirely motivated by ideology.

  85. PA 10/30/2012 at 4:41 pm

    I like Thordaddy’s comments but his writing has the flaw of never coming down from a high level of generality, and it also relies on idiosyncratic language.

    This prompts accusations of “crazy” from his detractors. Not unreasonably either; one is not obliged to give credence to someone who does not attempt to sell his ideas by way of a common language. I am not obliged to take a strange guy seriously when he mutters generalities like “the truth is one and you are the truth”, for example.

    Is like to understand more about Thordaddy’s concept of ‘white Supremacy’ (the significance of capitalization here is not lost on me) because I think he is onto something here — but this requires that he bridges the abstract and the concrete.

  86. thordaddy 10/30/2012 at 6:34 pm

    PA…

    The reason “it” doesn’t come down from “a high level of generality” is because the radical liberationist can’t understand things in concrete terms. Even though the radical liberationist (one who desires absolute autonomy) is voluntarily confined to a concrete playing field, HIS LIBERALISM is bound to the idea of NEVER BEING ANYTHING in particular, i.e., anything concrete. So when the radical liberationist IS FORCED TO PLAY by becoming something concrete in his all concrete world, IT IS A FALSE self-creation that can’t comprehend REAL THINGS.

    Ergo… An aspect of RADICAL liberation IS IN PURPOSELY NOT COMPREHENDING reality.

    So we have a male liberationist movement (homosexual “nature,” MGTOW, self-annihilating) cloaking itself in man-ness.

    And we have a female liberationist movement (dyke “nature”) cloaking itself in “feminism.”

    And we have an HDB movement (biological reductionism whose sole focus is black undertow) cloaking itself in the physical sciences.

    These are all fronts intended to maximize the COLLECTIVE autonomy of said liberationist movements.

    The consequence of their exaltation as legitimate movements is nothing less than the abolition of white man and his white woman and white children.

    Again, WHO DOES THE MRA AND HBD movements really HATE?

    White alpha jocks? And the white woman they would have?

    White Supremacy?

  87. thorsok 10/30/2012 at 6:53 pm

    PA – when i first came across Thordaddy, i too thought he was insane. but his concept of “radical autonomy” is a fantastic prescription of modern liberalism. so fantastic in fact that I’d put it up there with just about any other explanation. it’s a shame he comes across like he does becuz he has a lot of good things to say.

  88. thordaddy 10/30/2012 at 6:54 pm

    The first law of radical liberationism is to never admit to being a radical liberationist as such a blunt confession is equal to professing one’s self-annihilating ways.

    Radical liberationists are self-annihilating and they have an obvious motivation to hide this salient fact.

  89. thordaddy 10/30/2012 at 7:21 pm

    Lena Dunham wants you to vote for BO because BO will absolutely push the idea of radical sexual autonomy ESPECIALLY amongst white women.

    This is the unvarnished truth.

    Radical sexual AUTOMOMY in its purest form is self-sexualizing, i.e., self-annihilating. It is the principle of pleasuring yourself to death. Homosexuals and dykes ARE RADICAL SEXUAL AUTONOMISTS by “nature.” They are literally sexually attracted to the SELF and it only LIBERALLY manifests in concrete reality as sexual attraction to “the SAME.” But the self-sexualizing “nature” is rooted in sexual aversion for female and male, respectively. It is not rooted in attraction for “the same.” This is not tenable. This claim is ENTIRELY SUBJECTIVE. The hatred for men found in “feminism” and the hatred for women found in the MRA is palpable. The radical autonomists on each side are intent on asserting that this is a white man versus white woman “war.” FILTHY LIARS.

  90. PA 10/30/2012 at 7:32 pm

    Thorsok – a former blogger?

  91. thordaddy 10/30/2012 at 7:58 pm

    Thing is, I got real skin in the game. Most of these MRAers and HBDers are white male liberals with nothing in the game. They are mostly cheerleaders for a small cabal of genuine woman-haters. These clowns crying about the perils of playing inside a system THEY AREN’T EVEN PLAYING IN!

    Now imagine… You have real skin in the game (something outside your ego) AND you try to live OUTSIDE this system. You fools don’t real peril. In fact, you are part and parcel of that radical collective which intends to make it impossible for real white men and their white families to live outside the liberationist paradigm.

  92. Lara 10/30/2012 at 8:08 pm

    I watched a few videos of Lena and while she is much raunchier than I am, she isn’t really less feminine. I’m not a lesbian and therefore it’s unlikely she is either. I bet if you put her in a more natural environment, where she spent a lot time outside, and in the company of masculine men, she would act more like a woman.

  93. Lara 10/30/2012 at 8:36 pm

    It would be good to keep her pregnant, too. It would sap her energy, so we wouldn’t be subjected to videos like this one.

  94. thordaddy 10/30/2012 at 8:47 pm

    Lara…

    She is DE FACTO dyke (maybe a real one actually, but we don’t know). As in, she pushes for radical female sexual autonomy, i.e., unhindered fornication, abortion on demand, free contraception, no-fault divorce and the equalization of dykism to heterosexuality. The MRA asserts that this assorted perversion of “rights” evidences “female supremacy.” In fact, it represents female degeneracy and self-annihilation.

    Lena Dunham’s call is a call for white women to collective self-annihilate. The MRA are allies in arms. All they want in return is their own radical sexual autonomy. Jerk-offs, they are.

  95. Rifleman 10/30/2012 at 10:44 pm

    PA 10/30/2012 at 4:41 pm

    I like Thordaddy’s comments but his writing has the flaw of never coming down from a high level of generality, and it also relies on idiosyncratic language.

    This prompts accusations of “crazy” from his detractors.

    Right, in other words another White sex-nerd, Aspergy/semi-autistic, socially awkward weirdo who thinks he has figured out all of society’s problems and it all gets around to Evil Women (dykes,hypergamous whores) manginas/beta-males, low IQ, crime prone blacks/NAMs, some sci-fy garbage about red pill/ blue pill bbbbllllaaahhhaa,yyyyackkkk…***sigh***,poor,lil me! losers

    These freaks are nesting all over the game/pick-up artist, MRA, pseudo-right wing, so-called mano-sphere.

    They’re an embarrassment.

  96. thordaddy 10/30/2012 at 10:54 pm

    ^^^ Lol… You couldn’t be more off the mark, Rifleman.

  97. thordaddy 10/30/2012 at 10:59 pm

    Seventeen years in the night life business does not an Aspie make. Up-in-your face “radical autonomy” is a view into the “nature” of the beast and I’ve been facing that beast on the daily for almost two decades. Like I said, I have real skin in this game. Survivalism is a non-starter for woman and children.

  98. thordaddy 10/30/2012 at 11:26 pm

    If you can not see that the MRA movement and the HBD paradigm are as real as a threat to the freedom of Western Man as any radical liberationist movement THEN YOU CAN NOT SEE IT.

    You are in a state of radical automomy.

  99. C.R. 10/31/2012 at 12:39 am

    thordaddy,

    if i told you that your ramblings here don’t make any sense i’m sure you’d just respond that i just don’t get it because i’m in denial since i’m self-annihilating. but i enjoy and am swayed by similar writings on this topic by people like Christopher Lasch and others. except he actually knew what he was talking about and could communicate his arguments through his superior prose whereas you just start out rambling and then devolve into attacking the people who aren’t “smart enough” to pick up on the nuances of your argument.

    this is all exemplified by your unswerving focus on whether or not Lena Dunham should be called a dyke instead of a woman. regular heterosexual women can be “self-annihilating” or narcissistic as well. anyway, maybe work on your delivery or something.

  100. thordaddy 10/31/2012 at 1:15 am

    Mr. Rudd,

    You hate “white Supremacy.”

    For you and ALL THE REST of the liberationists, it all starts there.

    And if you can’t distinguish between dyke “nature” and woman’s nature then I might as well call you a radical liberal.

  101. thordaddy 10/31/2012 at 1:19 am

    But really… If you can’t understand something then just ask for specific clarification.

  102. thordaddy 10/31/2012 at 1:22 am

    Yes… Heterosexual females can be self-annihilating and that would be why they never reach womanhood. They have been stunted by the call for radical sexual autonomy, but WOMEN are not the ones making that call. “Feminism” and the MRA are calling for that “equal” sexual autonomy.

  103. Brendan 10/31/2012 at 10:50 am

    By the way … the GOP has caught on to the “voting as relationship” meme with these vids, which are kind of a direct counter to the Lena Dunham spot: http://www.620wtmj.com/blogs/charliesykes/176561921.html

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: