Official Kiwi Farms Man-Hate Thread

[Android raptor]

I feel like a lot of the “why does it matter if a Troon is in the ladies’ toilets” moid crew are genuinely unaware how much women randomly chat to strangers in public bathrooms.

I only do that at cons, wtf

 

[Big Miss Steak]

Yeah, I'd been ploughing through page after page without seeing any -- then no sooner do I post than I spot one.

My bad.

I will forgive you just this once

In my experience, most women never really gave much of a fuck about troons as long as they weren't married to one, until they started invading their spaces, competing in their sports and insisting they were more womanly than real women could ever be.

And? Most people don't care a whole lot about what some weird subgroup of people is doing until it personally affects them. I would care about troons 90% less if they didn't insist on being in my bathrooms and outperforming real women. I never cared about drag queens a whole lot because they were fine to stay in their own lane, but once they started wanting to visit schools and get kids involved I started caring more. This is normal.

Even then, most women I know are too polite to verbalize their objections.

I know this has been discussed in the thread too but can't remember how much. Women are biologically wired to be nonconfrontational and this is doubly reinforced with our culture of public shaming and the fact an unhinged troon might beat them half to death. I think the pendulum is swinging and once it becomes more acceptable to call out these freaks then we'll see a lot more women doing so.

I feel like a lot of the “why does it matter if a Troon is in the ladies’ toilets” moid crew are genuinely unaware how much women randomly chat to strangers in public bathrooms.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think they would have our backs if they did, but I think they are so obsessed with not peeking at each others’ dicks that they have no ability to comprehend the sharing of hairspray and the passing of the emergency loo roll and the drunken all-hands discussion on whether this one crying girl should dump her boyfriend or not.

I think moids are so socialised to… not socialise (unless they are trying to fuck it) that the concept of random friendly social chatter just eludes them. We don’t want troons in the bathroom in part because being in the femoid bathroom is being part of the femoid tribal identity. I ain’t sharing no spare hair bobble with a crazy man in a dress.

Plus, I don’t think they ever figure how to hide in the bathroom to avoid awkward or scary social interactions, so they don’t get that we want to avoid troons by, er, hiding in the bathroom. Because they are awkward and scary. The ladies’ room in a public place is a moid- and creep-free zone. It can’t be that if troons are permitted in there. We are trying to hide from them, ffs.

Socialization aside, as some bathrooms are more chatty than others. Women have to partially undress to use the toilet. I do not want to be in a state of partial undress/partial nudity in the same room as a sex pest. This should not be hard to understand.

 

[Stan]

The criticisms that a lot of you women have about conservative moids seem perfectly reasonable to me, but it's puzzling why you appear to give their left wing equivalents a free pass.

You can't scratch your arse without some big name left wing media celebrity has been outed as a sexual predator or rapist yet again. Most of them have enough money, status and power to get laid if they really wanted to -- and yet still they rape. Remember Andrew Callaghan?

Seems to me that political ideology has nothing at all to do with it. The issue is one of character. Scumbags gonna be scumbags regardless of politics.

I don't think anybody gave Harvey Weinstein or Justin Roiland a 'free pass', despite their liberal politics. To the extent that these kinds of guys are answerable to their corporate overlords, they get shitcanned. Callaghan runs a YouTube channel, which gave him more latitude for misconduct because there's a lack of oversight on YouTube generally.

Left wing men can suck too but they aren't trying to take women's rights away with the law the same way tradmoids are.

What nags me about left-wing men is how conveniently women's liberation to them overlaps with what they happen to want. It's totally feminist for women to wear revealing clothes and sleep around, but when feminists start asking for things that would not directly benefit the male boner (e.g. paid maternity leave policy, child care tax credit), leftist men start tugging their collars and trying to redirect the discussion to class struggle. Also they're 100% fine with men LARPing as women in the women's toilets, because it doesn't really affect them.

 

[Swole McPole]

I don't think anybody gave Harvey Weinstein or Justin Roiland a 'free pass', despite their liberal politics.

Come on. Weinstein got a free pass for years and years. It was an open secret that you shouldn't go to his hotel room alone. Whether that was because of his liberal politics or because he controlled access to a valuable scarce resource is somewhat arguable, I suppose. But the people who covered for him -- the employees of his company, the actors, the journalists, the lawyers -- we can fairly safely assume that they were ALL left leaning.

Sure, once the cat was out of the bag and the story was too big to kill, they did for him. But some of that was about changing social mores. I'm sure at the start of his career, expecting men to be 'overly handsy' or to deploy the casting couch was just an accepted part of doing business.

What nags me about left-wing men is how conveniently women's liberation to them overlaps with what they happen to want.

I'm always reminded of Stokely Carmichael's response when asked about women in the SNCC. His response:

"The only position for women in the SNCC is prone."

 

[I'm a Silly]

The criticisms that a lot of you women have about conservative moids seem perfectly reasonable to me, but it's puzzling why you appear to give their left wing equivalents a free pass.

based on what? we explicitly did the opposite

 

[Inside your walls]

Recently, I was having a conversation with another girl about the incel movement and we were basically talking how most incel shit stems from angry moids being upset at the fact women do not have to settle down with them and thus they are being denied of their mommy bangmaid.

Our conversation was rudely interrupted when this self-proclaimed "volcel" barged in and started going off about how women loving to be independent is a cope and how the incel movement is mainly dudes going "What's the point?" when they see women in relationships with "bad men" that end up really poorly with end result being women becoming more misandrist.

I pointed that women and young girls also ask "What's the point?" when they see men call them derogatory names, already have this perceived low opinion of them due to being "western whores" (despite most these rejects seeing more dicks in porn than any women they accuse of being a roastie) all the while they put this twisted up version of other women on pedestal (i.e. the whole western women vs. submissive slavic/asian women), simp for porn stars and other exaggerated women, tell young women how they're gonna replace them with AI or sexbots. This scrote unironically said "It's not the same, because women deliberately compare themselves to one another".

Yeah, I'm so sure women and young girls love being bombared by posts written by rejects about how as (western) women they are useless, bound to fuck over people and other vile shit, and they cannot compete with moidifed idea of Asian women or their waifus. I'm sure women love being pitted against one another where the end game reward for that is dating a scrote that's most likely a porn-addict, that's why they are refusing to date and participate in these competitons set up by loser scrotes. What a clown.

Handmaidens existing doesn’t mean women as a whole actually like troons and want them violating their privacy.

Not too derail this thread too much, but handmaidens most of the time are ones that admire troons from distance, only to realize the gravity of what they're supporting when they meet a troon IRL. It's that or them being still handmaidening for troons because of the sunk cost fallacy.

Come on. Weinstein got a free pass for years and years. It was an open secret that you shouldn't go to his hotel room alone. Whether that was because of his liberal politics or because he controlled access to a valuable scarce resource is somewhat arguable, I suppose. But the people who covered for him -- the employees of his company, the actors, the journalists, the lawyers -- we can fairly safely assume that they were ALL left leaning.

If Hollywood was 100% right leaning, we would be still getting plenty of sex scandals similar to Weinstein one. Just look at old Hollywood when it was right-leaning/having conservative values. It has many horror stories about how both adult and child actresses were physically, mentally and sexually abused by people in Hollywood who most likely had very conservative values back then. They couldn't do anything about it, because if back then they tried to expose a director or someone influential in Hollywood, they would be called lunatics and get sent to a mental ward.

 

[Merton J. Dingle]

Why do some men think owning cats is effiminate?

What's weird about that is that it's not exactly a secret what cats do with their waking hours when let outside: look for shit to kill. That's not exactly what I would readily associate with femininity.

 

[Merton J. Dingle]

Recently, I was having a conversation with another girl about the incel movement and we were basically talking how most incel shit stems from angry moids being upset at the fact women do not have to settle down with them and thus they are being denied of their mommy bangmaid.

Our conversation was rudely interrupted when this self-proclaimed "volcel" barged in and started going off about how women loving to be independent is a cope and how the incel movement is mainly dudes going "What's the point?" when they see women in relationships with "bad men" that end up really poorly with end result being women becoming more misandrist.

I pointed that women and young girls also ask "What's the point?" when they see men call them derogatory names, already have this perceived low opinion of them due to being "western whores" (despite most these rejects seeing more dicks in porn than any women they accuse of being a roastie) all the while they put this twisted up version of other women on pedestal (i.e. the whole western women vs. submissive slavic/asian women), simp for porn stars and other exaggerated women, tell young women how they're gonna replace them with AI or sexbots. This scrote unironically said "It's not the same, because women deliberately compare themselves to one another".

Yeah, I'm so sure women and young girls love being bombared by posts written by rejects about how as (western) women they are useless, bound to fuck over people and other vile shit, and they cannot compete with moidifed idea of Asian women or their waifus. I'm sure women love being pitted against one another where the end game reward for that is dating a scrote that's most likely a porn-addict, that's why they are refusing to date and participate in these competitons set up by loser scrotes. What a clown.

Incels are basically just men that have tied their identity to some imagined hierarchy based around sleeping with as many women as possible, just like stereotypical frat boys and pickup artists. The difference is that the incels are at the bottom of this perceived hierarchy and have adopted a defeatist attitude in which they do nothing to improve their chances with women, like putting in effort into not looking like shit or being able to carry on an interesting conversation.

 

[𝕺𝖑' 𝕯𝖎𝖗𝖙𝖞 𝕱𝖆𝖙𝖘𝖔]

I want to know which law was passed allowing troons to exist and when I voted on it

No you voted for this if you voted for Democrats. And also fuck you if you want shit like abortion to stay legal, enjoy having two bad options!

 

[Yaks]

Honestly while I disagree with a lot of conservative men and their talking points when it comes to women (honestly it depends on what camp they're in, majority of them I find very respectful to me, even if we disagree.) I find them significantly more enjoyable to be around than most staunch liberal men.

This does not include Kiwis. Liberal or conservative most of you are annoying retards whenever any sniff of politics is in the water, much like sharks. I say this fondly.

 

[Tilapia]

The criticisms that a lot of you women have about conservative moids seem perfectly reasonable to me, but it's puzzling why you appear to give their left wing equivalents a free pass.

Lurk more.

 

[CryptidRetard]

What's weird about that is that it's not exactly a secret what cats do with their waking hours when let outside: look for shit to kill. That's not exactly what I would readily associate with femininity.

One of the most efficient killing machines of the modern age that can singlehandedly reduce the population of a prey species to extinction levels. I guess they're cute though so that means feminine

 

[Swole McPole]

If Hollywood was 100% right leaning, we would be still getting plenty of sex scandals similar to Weinstein one. Just look at old Hollywood when it was right-leaning/having conservative values. It has many horror stories about how both adult and child actresses were physically, mentally and sexually abused by people in Hollywood who most likely had very conservative values back then.

Surely your point should be if Hollywood was 100% right leaning we WOULDN'T be getting plenty of sex scandals similar to Weinstein because the right/conservatives would cover them up.

In exactly the same way all of those leftists did with Weinstein and his victims for all those years.

But I don't get your point. The things you discuss were really functions of a huge monolithic studio system. That system no longer exists and was pretty well done by the late 70's early 80's. Weinstein's company and his dominance over the independent production system was probably as close as it gets to 'old' Hollywood in terms of power and the veto it has over careers, and it functioned in exactly the same way. People who worked for the company covered for him. The actors and actresses who worked for the company either turned a blind eye or covered. The cockroaches in the media who were dependent on the company for stories did exactly the same thing.

Even the holier-than-thou late night comedians made sure that none of their jokes touched on the allegations against Weinstein until it was much too late to credibly do so. So the idea that there's some establishment left with integrity working in the media, really doesn't cut much ice with me.

And it's not like the scandals have stopped post Weinstein, is it? James Rosen, James Franco, Paul Haggis, Morgan Spurlock, Tavis Smiley, Matt Lauer, Mario Batali, Garrison Keillor, Charlie Rose, Russell Simmons, Jeffrey Tambor, Danny Masterson, Andrew Kreisberg, Louis CK, Brett Ratner, Jeremy Piven, James Toback -- would it be possible to get even greater numbers of abusers working in the industry?

Just an addendum: I've identified as being on the left my whole life. Four or five years ago, I dropped that loyalty and began to identify as independent, taking my positions on an issue-by-issue basis, but I've never voted anything further right than the UK Labour Party, so I'm not attempting to cover for conservatives here. I just don't get where people see the behaviour of the left as any different on this issue.

 

[Stan]

Come on. Weinstein got a free pass for years and years. It was an open secret that you shouldn't go to his hotel room alone. Whether that was because of his liberal politics or because he controlled access to a valuable scarce resource is somewhat arguable, I suppose. But the people who covered for him -- the employees of his company, the actors, the journalists, the lawyers -- we can fairly safely assume that they were ALL left leaning.

Sure, once the cat was out of the bag and the story was too big to kill, they did for him. But some of that was about changing social mores. I'm sure at the start of his career, expecting men to be 'overly handsy' or to deploy the casting couch was just an accepted part of doing business.

Yeah, it is a sign of changing social mores. It’s an example of the rising legitimacy of acting as a career (actresses used to be considered even lower than whores) and it’s a sign of how our society takes sexual harassment more seriously. Weinstein was like a spider in a web; he carefully surrounded himself with leverage and people to cover for him so he could carry on acting like a predator. It isn’t just sexual abuse either - this guy was an asshole generally. He threw shit at his staff when he was in a snit, he berated his talent and threatened them with job loss (even the men) and he pioneered a strategy of buttonholing members of the academy to fast track his projects to the Oscars. And the result of that is like you said, Weinstein was in control of a valuable and scarce resource in the industry and women would put up with his rapist behavior to secure a spot in Miramax projects.

He was/is a shitty guy all around, and shitty guys come left and right. Sean Hannity and Roger Ailes come to mind, but I do feel that the right is less inclined to hold their men accountable than the left will, at least nowadays. (Obviously, the leftists of yesteryear, like Clinton and JFK, were notorious womanizers.)

I guess it’s a matter of what you’d prefer; a man who pretends to care about these issues and at least pays lip service (heh) to the notion of workplace protection from sexual harrrassment, and those who won’t and are honest about being sex pests. I’ll grudgingly choose the ones that at least pretend to care, as they demonstrate that they know the behavior is wrong, over some asshole like Trump who sees nothing wrong with being an open cheat.

I guess I’m agreeing with you, tbh. Sry to seem confrontational it isn’t intended.

 

[Inside your walls]

Surely your point should be if Hollywood was 100% right leaning we WOULDN'T be getting plenty of sex scandals similar to Weinstein because the right/conservatives would cover them up.

>Person openly says they love apples
>You: Wow, clearly you love oranges!
Are you braindead?

But I don't get your point. The things you discuss were really functions of a huge monolithic studio system. That system no longer exists and was pretty well done by the late 70's early 80's. Weinstein's company and his dominance over the independent production system was probably as close as it gets to 'old' Hollywood in terms of power and the veto it has over careers, and it functioned in exactly the same way. People who worked for the company covered for him. The actors and actresses who worked for the company either turned a blind eye or covered. The cockroaches in the media who were dependent on the company for stories did exactly the same thing.

We're talking about an industry that produced movies during 20s-50s that openly shown scenes of women being abused and spanked when they were acting "irrational", those movies pushed the narrative of "abusing women is a form of therapy for them" that conservative men pushed back in the day.

To think that Hollywood would be somehow this pinnacle of morality if it was right leaning is a very thought.
The reality of it would be, everything would be the same but instead of left leaning people in charge saying saccharine mantras such as "TRANNY RIGHTS OR ELSE YOU'RE WORSE THAN A NAZI" before going to off to sexually abuse someone and be a complete degenerate, we would have right leaning people saying whatever right leaning mantra of the month is before going to sexually abuse someone or be a full degenerate.

The reason why women in this thread shit on conservatard moids is because those types on this site act like completely self-righteous tools that are convinced their side can't do nothing wrong, they talk about left-leaning people's lack of holding accountability and conviction but then seethe when they're expected to do the same.

Here's a fun game, go to Articles and Happenings find an article about some tranny or a drag queen being caught in a police sting to lure out pedos and child abusers, and see how many of these people call the child abuser a degenerate that should be lynched, now go find an article where a right-leaning person, Christian pastor or people from their side get caught being gross nonces and see how many of them go "Oh because ONE pastor/right leaning person got caught being a pedo that all means we should just let kids be near trannies and drag queens!" and absolutely doing the same thing they accuse left-leaning people of doing of.

Women in this thread complained about left-leaning men, bunch of times so lurk more.
It costs zero dollars to write "Leftie/left-leaning men" in the search bar and toggle "this thread".

 

[Truffle Logger]

I'm not sure if I saw it mentioned here or somewhere else, but I read someone say a while ago where they thought the concept of marriage to a man was essentially longform prostitution, and it's been stuck in my brain. What are your all's thoughts on that? When I think about it, it could make sense in certain contexts, like with tradmoids and their utopia where women can't have bank accounts or do much of Jack shit else except to shack up with a moid.

On that note, fuck conservative and liberal moids. I don't remember who said this, but the saying goes something like "Conservative men see women as private property, and liberal men see women as public property" and I fully believe this rings true. I don't trust any fucking guy who leans way too hard into either ideology.

It was Andrea Dworkin in her book "Right Wing Women" from back in 1983

I have not read the entire book but have read bits here and there. Interestingly she also says the following:

Right-wing women have surveyed the world: they find it a dangerous place. They see that work subjects them to more danger from more men; it increases the risk of sexual exploitation. They see that creativity and originality in their kind are ridiculed; they see women thrown out of the circle of male civilization for having ideas, plans, visions, ambitions. They see that traditional marriage means selling to one man, not hundreds: the better deal. They see that the streets are cold, and that the women on them are tired, sick, and bruised. They see that the money they can earn will not make them independent of men and that they will still have to play the sex games of their kind: at home and at work too. They see no way to make their bodies authentically their own and to survive in the world of men. They know too that the Left has nothing better to offer: leftist men also want wives and whores; leftist men value whores too much and wives too little. Right-wing women are not wrong. They fear that the Left, in stressing impersonal sex and promiscuity as values, will make them more vulnerable to male sexual aggression, and that they will be despised for not liking it. They are not wrong.

Misogyny exists amongst men regardless of their political affiliation

 

[Justa Grata Honoria]

like putting in effort into not looking like shit or being able to carry on an interesting conversation.

At this point of what i have seen is wash your ass and dont smell like shit plus dont be autistic in conversations, not carry interesting conversation just dont be fucking autistic .

I mean every year the standards are dropping and every year men get whinnier its so bad that now that western women are converting to islam. I can guarantee you in few years there will be islamic marriages prolifirating and women accepting to be second, third or fourth wife to someone who is mentally sane and clean, than to go near again another stinky autist who obsess over womens vaginas , pornstars and ethots. Also wearing hijabs as a repelant to scrotes who think every western woman is a game .

I predict in a decade there will be male and female sections of gyms, restaurants and many social avenues and videos coming out how women beating the shit out of troons and fuckboys trying to sneak into their section.

 

[Hassou Tobi]

Hello, long time reader first time poster.

I’m frustrated by the insistence from moids that women commit “just as/almost as much” sexual violence as men and try to “prove” it with some shitty research papers with dodgy conclusions likely done random MRA. Sorry, I’m just not buying that there’s tons of women with rape dungeons that we just don’t hear about. I think there are negative behaviors that women tend to have that men don’t if I’m being honest, but sexual violence is 99% a male thing and they need to stop coping about it.

I feel like even the men know it but there’s nothing they love more than pointlessly debating about everything.

 

[Swole McPole]

I guess it’s a matter of what you’d prefer; a man who pretends to care about these issues and at least pays lip service (heh) to the notion of workplace protection from sexual harrrassment, and those who won’t and are honest about being sex pests. I’ll grudgingly choose the ones that at least pretend to care, as they demonstrate that they know the behavior is wrong, over some asshole like Trump who sees nothing wrong with being an open cheat.

I really think it's just the hypocrisy that irritates me as much as anything.

Are you braindead?

One of us clearly is. You pays your money...

 

[Stan]

I feel like even the men know it but there’s nothing they love more than pointlessly debating about everything.

It's actually more sinister than that. Men are doing one of two things:
1. Because they don't personally rape, they refuse to take notice of the men that do rape, in order to create a constructed rape-free worldview, where they don't need to take any action. (Basically, they're burying their heads in the sand and trying to see no evil.)
1a. I've got this axiom - men only believe you were raped if you die as well. Seems to me that if a woman survives her rape more-or-less uninjured, men will tend to refuse to believe it was rape.
2. Deliberately gaslighting women that rape is rare and uncommon to make it easier to personally commit sexual assault.