There are the occasions that men—intellectual men, clever men, engaged men—insist on playing devil’s advocate, desirous of a debate on some aspect of feminist theory or reproductive rights or some other subject generally filed under the heading: Women’s Issues. These intellectual, clever, engaged men want to endlessly probe my argument for weaknesses, want to wrestle over details, want to argue just for fun—and they wonder, these intellectual, clever, engaged men, why my voice keeps raising and why my face is flushed and why, after an hour of fighting my corner, hot tears burn the corners of my eyes. Why do you have to take this stuff so personally? ask the intellectual, clever, and engaged men, who have never considered that the content of the abstract exercise that’s so much fun for them is the stuff of my life.
'Dilbert' Creator Scott Adams Compares Women Asking for Equal Pay to Children Demanding Candy





“The reality is that women are treated differently by society for exactly the same reason that children and the mentally handicapped are treated differently. It’s just easier this way for everyone. You don’t argue with a four-year old about why he shouldn’t eat candy for dinner. You don’t punch a mentally handicapped guy even if he punches you first. And you don’t argue when a women tells you she’s only making 80 cents to your dollar. It’s the path of least resistance. You save your energy for more important battles.”  -Scott Adams

I love how he almost comes out and says exactly what he actually means, which is, “Women are treated like children and disabled persons because they are incapable of doing things men can”. That’s patently false, and that’s why we’re all pissed that women are getting paid less to do the exact. Same. Things.

What an asshole. Dilbert was mediocre at best, you jackass!

is this for real? seriously, was this guy kidding or did he actually mean what he wrote? sometimes i forget that people like this actually exist… i’d say boycott dilbert, but i don’t know anyone who reads that crap to begin with.

He even left a really condescending comment on Feministe about how everyone there was too emotional to understand what he meant, and that only his readers are smart enough to get it.

He did that on this site too. His explanation seems to be, “No no, women talking about pay equality aren’t LIKE children asking for candy and disabled people striking out violently really, it’s just smart for men to smile and nod with all three of them”. Which I suppose, in a sense, is correct, in that it is more difficult for a man to examine his privilege and try to create change than it is to just float through life being a snarky, vaguely misogynist douchebag. 

Wesleyan v. Wellesley: “Rather Dead than Coed?” - Opinion - The Wesleyan Argus


The awkward moment when one of your former classmates write this and you’re completely unsurprised.

I had seen this popping up everywhere and hadn’t said anything about it until I noticed it was written by a Bryn Mawr alum.

I don’t think it really requires my commentary, since she has been ripped to shreds in the comments several times over, but girl - where the fuck were you living at Bryn Mawr that had “bloody tampons strewn all over the bathroom floor?”

This is not something that happens. Your internalized misogyny is showing.