Are you man enough to wear a Hillary pantsuit?

Two years ago Perrie Samotin at Stylecaster complained in Urban Outfitters Offends Again With Sexist Hillary Clinton ‘Nutcracker’:

The supposedly funny toy—a brilliant women with serious political ambition, ha ha—is rocking a pantsuit, and features packaging with some messaging like “Is America ready for this nutcracker?” while informing shoppers the gag gift has “stainless steel thighs” and that it “cracks the toughest nuts.”

Translation: Hillary is a ball-buster who emasculate men—a damaging message to send to the world about the person who may become the first female President of the United States, no?

Fast forward two years, and Hillary has made the pantsuit her campaign icon.  Hillary has fully embraced the (visual) image of the ugly feminist.  But Hillary’s ugly feminism runs much deeper, which is why the campaign is compelled to dress a man in a pantsuit tee.

Formally connecting Hillary the candidate with:

  1. A visual reminder that feminist women are proud to be unattractive.
    and
  2. The emasculation of men.

is of course not helpful for the campaign.  This isn’t about winning voters, but about an ugly feminist compulsion.  But what do I know?  I’ve never walked a mile in her pantsuit.

Related:  How to be a hero.

This entry was posted in Feminist Territory Marking, Hillary Clinton, Social Justice Warriors, Ugly Feminists, You can't make this stuff up. Bookmark the permalink.

51 Responses to Are you man enough to wear a Hillary pantsuit?

  1. As soon as we get proof that she has had lesbian sex with Huma Abdin, the image of Hillary as radical feminist bitch will be complete.

  2. Pingback: Are you man enough to wear a Hillary pantsuit? – Manosphere.org

  3. Pingback: Are you man enough to wear a Hillary pantsuit? | The Alt-Right View

  4. Durandel Almiras says:

    At the least the models are consistent with the type of men who’d wear this garbage: SWPL losers who can’t do a single push up and cry when they see a .gif of an AR-15 on Tumblr.

  5. rugby11 says:

    Just doing the best I can…
    Whateverr isn’t in my control is less pondered.

  6. wow. Just checked out Hillary merch and she has a bumper sticker/ pin you can wear that says ¡Presidenta! and a poster of her modeled after a Mao poster. They aren’t even trying to seem American anymore.

  7. Lost Patrol says:

    Hey Dalrock,
    There’s a “I’m a hillary voter, add my name” advertisement imbedded in this article. She’s wearing a pantsuit. Is the site being subverted or just me?
    Wheels within wheels…

    [D: Heh. I assume you mean an ad coming from wordpress. It sounds like Hillary’s campaign is helping ensure this blog is hosted for free.]

  8. Daily Llama says:

    “a damaging message to send to the world about the person who may become the first female President of the United States, no?”

    “May become”? She already was 1993-2001!

  9. Hawk&Rock says:

    The back of the tee says:”pantsuit up”.

    So much fail…

    Prison jumper tee? Could work.

  10. Anon says:

    As soon as we get proof that she has had lesbian sex with Huma Abdin, the image of Hillary as radical feminist bitch will be complete.

    To be fair, Huma Abedin is (age adjusted) better looking than Monica Lewinski.

    As to cuckservatives who still assume that women are desperate to be rescued from Islam by cuckservative whiteknights, a deep examination of Huma Abedin will explain why ‘feminism’ and Islam are natural allies..

  11. Lost Patrol says:

    [D: Heh. I assume you mean an ad coming from wordpress. It sounds like Hillary’s campaign is helping ensure this blog is hosted for free.]

    Yeah, I doubt anyone is actively pursuing add satire/irony. Just some algorithm based on payment received. Funny though that she popped up in that article.

    On a more serious note – really appreciate the blog. I’m a new guy that learned about it from my 22 year old son. That’s how deep the hole is that I’m trying to climb out of. He’s getting an education that I did not know enough to provide. You and your readers are doing a community service. Keep up the good work.

  12. Anon says:

    I’m a new guy that learned about it from my 22 year old son.

    The best news is that he found out all of this early.

    What portion of his peers, would you say, are sufficiently red-pill vs. blue-pill? That tells us everything about where things are headed..

  13. Anon says:

    Michelle Obama tells men to ‘be better’.

    It must sting that despite being FLOTUS, she is still not attractive to men and cannot figure out why.

    Sure, men want advice from the luckiest human being on the planet (examine her life relative to her intelligence, looks, and personality, and name a luckier person) who does not recognize herself as such…

  14. Is the Mao shirt always part of the new pantsuit? Hillary has been dressing like a cross between a party member and those freaks in that old Star Trek episode “The Return of the Archons”, where the lawgivers keep asking Kirk et al “are you of the body?”

  15. Darwinian Arminian says:

    . . . But wait! The order form says it’s only available in unisex sizes. What if you’re trans? TRIGGERING!

  16. feeriker says:

    “May become”? She already was 1993-2001!

    For all anybody knows, she already IS president. The election charade, as pure theatrical formality, has almost certainly already been scripted.

  17. Anon says:

    For all anybody knows, she already IS president. The election charade, as pure theatrical formality, has almost certainly already been scripted.

    Indeed. Donald Trump does seem to specifically sabotage himself as soon as he gets high enough in the polls to wreck the script..

    The Orlando shooting could easily have put Trump in an unassailable position. Yet he chose to sabotage himself… He is the WWE foil designed to look like real opposition to Hillary. The GOPe were that too, and the contest between the two was only for who gets freebies after Hillary wins (as the Donald will demand more than the crumbs the GOPe cowards can be bought off with)…

  18. Pingback: Are you man enough to wear a Hillary pantsuit? | Reaction Times

  19. Lost Patrol says:

    Anon >>> What portion of his peers, would you say, are sufficiently red-pill vs. blue-pill? That tells us everything about where things are headed..

    Can’t really say with accuracy from my vantage point, but I will venture that I sense a broad awakening. Sites like Dalrock and others (they easily find them all) serve to get the ball rolling, and then they discuss these issues amongst themselves offline. When they are exposed to these ideas they understand the concepts right away, but each has unique environmental issues to overcome. Sometimes a guy just needs more miles on the odometer before it really sinks in on a personal level.

    Lads today do seem more cynical of females, and much more wary of them than I remember. Not sure if this is a positive development, but it may be the new survival reality.

  20. The Question says:

    Reminds me of that old 1990s joke about Bill throwing Hillary onto the Yankees baseball field after misunderstanding the pitcher when he asks Bill if he wants to throw the first “pitch.”

  21. Julian O'Dea says:

    Pantsuits look great. Without the pants.

  22. RichardP says:

    @ Lost Patrol: “Lads today do seem more cynical of females, and much more wary of them …”

    Hopefully, that statement translates to “Lads today are much more informed about females; as a result, they are much more realistic in what they expect from them”.

    No need to be wary of something that performs to expectations. That truth suggests that it is the expectations that make the difference. Sites like Dalrock’s and others are doing a great job of aggregating information for the uninformed to sift through in the process of moving their expectations to match the reality.

    Historical writing suggests that the men of history had a good understanding of what women could and could not deliver. It seems only within the last century or so that men started to expect things from women that women can’t/couldn’t deliver. Men used to talk to men and pass necessary truths along. It’s good to see that conversation restarted on the web, where men who need the information can find it.

  23. RichardP says:

    @ Julian: “Pantsuits look great. Without the pants.”

    On Hillary?

  24. They Call Me Tom says:

    This thread won’t be the same without this, because I bet the toy doesn’t park like a chihuahua:

  25. Oscar says:

    OT

    “… they peed all over her clothes and on her too… The little girl had no clothes on. The boys took them off… She was scared to death, crying ‘Grandma Jo, Grandma Jo, help me’.” ~ eye witness Jolene Payne

    “Liberal” Christians keep telling me that I don’t love my neighbor because I oppose importing millions of Muslims. This five-year-old girl is my neighbor. She’s one reason I oppose importing these savages.

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/06/21/idaho-police-iraqi-sudanese-immigrants-allegedly-rape/#ixzz4CGrIlsP2&f

  26. They Call Me Tom says:

    uggghhh…wrong link can you please replace with:

  27. Lost Patrol says:

    @RichardP: Hopefully, that statement translates to “Lads today are much more informed about females; as a result, they are much more realistic in what they expect from them”.

    Yeah, I like that better. I’m going with that.

  28. “It must sting that despite being FLOTUS, she is still not attractive to men and cannot figure out why.”

    Nah, the “First Lady” is a Shaved Transexual Wookie. Solipsism is a feature of the female mindset, not he male mindset regardless if he’s a tranny.

  29. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Anyone else notice that Hillary’s butt and thighs have ballooned these past few years? She now wears these big, baggy — they look more like moo-moos than jackets — that drape over and hide her butt.

  30. Spike says:

    One of he best ways Trump could put a dent in Hilary is to find that disgusting “Women are always the primary victims of war” speech that she gave and juxtapose it with pictures of maimed veterans. Would Hilary the ardent and outspoken feminist look after them?

  31. elmer says:

    It’s called a “tentsuit”, and it will be all the rage during the Clinton presidency.

  32. Damn Crackers says:

    Physiognomy is real.

  33. kfg says:

    I knew Jackie Kennedy, and Hillary is no Jackie Kennedy.

  34. PokeSalad says:

    Sure, men want advice from the luckiest human being on the planet (examine her life relative to her intelligence, looks, and personality, and name a luckier person) who does not recognize herself as such…
    The Ringo Starr of politics…..although in his defense, Ringo always freely admitted he lucked into the biggest band in the world.

  35. >>>>>Lads today do seem more cynical of females, and much more wary of them than I remember.

    MGTOW and the manosphere are finally having an impact. NEVER FORGET that men dying by the millions is a bad day at the office. NOTHING HAPPENS UNTIL WOMEN ARE INCONVENIENCED. Look at Hillary- women are the victims of war. Men die…but woman are…inconvenienced. THAT is what is important. THAT is when action starts to happen- when women are inconvenienced.

    MGTOW is even more of an inconvenience to women, it is an existential threat to most women. The marriage strike produces terror in even the most ardent feminist in her early 20’s. By her late 20’s that fear is breathtakingly real. So…in order for their to be “change” we must inconvenience the poor little entitled princesses. Men dying brutal deaths will not raise public consciousness. However when women start to whine…THAT is when shit happens. Whine bitches….whine and beg for mercy and THEN we can have a conversation about ending child support laws, presuming custody with the man for a ‘no-fault’ Frivorce, and abolishing the so called marital rape laws (which are now sacrosanct but it was not so for all of human history until the 1950’s).

    Marriage meant sex for all human history and the couple were expected to have sex. This didn’t mean that men brutally assaulted their wives and THAT was not the target. The target was ALL men. All men who might want sex with their wives. ALL men are now subject to the woman withdrawing affection and sex on a whim- and she is cheered and egged on by all of society. THAT is the crux of what needs to change before we end the marriage strike girls. Stop using sex to take control of 90% of marriages and we can have a discussion. Let us know.

    >>>>Julian: “Pantsuits look great. Without the pants……………….On Hillary?…………..that drape over and hide her butt.

    To hide her DEPENDS. All of those STD’s Bill gave her in the early hippy years must have taken a toll. The word is out that Hillary pees her pants every time she raises her voice. NO WONDER SHE IS SO HOSTILE! Without the Depends she would drip all the way through and ruin perfectly good podiums. Just imagine her Vagina stinging like crazy which is causing her to scream: “I am sick and tired of all these Republicans…like Donald Trump….I am outraged….we are not that kind of country…our worst impulses….ouch…motherfucker I need to change my pants and wipe everything down again….”

  36. mrteebs says:

    Notice the inability for Samotin (and millions more like her) to differentiate between dislike for a person (Hillary) and dislike for all females. The speed at which “mysogynist” is pulled from the utility belt and flung can be measured in picoseconds.

  37. Jim says:

    The speed at which “mysogynist” is pulled from the utility belt and flung can be measured in picoseconds.

    It’s just the generic response when you have none. Like the race card BS. It’s old, tired, boring, and cowardly.

  38. RichardP says:

    @bluepillprofessor: “Marriage meant sex for all human history … ALL men are now subject to the woman withdrawing affection and sex on a whim … Stop using sex to take control of 90% of marriages …

    Using sex as a weapon has been around for a while. It is not a modern invention.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysistrata
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_strike

  39. The Lysistrata story was a comedy. To an ancient audience, the idea of a woman denying sex to her husband was hilariously implausible.

  40. Bill Clinton must be a self-loathing masochist to marry a woman like Hillary Rodham. Marrying a Feminist is like frying bacon naked. It makes no sense for a man to do that to himself.

  41. feeriker says:

    Bill Clinton must be a self-loathing masochist to marry a woman like Hillary Rodham

    It’s always been a political and business match, never a romantic one. That’s obvious from Bill’s behavior. I’m still trying to figure out how Bill could possibly have forced himself to do what was required to create Chelsea (Blackout drunk? Hypnosis? Artificial insemination?).

  42. They Call Me Tom says:

    With regards to the extra eggplanting of Hillary’s figure the last two years… I tend to be convinced that she’s got serious health issues going on, she never was a petite woman… but her midsection and thighs appear to be three times thicker than the last time she was running for president. I wouldn’t be surprised if the only thing keeping her going is her lust for power, and it seeming to be almost within her grasp. If she loses the election, I suspect she’ll shuffle of the mortal coil before the next election comes to pass.

  43. Tom C says:

    If you think men wearing pantsuits is bad, wait until we start seeing them walking around in yoga pants.

  44. PokeSalad says:

    I’m still trying to figure out how Bill could possibly have forced himself to do what was required to create Chelsea (Blackout drunk? Hypnosis? Artificial insemination?).

    Vincent Foster.

  45. BubbaCluck says:

    I’ve heard Web Hubbell. There is a resemblance.

  46. cynthia says:

    @mrteebs

    Notice the inability for Samotin (and millions more like her) to differentiate between dislike for a person (Hillary) and dislike for all females

    It’s intentional, selfish obfuscation. Sure there are probably some women out there who buy into this idea that disliking one woman means hating them all, but for most, this is a tactic. Women are far more group-focused than men, and when we want to shame each other into compliance, we usually do it by invoking the group. “Nobody else is doing this” or “we all think that, so why don’t you?” That sort of thing. There’s a basic human need to be part of a larger social group. Women take it a lot further than men though, where morality becomes defined by the group and personal responsibility is diminished.

    Personally, I suspect this has a lot to do with why feminism happened in the first place (ugly women couldn’t stand the discomfort of being outside the group, so they changed the group), and how it’s survived this long (despite it making us miserable, it’s what all the other women believe in so one has to conform).

    In this instance however, it’s being used in its more defensive form. The group shields you from personal responsibility, as morality is deferred from the individual to the collective. Following group morality mean you’re being moral, even if what you’re doing is objectively wrong. You have ownership within the group, as well as a sense of belonging. Both are fiercely protected on behalf of everyone. So, an attack on a woman isn’t merely an attack on her, but all the women who in her same extended social group.

    In this case, that social group is liberal women in general. Attacking Hillary is a not-so-subtle message to the rest of the group that because they support her and believe in her, if she’s doing something wrong or not good enough or just a bitch, that applies to them as well. Liberal women tend to appropriate all of us – they think they speak for us all – so pretending this criticism is aimed at us all is logical, if not at all rational.

    It’s also a warning to all other women who might not be in the Hillary camp. Criticize her and you’re out in the cold. Men might find this shit obnoxious and idiotic, but it can be really intimidating for your average woman.

  47. Anonymous Reader says:

    If you think men wearing pantsuits is bad, wait until we start seeing them walking around in yoga pants.

    I was in San Francisco about a year ago. It’s already happening there. Fortunately even there it’s a minority.

  48. Robert says:

    Thanks Dalrock for another great article.

    I turned on the radio for the first time in a while. I can’t hardly stand the music (who knew at 37 I’d feel 77) and even more importantly the messages in the music. Here are the latest lyric’s the country music hit by Florida Georgia Line. Can we get any more screwed up in how we reverent (or don’t) the Lord and view women? We need some fall on our face repentence.

    [D: Extended quote of copyrighted content removed. See here for lyrics.

    This is truly disturbing, but unfortunately should not be surprising. Thanks for the heads up, and welcome.]

  49. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    If we’re voting for Most Pedestalizing Blue Pill Lyrics, I nominate Air Supply’s “Making Love Out Of Nothing At All”: http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/airsupply/makingloveoutofnothingatall.html

    This is an especially choice excerpt:

    But I’m never gonna make it without you,
    Do you really want to see me crawl?

  50. Song lyrics that offend?

    Out of the blue, last evening after a nice dinner marking 26 years of marriage we hear on the radio Kevin Cronin crowing “Tough Guys” for REO Speedwagon. If you recall it chronicles the change a woman undergoes as first she loves the tough rough guys and then later she brings them to heel.

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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s