The Elite Daily's Misogynistic Screeds Are Probably the Worst Things You'll Read All Day

It’s not going to come as any great, paradigm-shifting shock that there exists on the Internet a balmy little swamp blog that unapologetic misogynists can crawl into for a nice muck bath while they compose their latest “How to be the quintessential Cassanova” manifesto, or reveal the mysterious, alchemical formula for “How to turn a ho into a housewife.” The Internet is full of such mind-numbing crap that a site as awful as Elite Daily should hardly matter because its offerings are either trollish, simple-minded, or both. Then again, Elite Daily should hardly exist at all.

A lot of people have written to us about the misogynistic fuckery plastered like chimpanzee feces all over Elite Daily, but a helpful tipster has finally done what I certainly didn’t have the patience or level-headedness to do: catalogue several of the site’s worst articles and most flagrantly stupid excerpts. These range from panegyrics on women who give blowjobs, to nostalgic reminiscences about the historically disputed Age of Infinite Harems:

If you delve back into our ancestry, centuries ago men with power were draped with a multitude of wives and concubines. The man with only one lady was a peasant. It’s only now, in the moralistic overtures of modern society that we are forced to abide by the monogamous ruin of relationships. It’s only now that we have ascetically denied ourselves one of life’s simplest pleasures: sex.

I love baroquely unnecessary adverbs as much as the next person, but it’s not everyday that you find someone willing to use turn turn “ascetic” into an ironic piece of ornamental language-use criticism. Besides, I’m pretty sure all those people not fucking like gangbusters back in “our ancestry” because the Catholic Church told them UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES would have a few grievances with such a liberal re-imagining of history.

The Elite Daily — or, if you prefer the abbreviation “ED” — professes to be “the voice of Generation Y,” which would be distressing if it were at all true. It isn’t, and ED’s “sex & dating” musings can be dismissed almost before they have a chance to outrage — they’re all that bad.

For instance, on the sepiatone reality of monogamy…

No one wants to eat chicken everyday. This is true when it comes to women as well. Unfortunately a woman’s value depreciates over time. She is getting older and not getting any tighter. Eventually the same girl gets old faster than stale bread, compelling men to cheat.

Women “compel” men to cheat just by existing! They wear down, like toasters or washing machines. Meanwhile, men…don’t wear down? Do they instead maybe age in reverse like Benjamin Button until we find ourselves sitting in a movie theater in front of a man so dazzled by Brad Pitt’s youthful face that he interrupts our motion picture show to exclaim for the third time, “He’s so young!!”? Then where do all the old guys complaining about lower back problems come from, Elite Daily, hmm? Answer that riddle!

Then there’s advice on how men can be more like their cinematic icon, Norman Bates:

[I love you.] These three words compose the most dangerous phrase in the English language, and should only be used in one instance…letting your mother know how much you appreciate her. As long as she loves you, you shouldn’t love another woman.

And, for all you amateur evolutionary psychologists out there, here’s a gem from the ED’s annals of pseudo-biology:

Men don’t even really know what love means, nor do we even know how to handle it properly, which is why none of us should pigeonhole ourselves by saying these words. We are predatory creatures constantly hunting and managing to fall in love every time a nice and tight coed walks by us and we decide to stare.

“Predator” is a predatory creature. So is a lion. A sexually predacious man is at best an ogling creep, and at worst a sex offender.