Feminism or death?
Here’s the entirety of a recent post by an MRA who calls himself Snark:
Uh, dude, I think you’ve confused “feminists” with “Daleks.”
Our new friend Fidelbogen thought this was such a brilliant idea he devoted a post to it himself, declaring:
Such economy, such concision. …
Really now, we wouldn’t go far wrong to make our rhetoric revolve around this above all, and very little more. The saying is deceptively simple, for it goes deep and reaches into many corners.
It puts them on the spot, and nails them there.
I knew Fidelbogen was a bit of a pompous doofus, but this is a whole new level of stupidity for him. I don’t even know what to say about something this idiotic.
Also, check out the comments to Snark’s piece. There’s something about potatoes you kind of have to see to believe.
Posted on September 22, 2011, in antifeminism, idiocy, MRA, violence against men/women. Bookmark the permalink. 1,516 Comments.
Hey, don’t ignore the benefits of intersectionality. I think we can make important inroads to the Dalek community.
Interesting that the comments all run along the lines of, “I will do violent things to a feminist until she gives in” as opposed to, “I am an adult who has the ability to have a normal conversation with a woman over an issue of disagreement.”
Also, how is that question in any way a ‘gotcha’ type question? Of course I recognize the rights to existence of non-feminists. I FEEL SO PUT ON THE SPOT NOW.
I don’t agree with the stance of people like this, but unlike them, I’m not going to threaten them with violence or commit violence against them until they’re in so much pain that they’ll agree with me to get me to stop. That’s called torture.
Scarecrow said he was joking, and I know that his boiled potato tennis ball torture device would never happen, but it really freaks me out that someone would ever dream up such an idea. In his next comment he calls women “rat faced, smelly vermin”. Everything he says sounds very scary.
…wh… what’s it supposed to lead in to?
Unless he seriously expects the conversation to go: “No.” “A-HA!”
Is there a series of follow-up questions that’s supposed to lead to a clever trap, or something? (Like when Ray Comfort ask if people have ever stolen anything, and takes a “yes” as an admission that they’re completely evil.)
They just looooove to “reveal” feminists for the hypocrites they are by spouting nonsense, then not getting replies from some magical mythical feminist overlord.
What I want – nay, DEMAND – to know is, just where feminists come down on the issue of allowing the post-living to exist?
Hey, don’t ignore the benefits of intersectionality. I think we can make important inroads to the Dalek community.
because that worked out so well for dalek sec…
Don’t worry zombie rotten mcdonald, I think we should let zombie humans exist, even the ones who keep eating our brains. I draw the line, though, at radioactive zombears, because they’re so damn mean.
Man, I’d totally forgotten about that Scarecrow guy, so this update is kind of nice, like reading the class notes in the University of Assholes alumni magazine. Boiled potatoes. Huh.
Why are they so afraid of being called misogynists? Even saying that is was TOTALLY A JOKE YOU GUYS doesn’t make it less misogynist.
They kind of understand that being called a misogynist is a bad thing, but they don’t understand that they aren’t being called misogynists to insult them, but because they are, in fact, advocating misogyny.
If they think it’s bad to be a misogynist, why don’t they just stop being misogynists?
It just doesn’t make any sense.
Anyway, Daleks still rock!
(totes the hymn of feminism!)
Yes.
*Sips tea*
zombie rotten mcdonald- dude, we’re cool.
I’m going to be a bit more generous than this idea likely deserves and try to turn it into not-crazy. Is it at all possible that this dude Snark believes that feminists will try to convert non-feminists into believing in the legitimacy of feminism?
This would not be a peculiarity of feminism, though. Classical liberals try to convince everyone to believe in classical liberalism. They are working for a world where no one denies the truth of classical liberalism. Therefore (I guess), they deny the right to exist of people who are not classical liberals.
I don’t see a particular problem with a world where there are only feminists. Getting there through some kind of final solution would be a bad idea, but if we got there through rational argument and through persuasion, there is no problem.
Is that what Fidelbogen and Snark are talking about? That dastardly feminists are trying to convince them using reasonable arguments to stop being wrong? Aren’t the MRAs trying to convince people as well?
I’d also like to point out that, as someone who is not an MRA, I don’t particularly care if Fidelbogen and Snark recognize my right to exist. I’m going to go on existing in either case, so the question is entirely moot.
why BOILED potatoes?
Um… Yes.
Any follow-up questions?
(I think everyone should be a feminist, but only in the sense I think everyone should learn about the scientific method– not in the Dalek sense.)
Of course non-feminists exist, entire MRA community, meet Michelle Bachmann. Michelle Bachmann, meet the MRA community.
I would introduce them to Phyllis Schafly but I do not want them to start sobbing and sucking their thumbs at their entire world order being destroyed.
EXTERMINATE EXTERMINATE EXTERMINATE
@Holly: Reading the non-potato related comment, it really seems like the idea of convincing MRAs to adopt feminism is the sense that is meant here.
So… that’s a little odd. It seems as if the entire process of rational debate (through which a person might change his or her mind) is offensive to these people.
“Well, we’re out of feminism! We only had three bits, we weren’t expecting such a rush.”
Leo – Yeah, they don’t seem to get nuances like “I want you to change your mind, but I don’t want it so much that I’m going to hurt you or anything if you don’t.”
It’s possible to disagree with, even dislike, someone, and still not potato-torture dislike them.
…you’re supposed to learn that in kindergarten.
if non-feminists didn’t exist, who would troll Manboobz?
That seems more like the claim is “Feminists will exterminate everyone who disagrees with them” to my eyes, Leo.
Yes. That cover it?
That potato thing was creepy, joke or not.
I think that’s (once again) projecting from their side.
Why do “jokes” like the potato thing never have a punchline?
…and why do they always sound eerily masturbatory?
@Rutee — You seem to be right. As Holly says, they seem to make little distinction between disagreement and blood-lust. My reason for picking up on it is the peculiar ‘right to exist’ rather than ‘right to live’ language. It may be plain old illiteracy, but typically someone who is afraid of being exterminated asserts his or her right to life. I am likely being enormously over-pedantic, aren’t I?
Oh well, I’m accustomed to this problem. Go about your business in peace.
@Holly–they’re never funny because there’s too much real (however misguided) anger behind them.
One more comment for the moment–can you imagine the ruckus MRAs would raise if any feminist, anywhere, made anything like the potato torture comment? We’d be hearing about it well into the 2030s.
(At least it would add some variety. That one “Dear Men” essay and that handful of Andrea Dworkin quotes are wearing awfully threadbare.)
But the fact that an MRA said something violent just means that it’s Thursday.
Yes, as a feminist, I recognize the right to existence of people who are not feminists. I do not understand how stating that puts me on the spot, nor how that statement nails me to that spot. I am at a loss.
Maybe not as much as you think. For a movement that claims we want to actually genocide- sorry, gendercide, them they don’t really act like a movement worried about government intervention. I mean right now every mosque that gets a violent whacko reports that guy to the FBI. They don’t shelter him, they chuck him out. Kind of puts the lie to the idea of a feminist-dominated government that suppresses disagreement. As to actual black helicopters coming to exterminate, well… their shit is publically viewable. If they were worried, it wouldn’t be, and would be on very secure servers likely located somewhere else entirely. Actual civil rights movements in the west are very open, yes, but the ones that actually fear imprisonment aren’t typically in the west, and are not so much so.
So yeah, why would this guy talk about hte right to life? He doesn’t think dying in the service of the MRM is a possibility.
Fatman, the real question is does that statement hit the nail on the button? XD
I think Herr Snark forgot to put “straw” before “feminists”. Reading Snark’s blog, it is evident that he and Saint Fidelbogenus are referring to Straw Feminists, not real feminists. It is a peculiarity of Straw Persons in general that they are remarkably easy to put on the spot. Pretty much wherever you want to put them, really.
Do non-feminists have the right to exist?
Yes.
Does the MRA extend the same courtesy to feminists?
Let’s ask Meller.
(do I even want to know about this potato thing?)
He is basically saying he would pelt a woman with hot potatoes until she recants feminism. Launched from a tennis ball gun.
Because MRAs are so peaceful and reasonable.
While she is tied up, of course.
I see. So, we can add sadistic to the list of traits the MRM doesn’t disapprove of.
I think sadism is a plus in MRA circles.
Well, non consensual sadism really.
uh he said he was just kidding. why are you taking him so seriously just because he put time into imagining an complicated and over-the-top device for torturing his opponents into agreeing with him.
gosh, its like a guy cant even share his petulant revenge fantasies anymore.
I’ve got to hand it to the potato guy: it’s not every day I come across a sexual fetish that i have never heard of before. Pelting someone with hot boiled potatoes fired from tennis ball shooting machine is at least original…
I know, Sharculese, I just lighten up and enjoy the high-speed hot potato torture!
^should
it’s not every day I come across a sexual fetish that i have never heard of before
And they call US the degenerates…
I don’t know. Fidelbogen’s foot-fetishy torture seems like it would be a lot easier to implement.
I keep trying to figure out who Fidelbogen reminds me of with his laughably trying-waaaay-too-hard-to-be-pretentious buffoonery. Then it dawned on me. He’s totally Ignatius from the book “A Confederacy of Dunces”.
If der are no moor anti-feemeemeests ver vould Hy get my new hat vrom?
A Confederacy of Dunces is the story of what people you meet on the Internet did before the Internet. I love that book.
Yes. Some of my best friends aren’t feminists :P
Seriously, the only people who would look at a question like this an say “Ooooh, that will put them on the spot!” are the kind of people who feel put on the spot when asked if they disagree with violence and murder.
“Seriously, the only people who would look at a question like this an say “Ooooh, that will put them on the spot!” are the kind of people who feel put on the spot when asked if they disagree with violence and murder.”
Funny thing is, when someone with violent rhetoric similar to MRAs (if they’re MRAs themselves) does a violent act, THAT question is what they refuse to answer directly.
“I don’t even know what to say about something this idiotic.”
That’s because you can’t think of anything to say.
No-one has commented on the latest MRA “triumph”. Over at avoiceformen’s website, they are gloriously announcing the media storm about their register-her.com website.
Just for jolly, I went to Google news and typed in “register-her.com”. To make sure I wasn’t missing anything, I also typed in “Paul Elam” and “avoiceformen”.
I’d urge all manboobz readers to do the same – it will brighten up your day!
Compare and contrast this with the reaction on AVFM’s comments section.
Truly, the MRM is the comedic gift that keeps on giving.
Extra potatoes all round!
Lovely website. They quote the fictitious “40% of all rapes are false allegations” line, but then when I follow one of their citations, I find:
http://www.theforensicexaminer.com/archive/spring09/15/
They should read their own source material before linking it, since it actually proves that they’re full of shit.
Also, the 40% stat comes from one study of one town’s rape cases, totaling 109 cases.
“I’d urge all manboobz readers to do the same – it will brighten up your day!”
It really did, though probably not for the reasons you hoped…
Oh, no, no, no! You’re not actually supposed to read the source material! You just should be aware that there’s a source that proves it and then move on with your day, because manly men have too much to do like hot potato torture and hunt mammoths to just read the source material. Don’t you know that how right you are is measured by amount of links you can post, even if you don’t read them?
Hengist – So you enjoy weird quasi-sexual fantasies about women being subjected to unsettlingly specific torture?
Despite the tremendous damage it does to the already hilariously thin “we’re not against women, we’re just for men!” facade?
Hengist – So you enjoy weird quasi-sexual fantasies about women being subjected to unsettlingly specific torture?
I do like that they’ve created a site which brings to light female sex offenders and false rape accusers whose deeds are often minimized by the media and the justice system despite their very real and damaging effects, as well as the people who enable and encourage this culture.
The thing you’re referring to was an entirely different post which had nothing to do with register-her.com, and was meant as a joke, unless you believe disgruntled men are building hot-potato guns in their basements right now. Funny how feminists have no problem resorting to hyperbole and sarcasm when attacking others, but when subjected to those same things, they suddenly lose all capacity to understand them.
Funny how feminists have no problem resorting to hyperbole and sarcasm when attacking others, but when subjected to those same things, they suddenly lose all capacity to understand them.
I do think that it was a “joke” in the sense that he doesn’t intend to actually do it (for one thing, the irregular shape of potatoes means the cannon would probably throw unpredictable wobblers or jam altogether), but in no others.
I also have to point out that feminists, despite the “well everyone knows they’re just as bad as us” common wisdom in the MRM, actually don’t share violent revenge fantasies about their political opponents all that often. (Yes, I’m sure you can find one. Oh hi there, That One “Dear Men” Essay, haven’t seen you around in several minutes. But you can’t find them on a “must be Thursday” basis, that’s for damn sure.)
I do like that they’ve created a site which brings to light female sex offenders and false rape accusers whose deeds are often minimized by the media and the justice system despite their very real and damaging effects, as well as the people who enable and encourage this culture.
I guess you WOULD like a site that:
A) Randomly includes people who have committed no crime other than “we don’t like them and they’re poopyheads”
and
B) Includes lots of women who actually weren’t proven to be false accusers, which means that it’s exposing and advocating harassment of rape victims because they were suspected of lying.
Seriously, how would you like it if someone started “register-him.com” and made a big messy list of actual sex offenders, suspected sex offenders who weren’t actually convicted, suspected sex offenders who weren’t even charged and are chosen just on the basis that they might be sex offenders, and a bunch of MRA leaders who “well, they’re like sex offenders, haw haw!” With photos and personal information?
(Don’t say “yeah, feminists would do that.” Even if we would, you’d hate it. And I don’t blame you. It’s a hateful, stupid, dangerous, fucking vile thing to do.)
shaenon:
Totally stealing this.
Holly:
That’s where they start the process of brainwashing men into being manginas who don’t rape people, right?
Fatman:
Leo may be half-right about this. The conversation is supposed to go
MRA: Do you support the right of non-feminists to exist?
FEMINIST: Well, I’m not advocating putting them in prisons or death camps, so yes
MRA: And yet you’re trying to convince people to become feminists, you hypocrite!
Or they’re more delusional than I realize. I suspect I have now thought longer and harder about it than everyone on the thread David linked to combined.
kmcakes:
A bunch of them are like that. Samuel too, I think
Shora:
Like redlocker said, show me the MRA who can unequivocally condemn Marc Lépine or George Sodini with no hedging or justification.
OMG, you feminazis are so SCREWED!!! They totally GOT you with this one!!! These guys are playing fucking 11-dimensional chess and you’re just brushing your My Little Pony tails and manes.
Feminism is now OVER FOREVER!!!ONE11!
I am certain that one of the core values of the MRM is violence, which is why they refuse to condemn even the most egregious examples of it. To even say any kind of violence is wrong is to violate one of their core principles. Unless, of course, it is the rarest kind of violence, women on men, then they are baying hounds for justice.
Bostonian – Baying hounds for justice, or for violence in the “correct” direction?
Some of the MRA reactions to woman-on-man violence are “I hope she’s arrested, convicted in a court of law and serves a prison sentence!”, but… not all of them.
Indeed, I should have included that as well.
Actually, if you want to shut up an MRA in real life, ask him if he disapproves of violence. He will refuse to answer.
Which ones are those?
Funny how the feminists were eager to jump on the “guilty” bandwagon in cases like Duke or Dominique Strauss-Kahn, though. Double standards anyone?
Don’t they already have those, AKA dontdatehimgirl.com and its ilk?
Which ones are those?
Mary Kellet? Just off the top of my head.
Funny how the feminists were eager to jump on the “guilty” bandwagon in cases like Duke or Dominique Strauss-Kahn, though. Double standards anyone?
From what I’ve seen, it’s not that feminists jump on the “guilty” bandwagon, rather than “even black strippers and hotel maids shouldn’t be raped; also French millionaires are not above the law; and if a rape occurred, it’s the responsibility of the rapist, not the raped” bandwagon. Funny how you MRA’s just don’t comprehend that — or realize how hypocritical you are being when you address rape accusations not on facts but on the idea that the definition of rape should be narrowed so as to practically legalize it, and all women are dirty dirty liars and whores who deserve it, anyway.
Holly Some of the MRA reactions to woman-on-man violence are “I hope she’s arrested, convicted in a court of law and serves a prison sentence!”, but… not all of them.
Don’t forget that some types of “state sanctioned violence” would be ok; if they punished women more severely than they would punish men.
Make a rape complaint that fails to get a conviction and the woman is supposed to be sentenced to the maximum possible sentence the accused man could have gotten.
But for trivial things like murder, the witnesses and accusers aren’t to be punished if the jury decides to acquit, and even in the case of outright perjury a fine and jail is the most anyone should have to serve.
Because nothing is more heinous than to have a charged with rape, and then acquitted, while the lying bitch gets off scot free.
…”She has distinguished herself by prosecuting numerous cases of rape and domestic violence against men within her community based on no evidence, suppressing exculpatory evidence, and in 2011 – apparently participating in witness tampering.
Doesn’t say she committed a crime… only helped others.
Now you’re just muddying the issue. Do I really have to recall Amanda Marcotte’s reaction to the Duke case, which was subsequently taken down? The point is that feminists automatically assume a man accused of rape is guilty and treat him as such, sometimes even after he’s exonerated, while false rape accusers are always given the benefit of the doubt. Do you deny this?