“Feminists don’t even think of men as human,” and other insights from Reddit’s Men’s Rights subreddit.
This, oddly, was one of the first results in a Google image search for "hatred of women." So I'm going with it.
Hey, everybody, here’s another massive list of ridiculous comments from the Reddit’s Men’s Rights subreddit on the subjects of women, feminists and feminism. Some, er, highlights:
Never trust a woman. When you are out and they are around, go the other way. Your life may actually depend on you crossing the street or not taking that elevator or not working late in a office with another lonely woman.
Women are keen to assert all of the benefits that modern society affords them, but at the same time quick to twist their hair into pigtails and play the “I’m just a girl” defense when the traditional benefits of being a woman would suit them better.
Misandrist feminists want gender based apartheid, and the male population culled to lest than 10%
Feminism does NOT create strong women – it creates dependency and a stunted intellect.
In the feminist community, bigotry is met with a groundswell of support, and is very rarely called out.
That last one is just a teensy bit ironic, given that most of the comments above were heavily upvoted – in other words, “met with a groundswell of support.” Further evidence of this irony: oh, just the hundreds of misogynistic statements from MRAs I’ve linked to on this blog.
For links to the original comments in context, see the full list on Reddit. Props to the Redditor known as Squibbling for having the patience to assemble all of this.
Posted on October 3, 2011, in antifeminism, false accusations, misogyny, MRA, reddit. Bookmark the permalink. 330 Comments.
Why on Earth would we want men to be less than 10% of the population? That isn’t nearly enough to financially support all of us and give us babies.
Maybe the picture has something to do with “Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free and it comes with a free kitten?”
My theory on the picture is that cats, like women, aren’t usually willing to take orders, and a certain kind of man finds this offensive.
(I’m not entirely joking – I’ve found that men who love cats are often a lot less sexist than the ones who hate them, allergy issues aside.)
What is ridiculous about Reddit’s observations here, Futrelle? A nationally famous feminist, a columnist for the New York Times, America’s birdcage lining of record, wrote a book a few years ago titled “Are Men Necessary”–by Maureen Dowd.
Thought I forgot about that one, didn’t you? I suppose you could tell what Ms. Dowd’s conclusion was.
I, on the other hand, say that feminoids like Dowd(y) aren’t necessary. If someone would put her, and horrid women like her, on a desert island, and they were never heard from again, I wouldn’t know the difference, and could care less!
Uh, Maureen Dowd was not actually calling for the elimination of men. That was simply an title designed to attract attention. I imagine she meant it a reference to a book by James Thurber called “Is Sex Necessary?” (Note: Thurber was not saying that sex was unnecessary.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Are_Men_Necessary%3F_When_Sexes_Collide
No, I actually can’t. But from the summary and your reaction, I bet I know what you think it said!
That… that makes no fucking sense. Even for an MRA.
I find it fascinating that, for so many MRA views, there is an equal and opposite MRA view that is still hateful towards women/feminists. For examples:
But remember, saying that a woman might have a valid reason to be afraid of a strange man in certain contexts because most rapes are committed by men is sexism.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterfliesandwheels/2011/10/a-man-generally-cannot-know/#comment-10539
(As you’ll find out if you read the thread, this commenter also believes that feminists want to destroy all men)
Minus the population culling, that’s Anthony Zarat.
The Men’s Rights crowd, or more accurately the Whine-Whine Feminists Are Meanies crowd, has no intellectual consistency beyond an abiding hostility towards feminism and women.
Not only do feminists not all rally behind Maureen Dowd, I don’t know any who do. I am aware of some who deny she’s a feminist — and while that doesn’t mean she’s not, it does rather suggest that her beliefs aren’t representative of “mainstream feminism,” whatever that is.
Moreover, as Rutee said, MoDo didn’t call for the elimination of men.
Maureen Dowd, feminist hero? David, you really need to start warning people before you say things that absurd. It’s not good for a keyboard to have tea snorted out of the nose onto it.
When asked this question, apparently Maureen Dowd’s answer was:
“Well, yes, but don’t tell them, it will make them cocky. Of course, they’re necessary. What’s interesting to me is that I wanted the title, and obviously I, I put the cover on it for that reason, to be playful and mischievous, like the push and pull of a Jane Austin novel, “Pride and Prejudice”, strong willed men and women kind of having a fantastic time together.
And, but a lot of guys are a little scared of it because they think the answer is “no”, but you tell me, why would men assume the answer is no? Of course the answer is yes.”
http://www.thirteen.org/openmind/feminism/are-men-necessary/1691/
So umm, Mr David Futrelle seems to be seriously misinformed.
Oh, I got the person wrong, damn.
Seriously, I was lucky my coffee mug was empty. When has MoDo ever considered herself to be a feminist?
DKM? Couldn’t you care less by just not paying attention? Isn’t that what you are already doing?
My first thought was “Dear god, i can’t even imagine how difficult it would be to get laid”
But oh wait, women never want sex in their world. I forgot.
Maybe I’m just naive, but I am honestly baffled as to where they get the idea that feminists hold these views. Who is actually saying these things? Who is proposing that exterminating 90% of men would be a good idea? The closest thing I can think of is that occasionally, someone–feminist or otherwise–will be discussing reproduction and population dynamics and will make the entirely factual observation that biologically, you only need 1 male for every 10 females to maintain a healthy genetic diversity in your animals. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone extrapolate from that fact to “Therefore we should cull 90% of human males.” I mean, WTF?
Oh, WAH, a career woman wrote a lament about the hardships of career women in a professional world that still revolves around men. Mom, she’s being meeeeeaaaaannnnnn!!!!
They forgot that most feminists just don’t like MRAs like this, not men as a whole. It’s a bit troubling that they are assuming they are just like any man, so most men must be hateful misogynists too. That is, fortunately, not the case.
And considering that many women are actually quite fond of men, I don’t really think androcide is imminent.
Seriously, this persecution complex is getting ridiculous.
Well, if they were to admit that most men are not like them, where would that leave them? The whole MGTOW thing isn’t going to be very effective at forcing women to be more servant-like if the majority of men refuse to play along.
Yah, I’m perfectly willing to believe that avoiding women/crossing the street/not getting in elevators with women are excellent ideas for these particular MRAs, and that there might be women out there who kind of wish they didn’t exist. But that’s not because of their gender, it’s because they are terrible people and they shouldn’t be around anyone and probably lots of people kind of wish they didn’t exist.
@Karalora: it’s pretty typical persecution complex. They just KNOW that’s what we’re SECRETLY thinking.
Okay. FUN LOGIC TIEMZ!
I am a feminist. I do not believe men should be killed–really, under any circumstances other than “about to commit murder and can only be stopped by being killed”–let alone a 90% gendercide.
Am I:
A) Not really a feminist
or
B) Lying?
Well, I know I’m not lying, anyway. So we come to A. I’m not really a feminist, because I do not hold the feminist belief in gendercide. How many other feminists here also don’t believe in gendercide?
I’m going to charitably guess it’s all of us. Sohe question is–how many feminists have to disavow a belief before it becomes not a feminist belief?
If we can’t disprove that we want a gendercide, then we can’t disprove any claim. So fuck it! Go hog wild! Claim that feminists want to kill koalas and blow up the moon! If evidence doesn’t matter, think big! Feminists want to blow up the sun! Sure, they’ll claim they don’t, but sun-exploding is a feminist belief!
If gendercide is a feminist belief, it’s one that’s held by few to zero actual feminists, and that makes it… not a feminist belief.
WE HAD FUN LOGIC TIEMZ!
How can someone read enough Amanda Marcotte to hate her guts but not enough to know that making fun of Maureen Dowd is how blogging feminists relax? It’s probably the clearest example on the internet of feminists being equally critical of a man and a woman doing the same job, even though modo’s the token chick and there’s no back-up lady columnist to rally around.
http://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/kzh2p/this_is_what_happens_when_you_dont_buy_your/c2okax5 You really need to do a followup on this guy.
“Never trust a woman. When you are out and they are around, go the other way. Your life may actually depend on you crossing the street or not taking that elevator or not working late in a office with another lonely woman.”
Yet idiots like NWO (or was it MRAL?) get all pissy when women don’t respond to them with just the right amount of eye contact or smiles. And lets not forget the “nice guys” who blame women for basically not throwing themselves at them right away.
Why should women express interest in these men when many of these men want to avoid women anyway?
Go your own way already.
Also the level of projection in these particular quotes is amazing. I’ve seen MRAs discuss reducing the female population for “breeding purposes” and childcare only. And they say feminists want to reduce the male population to less than 10% ? yeah right.
Also I’ve never heard of Maureen Dowd before, but I just wiki’d her and found this quote:
“Al Gore is so feminized and diversified and ecologically correct that he’s practically lactating”
that doesn’t sound like something a feminist would say :S I don’t think so anyway..
I love it when people are scared of me. I put my index fingers up on my head and wiggle them like little devil horns and then I laugh and laugh.
Dear MRAs,
Can I have a blood oath that you will indeed go your own way and not cross my street, get in my elevator or work in my office late at night. Please? It sounds like paradise, really.
Tell you what, MRA folks. You go right ahead and cower in your tree forts or whatever you have, quaking with fear at the nightmarish prospect of talking to a woman, and I’ll just keep right on enjoying the rich, diverse and fulfilling world of human interaction. Sound good?
Dear MGTOWs – how can we miss you if you won’t go away?
What exactly is he afraid of, here? I don’t think it’s physical violence. I think even MRAs are dimly aware that the odds of a woman just up and murdering a man (and even moreso for a man she’s not intimate with) are extremely low.
So I assume it’s our old friend False Rape Accusations.
Which raises the question–if false rape accusations are easy and fun to make, if women make them very often for petty reasons, and if false rape accusations are rarely detected–why haven’t any prominent MRAs who use their real names been investigated for rape? I hate to say this in a way that sounds threatening (it’s actually the opposite), but if it was as easy as all that, you’d think some vindictive radical feminist would have gone to the courts with “[MRA] raped me” by now.
I feel like the mere fact that MRAs haven’t been rounded up proves that either false rape accusations aren’t so easy to make, or feminists aren’t so stop-at-nothing evil after all.
Or, you know, both.
Ugh, I don’t mean that to discredit a victim if one does come forward. (And really, who has more interest than a rapist in spreading the story “false rape accusations are everywhere”?)
I just mean the fact that every MRA who’s appeared in public under his real name hasn’t been accused proves that either false accusations aren’t so easy or feminists aren’t so evil. Otherwise it would be trivial to put the lot of them in jail.
As Quackers pointed out, Dowd’s primary tactic when talking about male politicians she disagrees with is to insinuate or outright state that they’re too effeminate. Not terribly feminist of her.
Oh man, I’m thinking too small here.
If feminists want a gendercide, and feminists are both omnipotent and omnimalevolent, why are 90% of men still alive?
That made me laugh. Loudly.
In before conspiracy theories from the MRAs that it’s actually already happening, but feminists are just super subtle about it. Those theories will probably include men’s lower life expectancies, more men than women being in the military (with a mention of the nonexistent draft), and more men working dangerous jobs, and that these things are all somehow caused by feminism.
Ha ha, that’s just what the feminists want you to think! >:D
Or something.
The more over the top MRA statements I see the more it strikes me that most of their claims are basically just their idea of what feminists think/say about men with the genders reversed. The whole thing kind of reads like “I know you are but what am I?”.
“If feminists want a gendercide, and feminists are both omnipotent and omnimalevolent, why are 90% of men still alive?”
The amount of men alive now is actually 10% of what the population used to be. We Evil Feminists have already killed off most of them. And we’re so omnipotent (read: awesome hypnotists) that we’ve made everyone believe this is how many men there have always been.
I just… none of this makes sense. Go your own way, dudes, no one’s stopping you.
OK, wait. In the first paragraph, how does he know she’s lonely? Project much?
::: sigh::: These guys are like nasty stray dogs that follow you, barking and growling. They don’t like you, you don’t want them to follow you, because they’re freaking creepy, but they seem inexplicably drawn to follow. As CassandraSays: We can’t miss you if you don’t go the fuck away.
@ Hellkell: If she’s working a job, rather than making a Nice Guy™ meatloaf or washing his underwear, she must be a lonely old hag feminist who goes home to her 3,000 cats every night.
Judging by old movies…and new movies, for that matter…
katz: Tell me about it. I was forced to sit through “Fast Five” a few weeks ago. There were like, three women in it? And they never even fucking talked to each other. Oh, my mistake. There was one conversation between two of them. It went like this:
*Girl puking into toilet in totally-subtle-THIS-IS-MORNING-SICKNESS way*
*other woman approaches*
Other Woman: *knowing look* Does he know?
Woman Who Puked: *shakes head*
Other Woman: *slightly different knowing look* *also may have offered one line of advice but it was so unimportant that I can’t remember at all*
THAT WAS THE EXTENT OF CONVERSATION BETWEEN WOMEN IN THE ENTIRE MOVIE.
Because that’s how life is/is supposed to be, right? One woman for every five men, and they don’t even bother talking to each other because OBVZ the dudes are the centre of their focus.
GRRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH.
In conclusion: I concur.
Technically Mary Daly did want the male population culled to 10% of its current size… but in that case I’m not sure why “misandrist feminist” is plural. Also, there is no social movement without people disconnected from this plane of reality in it.
And I call out bigotry all the fucking time.
Remember, when Mary Daly does it, it’s misandry. When a MGTOW does it, it’s perfectly okay because I don’t even know, blah blah Ameriskanks.
Also I enjoy how they said feminism “creates dependency and a stunted intellect.”
I thought that’s what they considered the natural state of womanhood and that it should be kept that way?
When are you going to do a list of outrageous comments (including regular contributors here) attacking MRA’s? Oh never. Okay. Isn’t it because you want to “dismantle the MRM?”
magdelyn: you could make your own list if you want it so badly.
@Ozy,
strangely, Mary Daly was a tenured professor, with lots-o-students (female ones) that took her classes. Her work, “…continues to influence feminism…” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Daly
I don’t think she was too marginalized. Especially for all those students of hers with financial aid the me and others paid for to subsidize her obvious distain of men.
I love it! It’s the Problem of [Women Not Actually Being] Evil!
Now we just need to rephrase Pascal’s Wager and the Kalam Cosmological Argument as MRA axioms and we’ll have a full apologetics/counter-apologetics set.
magdelyn: Because there are no misogynistic assholes teaching at major colleges? Being paid for by OUR MONEY ZOMFG?! I’m pretty sure you could find some hateful shit being spewed by the evo-psych camp.
Is Daly the new Dworkin?
magdelyn, this whole blog is an exercise in creating outrageous statements attacking MRAs.
Except I assume you also meant “outrageously false” rather than “outrageously hilarious.”
strangely, Mary Daly was a tenured professor, with lots-o-students…
So’s Harvey Mansfield, what’s your point? So are the founders of “male studies,” which is anti-feminist pseudoscience, and so are vast herds of evopsych assholes. But if you really cared about the issues, you’d do more than just snipe and run, as you tirelessly labor on behalf of people who’d really love to make it their business what you do for a living and would gladly see us taken back to a time when you probably wouldn’t have been allowed to rent an apartment without being harassed or evicted! ^_^
@blitzgal
“Why on Earth would we want men to be less than 10% of the population? That isn’t nearly enough to financially support all of us and give us babies.”
Hell, women slaughter 25% of them in the womb, the majority if child murder is committed by women, and population is declining wherever the posion of feminism is allowed to fester. I’d say 10% is more than enough.
———————–
@Holly Pervocracy
“I am a feminist. I do not believe men should be killed–really, under any circumstances other than “about to commit murder and can only be stopped by being killed”–let alone a 90% gendercide.”
Suddenly feminism is a monolithic block? Amazing how that works. All women are individuals when it’s convenient and a monolithic hive mind when it;s convebient as well.
————————
@Quackers
“Also I’ve never heard of Maureen Dowd before, but I just wiki’d her and found this quote:”
This is wiki central. Yet again I’m amazed. Da crew here claims ultimate knowlege of the universe, but once again these nasty little feminist tidbits slip thru the cracks. But of course you’re not a monolithic block unless it’s convenient.
————————-
@Holly Pervocracy
“Which raises the question–if false rape accusations are easy and fun to make, if women make them very often for petty reasons, and if false rape accusations are rarely detected–why haven’t any prominent MRAs who use their real names been investigated for rape?”
Just because you say false accuations are rare doesn’t mean they’re rare. Police stations nationwide have called it an epidemic, (meaning not rare). This would be another example of whatever falls from a womans mouth doesn’t automatically hold value or contain any truth. Your views on rape accusations are well known from your blog, precious. 100% support.
————————–
By the way, do any of you actuall read any of the comments here? All of you seemed to have devolved into slobbering idiots.
Kinda tired out here in my white male privileged world. I’d love to dismantle what little sense falls from your yaps, but I’m beat. Hmmm, white male privilege. Sounds sexist and racist. Modern day staple I guess.
Hey, wanna see what the folks at the top of the political pyramid are lying about? Here’s old lefty Biden spewing propaganda. And 70% of his advisors are women ta boot.
Lets see, he says most violence is committed against women. Well, that’s a lie.
He says most violence is committed due to fathers beating children when we know the vast majority of violent offenders comes from single mother homes where the mother is abusive.
He says the greatest travesty of justice is a woman being hurt, when the greatest travesty of justice is State endorsed denial and perversion of justice.
He states exactly what I’ve told you before, that Title IX is now it’s own police force and any college that doesn’t comply is denied funds. All of you called me a liar, or at least in error for that statement. How many times do I have to prove everyone of you wrong?
Are you still going to claim women don’t hold the lions share of political power? Here have a listen.
http://abc.go.com/watch/the-view/SH559080/VD55145134/the-view-927
10% is nowhere near enough to open all the jars and kill all the spiders that need to be dealt with! Plus, how are we going to entrap menz for their child support unless there are more of them? No, 10% simply will not do.
Anyone else tempted to quietly mail the usual trolls copies of Ooku and telling them it’s a secret feminist ‘herstory’ manual?
oh, look. nwo is back. joy.
Yes. Professorship, somehow, does not keep you from being a douchebag who is disconnected from this plane of reality.
NWO has a problem with… Wikipedia? o.O
Meller: If someone would put her, and horrid women like her, on a desert island, and they were never heard from again, I wouldn’t know the difference, and could care less!
So, let’s look at the logic here (since you have insisted you are a paragon of cogent thought).
1: All feminists are removed from society and placed on a desert island.
2: David K. Meller can’t tell the difference.
3: Said lack of difference bothers him not at all.
From this we conclude that the world, as it is, is not the result of feminists (since their lack wouldn’t be notable), and Meller actually likes the world as it is.
Which means the problem isn’t really feminism, but Meller.
NWO has a problem with… Wikipedia? o.O
I was confused by this for a moment, too, and then I realized that, given his debating style, it makes a certain amount of sense to conclude that he thinks looking facts up rather than, you know, making them up is a strange and novel concept.
Speaking of making things up, I think it’s cool that posters here are supposed to have “ultimate knowledge of the universe.” I’m new enough here that I don’t think I have ultimate knowledge yet – does it come in the mail at some point? Do I have to post a certain number of comments before I receive my ultimate knowledge?
NWO believes that Wikipedia is just a bunch of people making shit up. He especially hates it when we cite it to counter the shit he makes up.
Kind of OT, but every time I see NWO’s white-man-in-chains icon it gives me a little snicker. Are we absolutely sure that he’s not a troll in the “I don’t actually believe anything I’m saying” sense? Surely it’s impossible for anyone to be THAT ridiculous.
Kind of OT, but every time I see NWO’s white-man-in-chains icon it gives me a little snicker. Are we absolutely sure that he’s not a troll in the “I don’t actually believe anything I’m saying” sense? Surely it’s impossible for anyone to be THAT ridiculous.
If so, he’s an extraordinarily dedicated troll. No, I think that sort of commitment only comes from being a true believer.
I haven’t seen him break character at ALL, and to me, he kind of exudes an indefinable aura of ‘I put foil inside my hat to keep the mind control satellites form getting to me.’
So according to NWOslave, when Joe frakking Biden says something dumb it’s representative of most power but when “police stations nationwide” call false rape accusations an epidemic [CITATION NEEDED] suddenly it’s a few brave individuals speaking truth to power. What were you saying about convenience and individuals vs. monolithicity, NWO?
Maggie, you’ve showed up and said you hated women in Computer Science, so tell me why I care about your opinion.. There are a lot of professors who are subsidized by the taxpayers who hate women. Where’s the hate on there?
Oh right, you just don’t like Daly!
Yes, her work has had some influence. She didn’t get handed a diploma for being a minority, or minisotry as the preferred term of bigots though. She did actual academic work, including useful studies that were an influence, and not just for feminists. None of those studies involved man-hating (Though some of them had conclusions that weren’t good for men, and I suspect informed the man hating, rather than the other way around).
God, it’s like talking to an even more powerless version of Al Qaeda. Always with the life or death cosmic struggles. As hilariously stupid as the MRM is, I don’t think anyone here really cares to actually dismantle the faux civil rights movement. Just laugh, and encourage others to. Really, it’s too insignificant to worry about more than the occasional nutbar. I’m not even scared of the MRM influencing policy significantly.
Voip “…But if you really cared about the issues, you’d do more than just snipe and run…”
I’m offended. I never snipe and run. I always stay around a while to get abused. And while I do think this website is offensive, mostly because David touts himself as mocking misogyny, but truth be told, what he really wants to do is dismantle the MRM.
I, as well as anybody, know the stupidity that comes from some MRA’s. Some MRA’s are angry, and they don’t know how to express it without attacking people. Others are frustrated by a world that they believe doesn’t respect their contribution. Others are straight out assholes.
That being said, I love men. I love their company. And even with all their imperfections, I am glad to have known (biblically and otherwise) so many many of them.
@ Rutee, “…Maggie, you’ve showed up and said you hated women in Computer Science…”
What…What?
I will literally send you $20 to your email through paypal if you can find me support for that proposition. All I ask is that the support be legitimate, and that you state that you received the $20 here on this thread (if you can find any support for that bizare statement.)
You realize you’re saying this to people who have witnessed you sniping and running, right?