Amanda Marcotte, a half-witted feminist mouthpiece best known for continuing to refer to the boys falsely accused at Duke University as rapists even after the semen in the victim was found to belong to someone else (that’s right, folks, Amanda’s deep knowledge of human biology tells her that it is possible for one man to ejaculate another man’s semen!) is now claiming that Disney is conspiring to oppress women through the way it depicts wrist size! The prime example she gives is that of Anna, the heroine of the recent Disney movie Frozen. Here is a still of Anna and a male oppressor. From the look of shame on the poor girl’s face, the male bastard has just pointed out how tiny her wrists are, and how this makes her an inferior form of life…

Echoing another loon called Phillip Cohen, Marcotte whines that in Disney movies in general, the difference between male and female wrist sizes is exaggerated in order to make men look sturdy and strong and women weak and pathetic, as well as to emphasize the idea that men and women are “opposite” and that girls suck at math and can’t drive!  Here’s a clue, you tiny-brained wonder – it’s a fucking cartoon! Exaggeration – including of differences –  is the norm in the genre! Does this sawdust-brained twat  think that this is what the average duck looks like…

You know, she probably does! Not only that, she probably thinks that’s what the average sailor looks like! The fact is that both Donald and the characters in Frozen are cartoons, they are not a depiction of reality, and whereas I can see the problem in the portrayal of women as wimpy and men as stupid, I sure as hell can’t see any woman with a brain bigger than a walnut walking around feeling bad about her wrists! As for the claim that Disney is doing this to emphasize that men and women are opposite, this is rubbish. What they are obviously emphasizing is that men and women are different, and that isn’t a narrative, it is an obvious truth. Marcotte then points out that in real life the difference is not as great, assuming that, like her, we need to have reality explained to us, and uses a study of soldiers as an example. Funny, she whines that Disney is misrepresenting the difference in wrist size, then she does something similar by underplaying the difference by using stats gathered from a population which is, in all likelihood, not representative. What, no stats on wrist size outside of the army?

Just think, all MRAs have to worry about are trivialities like the life expectancy gap, the education gap, the incarceration gap, the homelessness gap, etc… But hey, what the fuck are we whining about – at least we aren’t being portrayed in cartoons as having tiny wrists! The other thing Mad Mandy whines about is that the heroine of Frozen has eyes that are bigger than said wrists! You know what the character’s eyes are also bigger than, Amanda? That shriveled up prune you call a brain, that’s what.

 

Get your proof of feminist idiocy right here.

 

Assuming she hasn’t always been that way, of course. Not surprisingly, I don’t read Cosmo, partly because I am not a woman and therefore am not obsessed with sex, and partly because I already have enough shoes (that’s right, two whole pairs.) As it turns out, it looks as if Cosmo has a tendency to do what every other MSM outlet does, which is to parrot feminist nonsense.

Some plain little thing by the name of Anna Breslaw has decided to compile a list of ways that men insult women when they don’t intend to. This, of course, is a sin I have never been guilty of – when I insult women it is fully intentional. The thing about this list is that she starts off quite sensibly – there is nothing “adorable” about a woman getting a promotion – then very quickly descends into what I can only describe as the territory of she who screams misogyny at every opportunity. This is either because little Anna’s skull is as thick and hard as a week-old sanitary pad, or because she wants her readers to feel that they are oppressed and hence entitled.

Apparently, telling George Clooney “You’re so cool, I can’t believe you’re still single!” is a compliment, but saying the same to a woman is an insult…

“You’re so cool, how are you still single?” Because my Coolness is an ever-expanding supernova, enveloping and destroying every potential mate in its path, that’s why. Fuckface.”

Pointing out that a woman is not a raging psychotic is also a no-no, and so is pointing out that she has a pretty face, as doing so can only be done by men who think the woman in question has a body made of sewage and swamp mud.

“You have such a pretty face!” But I want to throw holy water on the rest of your hideous body, you disgusting beautiful-headed demon-woman.”

Er, yeah, whatever. Funny thing is, it’s hard to believe the horse-faced plain Jane who wrote the piece ever hears the first part of that – though it wouldn’t surprise me if she often heard the second. Frankly, the whole thing comes across as a woman whining about her own personal life while projecting all sorts of behaviors and negative intentions onto males. In other words, it comes across like a lot of other feminist whine-fests. If the former example wasn’t enough of a clue as to who this piece is really about, here’s another…

“You’re single because you’re too picky.” “You should aim more on your level, like the crazy guy who hangs out outside the local YMCA trying to smoke discarded cigarette butts.”

Truth hurts, don’t it? Throw in “unpleasant, petulant and whiny” and you have a pretty good description of the writer. As for the cigarette guy, I doubt he would be willing to lower himself to the level of someone who writes for Cosmo.

The feminist hilarity continues here.