Top Definition man Dear editor, this entry does not violate any of the rules on the editor homepage. "Rule 3. Publish opinions. Don't reject an entry just because it's opinionated. Opinions are useful to readers unfamiliar with a topic. Don't reject an entry because you disagree or are offended. Don't reject an entry because you think it's inaccurate." It is not sexist as it is a view which can be held by any gender, does not generalise entire groups and does not mention any approval or promotion of discrimination. "Rule 2 Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it." So act with a little integrity, for once.



90% are useless, worthless arseholes who vote up and post misogynistic definitions. when they're not doing that they're probably whining their egocentric hearts out that people are complaining about their stupid misogynistic arses whilst desperately trying to distance themselves from that fact. despite this they'll often either a) not vote down male chauvinism and only recognise sexism exists when (shock, horror!) it's directed at them (useless, worthless arsehole) or b) laugh at misogyny and casual sexism and vote it up. c) the absolute rarity on urbandictionary: feminist male who votes down chauvinistic, masculist sociopathy and who doesn't expect people to simply accept casual chauvinism and irrational prejudice because some other oblivious, privileged arsehole who only empathises with their own interests (fuck you) finds it amusing. "i laughed my head off at the notion of the delusional man who claimed UD was not a repository of the racist, sexist sentiments of antisocial, teenage white heterosexual males, they need to find a clue. off the top of my head: rape (15 out of 20 pages = misogynistic bullshit), domestic violence, domestic abuse, sexual harassment, patriarchy, women's rights, feminist (5 of 11), feminazi (5 of 8), surprise sex, faggot, dyke, mangina, slut, slut shaming, whore, bitch, cunt, cum dumpster, woman (16 of 20 - chauvinistic bullshit), women (8 of 10), female brain, female logic, 50 facts about women... cba to write any more, you only need to open your oblivious eyes to see what is evident, if you've been an editor you'll also know that almost every other definition that's submitted is a made up sexist term where the female is sexually degraded anyway or something racist/homophobic... which often still gets accepted, DESPITE it being against rule 2 on the editor homepage which states "2. Reject racist and sexist entries. Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it."(pissed off pirate, alabama hot pocket, red sock, anybody?), but what do you expect when 90% of the editors themselves are other egotistical antisocial, teenage white heterosexual males?" by a censored, inconvenient truth May 11, 2011

Buy a man mug!

2 man Dear editor, this entry does not violate any of the rules on the editor homepage. "Rule 3. Publish opinions. Don't reject an entry just because it's opinionated. Opinions are useful to readers unfamiliar with a topic. Don't reject an entry because you disagree or are offended. Don't reject an entry because you think it's inaccurate." It is not sexist as it is a view which can be held by any gender, does not generalise entire groups and does not mention any approval or promotion of discrimination. "Rule 2 Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it." So act with a little integrity, for once.



90% are useless, worthless arseholes who vote up and post misogynistic definitions. when they're not doing that they're probably whining their egocentric hearts out that people are complaining about their stupid misogynistic arses whilst desperately trying to distance themselves from that fact. despite this they'll often either a) not vote down male chauvinism and only recognise sexism exists when (shock, horror!) it's directed at them (useless, worthless arsehole) or b) laugh at misogyny and casual sexism and vote it up. c) the absolute rarity on urbandictionary: feminist male who votes down chauvinistic, masculist sociopathy and who doesn't expect people to simply accept casual chauvinism and irrational prejudice because some other oblivious, privileged arsehole who only empathises with their own interests (fuck you) finds it amusing. "i laughed my head off at the notion of the delusional man who claimed UD was not a repository of the racist, sexist sentiments of antisocial, teenage white heterosexual males, they need to find a clue. off the top of my head: rape (15 out of 20 pages = misogynistic bullshit), domestic violence, domestic abuse, sexual harassment, patriarchy, women's rights, feminist (5 of 11), feminazi (5 of 8), surprise sex, faggot, dyke, mangina, slut, slut shaming, whore, bitch, cunt, cum dumpster, woman (16 of 20 - chauvinistic bullshit), women (8 of 10), female brain, female logic, 50 facts about women... cba to write any more, you only need to open your oblivious eyes to see what is evident, if you've been an editor you'll also know that almost every other definition that's submitted is a made up sexist term where the female is sexually degraded anyway or something racist/homophobic... which often still gets accepted, DESPITE it being against rule 2 on the editor homepage which states "2. Reject racist and sexist entries. Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it."(pissed off pirate, alabama hot pocket, red sock, anybody?), but what do you expect when 90% of the editors themselves are other egotistical antisocial, teenage white heterosexual males?" by a censored, inconvenient truth May 11, 2011

Buy a man mug!

3 man Dear editor, this entry does not violate any of the rules on the editor homepage. "Rule 3. Publish opinions. Don't reject an entry just because it's opinionated. Opinions are useful to readers unfamiliar with a topic. Don't reject an entry because you disagree or are offended. Don't reject an entry because you think it's inaccurate." It is not sexist as it is a view which can be held by any gender, does not generalise entire groups and does not mention any approval or promotion of discrimination. "Rule 2 Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it." So act with a little integrity, for once.



90% are useless, worthless arseholes who vote up and post misogynistic definitions. when they're not doing that they're probably whining their egocentric hearts out that people are complaining about their stupid misogynistic arses whilst desperately trying to distance themselves from that fact. despite this they'll often either a) not vote down male chauvinism and only recognise sexism exists when (shock, horror!) it's directed at them (useless, worthless arsehole) or b) laugh at misogyny and casual sexism and vote it up. c) the absolute rarity on urbandictionary: feminist male who votes down chauvinistic, masculist sociopathy and who doesn't expect people to simply accept casual chauvinism and irrational prejudice because some other oblivious, privileged arsehole who only empathises with their own interests (fuck you) finds it amusing. "i laughed my head off at the notion of the delusional man who claimed UD was not a repository of the racist, sexist sentiments of antisocial, teenage white heterosexual males, they need to find a clue. off the top of my head: rape (15 out of 20 pages = misogynistic bullshit), domestic violence, domestic abuse, sexual harassment, patriarchy, women's rights, feminist (5 of 11), feminazi (5 of 8), surprise sex, faggot, dyke, mangina, slut, slut shaming, whore, bitch, cunt, cum dumpster, woman (16 of 20 - chauvinistic bullshit), women (8 of 10), female brain, female logic, 50 facts about women... cba to write any more, you only need to open your oblivious eyes to see what is evident, if you've been an editor you'll also know that almost every other definition that's submitted is a made up sexist term where the female is sexually degraded anyway or something racist/homophobic... which often still gets accepted, DESPITE it being against rule 2 on the editor homepage which states "2. Reject racist and sexist entries. Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it."(pissed off pirate, alabama hot pocket, red sock, anybody?), but what do you expect when 90% of the editors themselves are other egotistical antisocial, teenage white heterosexual males?" by a censored, inconvenient truth May 11, 2011

Buy a man mug!

4 man Dear editor, this entry does not violate any of the rules on the editor homepage. "Rule 3. Publish opinions. Don't reject an entry just because it's opinionated. Opinions are useful to readers unfamiliar with a topic. Don't reject an entry because you disagree or are offended. Don't reject an entry because you think it's inaccurate." It is not sexist as it is a view which can be held by any gender, does not generalise entire groups and does not mention any approval or promotion of discrimination. "Rule 2 Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it." So act with a little integrity, for once.



90% are useless, worthless arseholes who vote up and post misogynistic definitions. when they're not doing that they're probably whining their egocentric hearts out that people are complaining about their stupid misogynistic arses whilst desperately trying to distance themselves from that fact. despite this they'll often either a) not vote down male chauvinism and only recognise sexism exists when (shock, horror!) it's directed at them (useless, worthless arsehole) or b) laugh at misogyny and casual sexism and vote it up. c) the absolute rarity on urbandictionary: feminist male who votes down chauvinistic, masculist sociopathy and who doesn't expect people to simply accept casual chauvinism and irrational prejudice because some other oblivious, privileged arsehole who only empathises with their own interests (fuck you) finds it amusing. "i laughed my head off at the notion of the delusional man who claimed UD was not a repository of the racist, sexist sentiments of antisocial, teenage white heterosexual males, they need to find a clue. off the top of my head: rape (15 out of 20 pages = misogynistic bullshit), domestic violence, domestic abuse, sexual harassment, patriarchy, women's rights, feminist (5 of 11), feminazi (5 of 8), surprise sex, faggot, dyke, mangina, slut, slut shaming, whore, bitch, cunt, cum dumpster, woman (16 of 20 - chauvinistic bullshit), women (8 of 10), female brain, female logic, 50 facts about women... cba to write any more, you only need to open your oblivious eyes to see what is evident, if you've been an editor you'll also know that almost every other definition that's submitted is a made up sexist term where the female is sexually degraded anyway or something racist/homophobic... which often still gets accepted, DESPITE it being against rule 2 on the editor homepage which states "2. Reject racist and sexist entries. Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it."(pissed off pirate, alabama hot pocket, red sock, anybody?), but what do you expect when 90% of the editors themselves are other egotistical antisocial, teenage white heterosexual males?" by a censored, inconvenient truth May 11, 2011

Buy a man mug!

5 man Dear editor, this entry does not violate any of the rules on the editor homepage. "Rule 3. Publish opinions. Don't reject an entry just because it's opinionated. Opinions are useful to readers unfamiliar with a topic. Don't reject an entry because you disagree or are offended. Don't reject an entry because you think it's inaccurate." It is not sexist as it is a view which can be held by any gender, does not generalise entire groups and does not mention any approval or promotion of discrimination. "Rule 2 Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it." So act with a little integrity, for once.



90% are useless, worthless arseholes who vote up and post misogynistic definitions. when they're not doing that they're probably whining their egocentric hearts out that people are complaining about their stupid misogynistic arses whilst desperately trying to distance themselves from that fact. despite this they'll often either a) not vote down male chauvinism and only recognise sexism exists when (shock, horror!) it's directed at them (useless, worthless arsehole) or b) laugh at misogyny and casual sexism and vote it up. c) the absolute rarity on urbandictionary: feminist male who votes down chauvinistic, masculist sociopathy and who doesn't expect people to simply accept casual chauvinism and irrational prejudice because some other oblivious, privileged arsehole who only empathises with their own interests (fuck you) finds it amusing. "i laughed my head off at the notion of the delusional man who claimed UD was not a repository of the racist, sexist sentiments of antisocial, teenage white heterosexual males, they need to find a clue. off the top of my head: rape (15 out of 20 pages = misogynistic bullshit), domestic violence, domestic abuse, sexual harassment, patriarchy, women's rights, feminist (5 of 11), feminazi (5 of 8), surprise sex, faggot, dyke, mangina, slut, slut shaming, whore, bitch, cunt, cum dumpster, woman (16 of 20 - chauvinistic bullshit), women (8 of 10), female brain, female logic, 50 facts about women... cba to write any more, you only need to open your oblivious eyes to see what is evident, if you've been an editor you'll also know that almost every other definition that's submitted is a made up sexist term where the female is sexually degraded anyway or something racist/homophobic... which often still gets accepted, DESPITE it being against rule 2 on the editor homepage which states "2. Reject racist and sexist entries. Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it."(pissed off pirate, alabama hot pocket, red sock, anybody?), but what do you expect when 90% of the editors themselves are other egotistical antisocial, teenage white heterosexual males?" by a censored, inconvenient truth May 11, 2011

Buy a man mug!

6 man Dear editor, this entry does not violate any of the rules on the editor homepage. "Rule 3. Publish opinions. Don't reject an entry just because it's opinionated. Opinions are useful to readers unfamiliar with a topic. Don't reject an entry because you disagree or are offended. Don't reject an entry because you think it's inaccurate." It is not sexist as it is a view which can be held by any gender, does not generalise entire groups and does not mention any approval or promotion of discrimination. "Rule 2 Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it." So act with a little integrity, for once.



90% are useless, worthless arseholes who vote up and post misogynistic definitions. when they're not doing that they're probably whining their egocentric hearts out that people are complaining about their stupid misogynistic arses whilst desperately trying to distance themselves from that fact. despite this they'll often either a) not vote down male chauvinism and only recognise sexism exists when (shock, horror!) it's directed at them (useless, worthless arsehole) or b) laugh at misogyny and casual sexism and vote it up. c) the absolute rarity on urbandictionary: feminist male who votes down chauvinistic, masculist sociopathy and who doesn't expect people to simply accept casual chauvinism and irrational prejudice because some other oblivious, privileged arsehole who only empathises with their own interests (fuck you) finds it amusing. "i laughed my head off at the notion of the delusional man who claimed UD was not a repository of the racist, sexist sentiments of antisocial, teenage white heterosexual males, they need to find a clue. off the top of my head: rape (15 out of 20 pages = misogynistic bullshit), domestic violence, domestic abuse, sexual harassment, patriarchy, women's rights, feminist (5 of 11), feminazi (5 of 8), surprise sex, faggot, dyke, mangina, slut, slut shaming, whore, bitch, cunt, cum dumpster, woman (16 of 20 - chauvinistic bullshit), women (8 of 10), female brain, female logic, 50 facts about women... cba to write any more, you only need to open your oblivious eyes to see what is evident, if you've been an editor you'll also know that almost every other definition that's submitted is a made up sexist term where the female is sexually degraded anyway or something racist/homophobic... which often still gets accepted, DESPITE it being against rule 2 on the editor homepage which states "2. Reject racist and sexist entries. Entries can document discrimination but not endorse it."(pissed off pirate, alabama hot pocket, red sock, anybody?), but what do you expect when 90% of the editors themselves are other egotistical antisocial, teenage white heterosexual males?" by a censored, inconvenient truth May 11, 2011

Buy a man mug!