Evangelist Matt Pitt’s misogynist stand-up act

Today I Learned: women are easily manipulable via chocolate. Doesn’t matter how much pain they’re in, you can cure them with chocolate.

Extrapolating from this, it doesn’t matter if they’re allergic to chocolate, you can cure them with chocolate. It probably also doesn’t matter if they’re seriously pissed off at you because you’re being a complete douche nozzle to them, just give ’em chocolate to shut their gobs. And they’ll eat it like Cthulhu slurping up humanity. So next time your pet woman is in one of “those states”, give her chocolate to shut the sweaty beast up, amirite?

But I’m mostly posting this because, for probably the first time ever, when scrolling down to the Bottom Half of the Internet(tm), I was… pleasantly surprised. Despite the video having ~6600 views, having been posted on August 17th, there were exactly six comments all posted within the last two days.

So why was he arrested in May for impersonating a police officer? Does that make women hot too?

Marisa Young 2 hours ago

A convicted criminal is probably not the right kind of person to get personal advice from.

JeffDM 3 hours ago

Oh yeah, it’s hilarious all right. Let’s gather together every stupid stereotype about women in one place and pretend we’re honoring women when we’re really making fun of them! And this guy is a preacher. Is it any wonder that more and more folks are embracing atheism these days? Wow.

Marisa Young 5 hours ago

What a douchelord.

TheArchieSpeck 5 hours ago 2

This bro is a preacher? What a joke.

WobulTterrag 5 hours ago 2

Merica’

Pampl3Moos3 2 days ago

Via Christian Nightmares.

Evangelist Matt Pitt’s misogynist stand-up act

58 thoughts on “Evangelist Matt Pitt’s misogynist stand-up act

  1. 52

    Carlie, I was not lying..that is not me. I simply typed into Google “misogyny Oxford Dictionary” and Google took me to the web page ‘Home of the Oxford Dictionary’ – I got the definition from there. You can easily try this yourself. No I have not gone into the on line OED because you need to register and be a member of a library (which I am) but I am not sure if that library needs to be in the USA or Britain..I don’t know, I will investigate joining OED online in the near future. I have (in an earlier post) accepted that the definition of ‘misogyny’ has been ‘expanded’ by Oxford Dictionary in 2002 and in my own country (Australia) our national reference dictionary ‘caught up’ with Oxford Dictionary only earlier this year. I am not in the habit of willingly lying in any situation (especially in an on line forum) to try and win an argument. And I am also willing to concede and offer a ‘bravo’ to my adversay if I am proven wrong on any point.

  2. 53

    “How funny how reasonable this sounds when you leave out some quite important bits like:
    Does he portray women like beasts who just feed on chocolate? Yes.
    Does he portray women like whatever the problem is, the solution is chocolate because they’re so simple minded? Yes.
    Does that lead to the impression that women aren’t really people but some sort of strange animal? Yes.”

    Funny how the human mind works. I would answer “no” where you have answerd “yes” to all of the above.
    Where do you pluck such words from..like: “beast”? “simple minded”? “strange animal”? These sort of descriptions that you have conjured up say more about YOU and your prejudices than the so called comedian in question.

  3. 54

    “And now we come to the classical “It’s science, therefore it can’t be sexist” defense. Science has proven that women are just dumb beasts who will be distracted by a piece of chocolate like a dog by a steak! He’s just telling the truth! You dogmatic feminists who simply refuse to accept all the superior science that simply proves that you’re inferior with bad impulse control”.

    This paragraph above does not deserve a response so I will not give it one…apart from asking other readers to look at these words above…and ask “would you reply to this!?”

  4. 55

    “So, now I’m waiting for your explenation why Chris Brown also isn’t misogynist in beating up Rhianna, probably because he sent her chocolates afterwards”.

    I am happy to debate with people who make valid points and bring evidence ‘to the table’ but this comment above! You must really be ‘clutching at straws’ and really struggling to defend your position if you need to employ this sort of tactic : bringing up some ‘irrelevant’ happening which you claim has some connection with chocolate and then try and tie it to this comedy sketch? If Chris Brown hit Rhianna ( and I must admit I am not a fan of either artist but I do remember hearing something about this assault) then he is a bad man and deserves to be tried and suffer the sentence brought down on him (maybe this has already happened). But what has Chris Brown’s assult on a woman got to do with Matt Pitt? Are you saying the chocolate? Unbelievable.
    By the way..to call Chris Brown a ‘misogynist’ because he hit a woman is a false accusation. If Chris Brown had hit a man would he automatically be a ‘misandrist’? I don’t think so. Chris Brown appears to be a violent man and he should not hit men or women. You reinforce my oppinion that the ‘M’ word is used far too freely.

  5. 56

    Funny how the human mind works. I would answer “no” where you have answerd “yes” to all of the above.
    Where do you pluck such words from..like: “beast”? “simple minded”? “strange animal”? These sort of descriptions that you have conjured up say more about YOU and your prejudices than the so called comedian in question.

    Hmm, I’m wondering, did you watch the thing?
    And, where you live, do people normally eat by just stuffing food into their mouth, totally dropping everything else, like the conversation?
    Where you live, do people actually forget about heavy pain because they’re given a peice of chocolate?
    Do you think that portrayal is that of a normal person who eats a piece of chocolate?
    Does it remind you of the behaviour of any femal acquaintance you have or of a dog digging into a bowl of dogfood?

    This paragraph above does not deserve a response so I will not give it one…apart from asking other readers to look at these words above…and ask “would you reply to this!?”

    Shorter mofa: I’m running out of arguments, which is no surprise because I hardly ever had one. Therefore I’ll act all haughty and superior and spend my time at saying how this is not worth my time.

    I am happy to debate with people who make valid points and bring evidence ‘to the table’ but this comment above! You must really be ‘clutching at straws’ and really struggling to defend your position if you need to employ this sort of tactic : bringing up some ‘irrelevant’ happening which you claim has some connection with chocolate and then try and tie it to this comedy sketch?

    Whait, is this the person who insisted over several posts that we all answer his question about Tim Minchin? You’re funny!

  6. 57

    “Hmm, I’m wondering, did you watch the thing?
    And, where you live, do people normally eat by just stuffing food into their mouth, totally dropping everything else, like the conversation?
    Where you live, do people actually forget about heavy pain because they’re given a peice of chocolate?
    Do you think that portrayal is that of a normal person who eats a piece of chocolate?
    Does it remind you of the behaviour of any femal acquaintance you have or of a dog digging into a bowl of dogfood?”

    Giliell, if Matt Pitt was describing what ACTUALLY happened the other week, you might have a case…but this not a realistic scenario…it is a comedy sketch! (again I confirm that in my opinion it is poor comedy)

    Again, like others you start making analogies to things like dogs, bowls of dog food etc. None of this stuff was in the video…it is coming out of your head…so YOU stop comparing women to dogs please!

  7. 58

    Again, like others you start making analogies to things like dogs, bowls of dog food etc. None of this stuff was in the video…it is coming out of your head…so YOU stop comparing women to dogs please!

    Muahh´-ha-ha-ha
    Yeah, I know, we’re the real sexists, seeing sexism everywhere.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *