| 73Q Music Videos | Vote On Clips | Submit | Login   |

Reddit Digg Stumble Facebook
Desc:In the woods with his trusty whiskey tumbler and pocket hanky.
Category:News & Politics, General Station
Tags:woods, Bald, weirdo, Davis Aurini, neo-reactionary
Submitted:BHWW
Date:11/06/14
Views:1635
Rating:
View Ratings
Register to vote for this video

People Who Liked This Video Also Liked:
Lake Dredge Appraisal- Chicken Wire/Tin Pot
skateboarding hamster
A Piece of the Sky
Grand: Illusions: Japanese Balloon Blowing Automaton
Canadians don't have accents
GaGa Ball!
Open mic comedy
Alestorm - You Are a Pirate
Chris-Chan has a potentially fatal abscess on his perineum and needs immediate medical care
Texas police officer fatally shoots restrained prisoner (NSFL)
Comment count is 15
baleen - 2014-11-06
So has anyone found his fetlife profile yet?
infinite zest - 2014-11-06
He's like a real-life Julian and Ricky combined, right down to the tumbler.

infinite zest - 2014-11-06
Also "Oedipus and Control" is my new band name. This guy sucks but I kinda love him

EvilHomer - 2014-11-07
I think he said "edifice of control", but he is a mush-mouthed Canadian and I like your way better.

BHWW - 2014-11-07
Imagine seeing someone dressed like that if you were out walking in the woods. The best part isn't even his suit - it's his sunglasses and mug of coffee, in the middle of the woods.

Is the forest backdrop supposed to make him look rugged? Really doesn't go with his trademark fussy cigarette and pocket handkerchief mannerisms. He must choose, just like with the red and blue pills.

Retardo Montebaun - 2014-11-07
ah good to see Lex Luthor gets out once in a while, can't just sit in the lab all day building the robots.
SexualBasalt - 2014-11-07
Why does he care if people actually burned bras? What a weird thing to mention. Also he said "Aurini out folks". What a fucking dingus.
PegLegPete - 2014-11-07
Women's sexual liberation requires "responsibility". Aurini's responsibility is that women should seek love and marriage, but most importantly pay for their own birth control so they don't have an unwanted pregnancy because they'd use more government subsidy. Therefore a woman is irresponsible, unless, as he argues, they use sex to augment a loving relationship, and/or pay for their own birth control.

He says birth control enables sexual behavior, missing the reality that you must take the required dose of birth control regardless of how much sexual activity you have (not talking condoms obviously). But why would he have a problem with birth control enabling sex anyway? The birth control would still mean less "oops babies", as he puts it. However, if women took birth control, they'd be able to have a lot of sex, and unless they're having sex with love or marriage in mind, they're failing part of Aurini's "responsibility" test, which is looking curiously like a "you must have sex for these reasons" test. Hope I'm not misrepresenting him.

By his logic, wouldn't men also have responsibility to use a form of birth control? Or at least have some responsibility? He doesn't really comment on that. Is it because women are the only ones who can get pregnant, and therefore carry more responsibility? If that's the case, that's poor reasoning because "impregnating sex" still needs a penis. If sexual liberalization requires responsibility, it is a mutual responsibility for all involved.

Which makes his argument all the more strange; he's quick to point out the "motivational" differences he perceives between men and women: wen want a "harem" and "women only want sex with the best guy she can attain", which leads Aurini to think that a small number of males are having all the sex - as If that would be the only social factor, let alone economic and dozens of others. He, again, hardly gives passing mention to a man's "responsibility", even though it's staring him in the face.

He credits technology and mass marketing for women's sexual liberation (and he combines social liberation at this point). Thus, in his view, denigrating women's behavior to that gleamed from "lowest-common-denominator" pandering which makes people behave like animals, and the glorious wonders of technology that solve all our social problems. In short: women owe science and commercials for their rights. But, as a historian he should know this; all of this "women's liberation" stuff was going on well before the 60's, even 40's. It's like he missed the entire 19th century. Even a quick glance at wikipedia tells us birth control rights were being sought after by women as a movement in 1877. That's not even taking the time to directly argue against the technology and mass-media angle. He also doesn't mention that women have more commonly had to go out and make money to survive in the last 50 years or so.

All around a pretty poor argument. The analogy at the beginning was just a huge waste of time.
John Holmes Motherfucker - 2014-11-07
There are bullshitters. And then, there are the true bullshit ARTISTS.

I think of this guy as the supervillain of trolls. I can't imagine anyone taking this shtick seriously. Even hardcore Gaters think he's full of shit, yet he makes me hate him so much I sort of admire him for it. I'm not surprised that his arguments can be easily disproven, but as always, I can only make it ten seconds.
ashtar. - 2014-11-07
TL;DR
It really annoys him that women get to pick who they have sex with.
John Holmes Motherfucker - 2014-11-07
Every MRA argument boils down to "How can you talk about male privelege when women get to pick who they have sex with?"

magnesium - 2014-11-07
Who dresses this guy?
Jet Bin Fever - 2014-11-07
He's truly a terrible person.
urbanelf - 2014-11-07
5 for the gunfight in the background.
misterbuns - 2014-11-07
Haha.

The dude sounds like Tim Gunn.
Register or login To Post a Comment







Video content copyright the respective clip/station owners please see hosting site for more information.
Privacy Statement