Muck Ryking: Petition to remove Alexander Ryking as a Tumblr politics editor
Evidently Ryking wasn't in debate club in high school.
So Alexander Ryking is a Tumblr blogger and one of Tumblr’s community “editors” for politics. He thinks of himself as a liberal.
He is also a raging misogynist who regularly calls women “cunts” and tells feminists to “kill yourselves you feminazi twats.”
In recent days he’s turned his douchebag-o-meter up to 11. As a result, there’s now a petition up on Change.org to have him removed as a politics editor on Tumblr. It’s already gotten more than 3000 signatures, with several hundred new signatures added in the time it’s taken me to write this post.
Here’s unknowable woman, a frequent target of his cyber-wrath, with more details on his recent meltdown. (Read the post on her Tumblr blog for links to the evidence of his douchebaggery.)
Alexander Ryking, who has a history of attempting to silence women bloggers (he told Jess of STFUConservatives and the other “feminazis” to “go kill themselves” several months ago, and has also been rude to women of color but I haven’t been on Tumblr long enough to have personally witnessed that), defended The Amazing’s Atheist’s violent rape threats on Reddit by tagging his posts with “I support TAA.”
I and many, many other Tumblr users were disgusted by this, so we decided to tag our criticisms of Ryking that night with “Ryking’s banana republic”—a reference to his co-opting of [social justice] concepts, NOT a homophobic dig, and the person who coined it was a queer man anyway. Someone also wrote a few jokingly romantic lines about Ryking’s blind defense of TAA and new atheism, and Ryking interpreted this as homophobic and misandric…it wasn’t, but because I reblogged it, Ryking insists that I am now a homophobe, which is hilarious given my own sexual identity but whatever.
We also responded to some of his posts with pictures of extreme close-ups of our eyes.
Seriously. That is what this guy is calling “abuse.”
We did NOT threaten him, make personal attacks against his sexuality, tell him to go kill himself, send him rude messages, or commit any other acts that could reasonably be interpreted as the “cyberbullying” Ryking claims it is. I did temporarily change my URL to rykingsbananarepublic and I make no apologies for that. Why should I? Why shouldn’t a group of feminists and their allies be allowed to respond creatively to misogyny? The only actual cyberbullying that has taken place was TAA’s initial rape threats on Reddit; I wouldn’t even go so far as to claim Ryking’s tweets to me and other Twitter users are cyberbullying, though I leave it up to the other people who were insulted by him to label their experiences as bullying or not.
Anyway, a few nights later, I tweeted something in defense of Whitney Houston’s legacy, and suddenly there was Ryking going ballistic. He found me on Twitter, called me a cunt right off the bat, and insisted that I claimed Whitney Houston’s death was “more important than the death of 5,000 Syrians” (I didn’t! Here is what I actually said!). I had never exchanged tweets with this man before, and was confused about his sudden interest in my thoughts about Whitney Houston and Syria. Naturally, I responded, told him how wrong he was, and the next day I screencapped some of the things he said and posted them … I never expected that post to get the amount of notes it did, but I think that just goes to show how widespread the dislike for him is.
Ryking, for his part, has responded to the widespread criticism by striking the pose of a victim, and pretending that it is somehow all related to race. Apparently, the evil feminazis are impugning his white manhood, though he’s not white.
So-called feminists have subjected me to white-bashing comments (even though I’m Hispanic) and sexist attacks impugning my manhood (slash-fiction scenes featuring me and heterosexual men; being called faggot; being told to man-up; insults about my body;) by people who don’t realize I’m gay. After nearly two decades online, I learned early on that when you’re attacked, you defend yourself by attacking right back and just as viciously, if not more so. And that’s what exactly what I’ve done. …
What’s really at issue here is not my rude behavior but that you and others like you want to punish any man who refuses to conform to your rancid, misandrist orthodoxy by discounting everything he says and using his gender and race as the excuse for doing so. …
You don’t want me stripped of my editorial privilege based on my behavior but because I reject your sick, bigoted, misandrist (per)version of feminism.
Yep, apparently the dude who loves to call women “cunts” is the final arbiter of what is and what isn’t “true feminism.” Who knew?
I signed the petition. How about you?
Posted on February 16, 2012, in antifeminism, creepy, douchebaggery, drama, hypocrisy, misandry, misogyny, oppressed white men, rape, rapey, vaginas, victimhood. Bookmark the permalink. 601 Comments.
@Cassandra:
yyyyup.
@Nathan:
“Right, Kirby, and most misogyny is directed at women who fail to conform to their own gender roles.”
This is wrong. Most misogyny is directed at women. Full stop. Rape jokes and “make me a sammich” and “women can’t drive/are stupid” is aimed at all women. The “well behaved” ones don’t get a pass.
You’re going to have to go into more detail, Cassandra, because I’m really not going to respond to basic assertations with no justification.
Sorry, Nathan, but you’re currently manifesting a level of complete incomprehension of the terminology that’s way beyond what I can explain to you before I need to go to sleep. I’m not sure which feminist books you read, but you may want to try reading them again and asking questions when you get to the complicated bits.
@kirby: It is not wrong. Aside from said jokes (and there are a hell of a lot of off-color jokes aimed at men as well), and the threat of sexual assault (this is the one place where I will concede a point), virtually all misogyny is reserved for certain deviations from the norm.
Gender policing is the act of enforcing prejudice, not prejudice itself. If women conform to societal expectations, they are still held to be the inferior gender. The same is not true of men. Seriously, how are you not getting this?
This… is going nowhere… Nathan, what are you arguing for, skipping any more attempts at turning our own arguments against us?
@Nathan
Yeah it’s gender roles and sexism. Which doesn’t always necessarily stem from an outright hatred of the opposite sex. For example you hear the claim that women are more emotional from men all the time, but I wouldn’t say that they hate women when they say that. It’s just a stereotype. It’s only when women are outright denied rights because of those assumptions. So when women were denied the vote because they were thought to be too emotional or weak minded to understand politics, that’s misogyny. Likewise if men are denied the right to enter the childcare profession that would be misandry. To my knowledge they aren’t though. Either way I don’t really understand why this is being debated because everyone here is in agreement that assumptions made about people based on their sex or gender, and discriminating against them because of those assumptions is wrong.
@Shaenon
Yeah…pretty much. It’s like they won’t care about having to support a wife, go to war or work dirty jobs if women kept their mouths shut and admit they are inferior to men. Not gonna happen.
I read an article on the Ms. website about the male pill and it was positive, unlike AVfM’s paranoid delusions of all us feminists freaking out about our loss of sexual power or whatever the hell they go on about. It’s like reading shit from a very asinine alien race, I can’t forsee why anyone (besides conservaturds) would be against another form of birth control.
I predict women will be allowed in combat positions soon enough. But then MRAs will just claim men are oppressed when female soldiers come forward if they’ve been raped.
If MRA really believed the stuff that they say they believe they’d be thrilled to have a male pill on the market. No more worrying about becoming a father against your will! No more potential child support payments for kids you didn’t plan on having! Isn’t this awesome?
Well, no, since that wouldn’t leave them with anything to blame women for. Plus contraception is lady stuff, why should men have to worry about it?
@Quackers:
Women are currently being allowed to take more forward positions in more dangerous combat zones. I think I saw it on the news, so sadly I don’t have the link (it might have been on the Colbert Report)… But it’s happening. And you can bet your boots that MRAs are complaining that women will endanger their male comrades.
and really…what is the equivalent of lawyer cunt or career bitch for dudes in childcare or expressing interest in childcare? pedoteach? come on Nathan…you know there’s a difference…
Whatever I have to go to bed, gotta be up in 3 hours…night all.
Cassandra, the terminology seems pretty simple to be. Misogyny = institutional contempt for women. (And remember, this isn’t even the most agreed-upon definition, it’s the feminist one, but I’ll work with it here). There is a level of institutional contempt for men as well. The two are not mutually exclusive. I do not accept that oppression is some black-and-white blanket phenomenon, especially with gender. That’s simplistic in the extreme.
Dracula, I don’t agree the assumption that women are universally considered to be “the inferior gender”. This goes back to my first post. Men are held to be superior in certain spheres, women in others- and this serves as the springboard for most misogyny and misandry in our society. Men have (or had, in the past) things quantitatively “better”, but there were and are areas where they were and are considered not adept. It’s pretty simple.
@Kirbywarp
Yeah I read an article in the NYT about that too. Finally I though, MRAs will shut up, more women will die now so they’ll be happy.
NOPE. Read the article on AVfM. Wah wah no more boys club in the military anymore!
I suppose the terminology would seem pretty simple if instead of trying to understand it you just stuck your metaphorical fingers in your ears and went “la la, I can’t hear you, I prefer my imaginary version of reality so I’m going to pretend it’s true instead”.
You’re so out of your depth here it’s kind of pitiful.
In terms of the military issue, I can see why MRAs are opposing it. If and when women are allowed into combat arms and flourish there that just removes one of the planks of which their little ship of prejudiced bullshit is built. It’s going to be even harder to argue that women are incompetent by nature once that happens.
Basically it’s another sign that things aren’t going their way, societally speaking, so of course they don’t like it.
@Quackers:
Called it. ^_^
‘_’
-_-
I smell lots and lots of goal-post shifting…
Someone needs to make a gif of goal posts dancing. I wish I had the skills necessary to do it!
Cassandra, until you can engage the topic instead of making lofty sarcastic remarks, you’re just going to make yourself look like a pompous ass. If you can’t be arsed to type so much shit out, you’re free to not participate.
The fact is I’m right. That is the feminist, or “social justice” definition of misogyny, and amongst some circles sexism as well. And even under the feminist definition, misandry is a thing.
“Cassandra, until you can engage the topic instead of making lofty sarcastic remarks, you’re just going to make yourself look like a pompous ass.”
Again with the lulz.
I don’t engage seriously with people who don’t understand the terms that they’re using. Dracula already very patiently explained your underlying conceptual problem. If you still don’t get it, oh well, not my problem.
Dracula, I don’t agree the assumption that women are universally considered to be “the inferior gender”. This goes back to my first post. Men are held to be superior in certain spheres, women in others-
Yeah, for this to work you kinda have to ignore the fact those spheres that women are held to be superior in, are systematically devalued and thought of inferior to the spheres men are held to be superior in.
To say that the perception of men as predators is not misandrist is false. To say that implicit discouragement from certain job careers based on gender is not misandrist is false. To say the concept of male disposability is not misandrist is false. These are all institutional, these are all harmful to men. Misandry is simply there, if you’d care to open your eyes.
Erasing misandry, and the victims of said misandry, well, it’s offensive, and it’s callous, and it’s petty politics that reflect privileged white girls’ desire to claim an “oppression”. It’s simply not that simple, and most people can sense this, and that is part of the reason feminism has inspired such a backlash.
@Nathan:
I feel like we need to start over at this point, because what we have is a flurry of topic changes, assertions, and ignorance that has led to a meaningless conclusion. You say “misandry is a thing?” What do you mean by misandry? “Institutionalized contempt for men?” How have you shown that such a thing exists? You’ve just kept repeating it over and over as if it were true, then calling us blind for not seeing it.
You’ve already admitted that the idea that “men are predators” is not one that really exists, and yet that was your one example of this contempt for men. Why don’t you start over with your argument (and definitions) to reach the conclusion that “misandry is a thing,” so we can all be talking about the same thing?
Kirby, it’s damn simple. Is there institutional prejudice toward men, on some level? Are there areas of society in which men are perceived inferior; that is, given short shrift? I think the answer is pretty much obviously yes. Therefore, even going by the feminist definition, misandry is a thing.
@Nathan:
“Are there areas of society in which men are perceived inferior; that is, given short shrift? I think the answer is pretty much obviously yes.”
So… The fact that men are looked down upon for taking the roles normally ascribed to women because of an underlying belief that women are inferior… is misandry?
…………
You seriously need to do some more homework, Nathan.
BTW, just in case anyone who is not Nathan was wondering why I was being dismissive towards him right from the beginning, it’s because I could already tell that his last statements were what he was working towards. Obvious dude is obvious.
@CassandraSays:
You read much more deeply than I, then. Good show.
Either that, or you’re full of it. ;)
Months of dealing with MRALs crap have made the context cues easier to read, I think. The “lots of men have it worse than you!” rant was a pretty big clue, too.
I have much to learn, sensei. *bows*
Dracula, it is when said roles lead to more insidious assumptions like: men are dangerous around children, men are overgrown children around the home, men are incapable of changing a diaper because they’re pathetic incompetents, etc.
Women have their own prejudices to deal with, of course, but this is not what about the wimminz! time.
No one agrees with you guys- seriously. If you ask someone on the street whether men faced gendered problems, the answer is of course going to be yes. Because they do. Different problems that women, but problems. Again- get off your high horse. You’re not a martyr. Cassandra’s a privileged white girl who I’m sure has had an incredibly easy life, who has probably had a fine relationship and social history, and now has the nerve to sit and talk about how men are never devalued? Fuck that, and screw you.
I guess you learn faster when the dudes in question tend to flip their shit at you on a regular basis. All women are very privileged in comparison to these guys, you know.
Actually, is it MRAL? Has David checked the IP?
I’ve become… agitated, as Jeff Winger would say. This has not been a productive conversation. I regret getting involved, frankly. Suffice to say I disagree with your guys’ position, I think it’s ridiculous, and I’m fairly sure most people would agree with me. But I’ll let you all be.
And right on schedule, as predicted, all the other stuff about men in childcare, etc, was just a smokescreen for the real grievance, ie. why won’t girls date me?
Nathan, I’m done with this shit. I have, in fact, acknowledged that men face prejudice. I have also acknowledged that men don’t conform to their expected roles often suffer for. I’VE FUCKING SUFFERED FOR IT. All you’re doing is advocating for the acceptance of definitions that make no sense.
Unless you have an actual logical argument that doesn’t contradict itself at every turn, then I’m finished with this discussion. Stop wasting my time.
And if you aren’t MRAL, I will be very surprised. Red flag went off as soon as “male disposability” came up. That and the fixation on Cassandra as some sort of spoiled princess.
I too suspected he was MRAL but wasn’t fully sure so I engaged….that jab at Cassandra just nailed it >.>
MRAL/Nathan why don’t you just talk about this shit with people irl and see what they say?
and people agreed that men face sexism for fucks sake, but institutionalized misandry is not a thing. There is nothing men are forbidden from doing that women can do. There are no “experts” talking about how inferior men are and there never has been. Has any president of an ivy league claimed that maybe men were just not so good at science and math?
God is a man. The president is a man. At least low status men have a fucking higher chance at reaching that position than women do. At least men are considered to have authority and control. You claim men are discriminated in childcare but how many men actually WANT to do those jobs? I’d guess not many because it’s low status pussy women’s work that pays shit.
Argh. Sleep now.
The odd segue from men who work in childcare to relationship history was another red flag.
Unless there are more of them. Maybe there’s a nest somewhere and they all crawl back at the end of the day to compare notes.
Granted that I was in snark mode from the outset because I could already tell where he was going, but still, Dracula and Kirby, I commend you both for your patience. I can’t even be bothered to engage with this crap any more.
Also, this bit was funny.
“No one agrees with you guys- seriously. If you ask someone on the street whether men faced gendered problems, the answer is of course going to be yes. Because they do.”
Someone who actually believed this wouldn’t bother to come here and argue with people. They’d just point and laugh, like we do with The Spearhead. If you think people are deluded and wrong and no one takes them seriously you don’t try to change their minds, because why bother? But if you know that in fact society is coming around more to their point of view than to yours…
No. No I’m going to try and get a guy I don’t know removed from his position because he said some stupid nasty things on Twitter (which don’t amount to harrasment). It’s Tumblr, ffs
Stick to exposing and mocking misogyny and the incoherence of the men’s rights movement, not pointless wrath.
I like and follow this blog and I like you but posts like this are the uglier side of things here.
Sorry – “I’m *not* going to try…”
Back to topic for a moment,
David wrote a while ago about AVfM “publisher” (of a blog…) Paul Elam struggling to get 1,000 signatures for an MRA petition.
The petition noted here has almost 4,000 after virtually no time at all.
But don’t worry, MRAs, your victory is imminent!!!
“I was responding to her sexism with sexism”
Because two wrongs make a right! Isn’t that how the saying goes?
I was wondering, are you going to say anything about the disgusting things that Liz Trotta said about rape in the military? I wonder if any MRAs have decided to support a woman because of the flamingly misogynistic shit she said, or if they’re ignoring the fact that a woman might ever say something they agree with….
MRAs will support women who say sexist or downright misogynistic things. That’s why AVFM supports GWW who agrees with Elam that “women aren’t self-sufficient in modern society” (except for GWW who is a special snowflake) and why The Spreadhead commentors love Ann Coulter for saying women shouldn’t be allowed to vote. I think they believe their support gives their bullshit validation and a defense against charges of sexism if it comes from a woman (It doesn’t).
So, what you’re saying is that you, David and the rest of the crowd here spend hours a day fighting a fringe movement with hardly any followers? Good Job!
Ann Coulter…. I want to bark every time I see her face.
I don’t understand how someone can say such stupid illogical things and still be able to string words together in grammatically correct sentences. Sometimes I wonder if she knows how full of crap she is but figures that being a blonde psycho is a good way to make money
HAHA that was supposed to read barf
suppose it still works XD
Thomas: “So, what you’re saying is that you, David and the rest of the crowd here spend hours a day fighting a fringe movement with hardly any followers? Good Job!”
While the MRM itself poses no real threat and has no power (as much as MRAs want to believe), it represents a greater and more serious problem of widespread misogyny and rape apologia in our society and needs to be called out. Notice that Ryking here is in no way associated with the MRM, but is being called out as a misogynistic ass just the same.
And in case you missed it, the banner at the top of the page notes that this site is all about mocking misogyny. Any actual activism or discussion its members engage in takes place elswhere like on Ozy’s site NSWATM.
Late to this thread. Why is “banana republic” being construed as a homophobic term? It comes from the 19th century, and is tied to the Chiquita company — which at the time was known as United Fruit Company. They went into impoverished countries, used bribery and coercion to take over the local government, and then exploited the local labor force on their banana plantations.
Sigh…and people wonder why feminists get so upset. Anyone want to speculate on the degrees of separation between RYking and the MRA? My guess is that we’ll need a spectometer to find it.
Nathan, try reading the Second sex. Or any of the women who are considered the pillars of feminism. They can explain to you why men are spit on for taking on traditional female roles.
@blitzgal:
I honestly have no idea… is “banana” now a gay slur or something?
@Crumbelievable:
I like to think of it this way; here we point out misogyny to mock. The funny thing is that following misogyny tends to lead back to the MRM, like how the various crime stories in Sherlock Holmes always had Moriarty behind the scenes pulling the strings.
This is the quintessential example for just how much of a myth Misandry is. Male nurses have preference in promotion and pay raises over female ones, and are considered more competent for the same work; Unlike women in male-coded jobs, they face no selection bias in hiring. Some patients are assholes to them, but seriously, what?
You’re joking. This is all you’ve done. You haven’t posted any links to evidence, as usual, MRAL.
Concern Troll.
FTR folks, “Male Disposability” is a Warren Farrell myth, which he tries to demonstrate by forgetting that women existed for 7000 years.
I spend maybe 20 minutes a day primarily amusing myself. Sometimes an hour or more if I’m correcting misconceptions about history. So yeah, I’d say good job.
Based on Nathan’s posts, especially the “theoretical armchairs,” and the idea that feminists spend all their time analyzing pop culture and debating language, I’d say he knows shit all about any elements of “feminism” than the current crop of (yes, white, middle-class, youngish) feminist bloggers.
Shit. All.
Therefore, again, I call troll!
@Nathan: I’ll ask you what I ask every single troll who has claimed to read feminist writing.
Name five feminists whose works you’ve read; bonus points if two are in BOOK form rather than blogs (which, although interesting in terms of feminism, class, the internet, are not the end all and be all of feminist writings). EXTRA bonus points if you can name ONE feminist of color or womanist whose work you’ve read (blog or book form).
*munches popcorn while waiting*
<blockquoteCassandra, until you can engage the topic instead of making lofty sarcastic remarks, you’re just going to make yourself look like a pompous ass. If you can’t be arsed to type so much shit out, you’re free to not participate.
The fact is I’m right. That is the feminist, or “social justice” definition of misogyny, and amongst some circles sexism as well. And even under the feminist definition, misandry is a thing.
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand our little troll boy shows all his cards. LOfuckingL at misandry being a thing.
It’s always so charming when they scold us.
What’s next, MRAL, another rant about how hard you have it as a middle-class healthy straight white boy?
Fucking HTML tags, how do they work?
“Frankly, I do think that gender is more give-and-take than other forms of “common” oppression- racism, homophobia, transphobia- because women are and have been half of every single society in history. Whereas gays, ethnic minorities, religious minorities etc. often had no place whatsoever, there always had to be a place for women. It might not have been as qualitatively “good” or “comprehensive” as men’s, but it was there.”
Nathan, this was hilarious. “Women are discriminated against! But gay people are discriminated against moar, so women still don’t count!”
You’ve managed to sound MORE misogynistic and promote gay, trans, and racial visibility AT THE SAME TIME. Doesn’t that hurt your brain?
Also, yes, Sady Doyle is white, but are you seriously claiming she comes from a middle class background?
The only thing that makes sense is that he assumed it meant “fruit.” But yeah, people should know where the term banana republic comes from, especially considering that we’re still dealing with the affects of corporations influencing government and abusing their workers.
*with the EFFECTS, grr.
I’m amazed “Nathan” got away with so many “well [subgroup] of women is oppressed because [subgroup], not because women” comments without anyone once mentioning the word “intersectionality.” …OTOH, I respect any decision not to inundate him with complex, nuanced concepts when he’s still struggling with the 101 vocabulary.
…
On a totally unrelated note, I’ve been pondering the mystery that is “Steak and Blowjob Day,” and I have to know: what the hell is so special about steak?
It’s not particularly expensive, it doesn’t taste particularly interesting, and in social status it’s pretty much dead center on the meat-cuts scale. I’d never have guessed that steak, of all meat cuts, would rank alongside oral sex. Does steak have some kind of magic re-masculating powers men need after a hard day co-existing with Teh Laydeez(TM) and that I just can’t possibly understand because I am one of Teh Laydee Borg? Or do some people just like steak that much and that’s all there is to it?
Dani, I think the steak thing goes back to mammoth days. It’s all manly and shit.
Nathan wrote, “Dracula, I don’t agree the assumption that women are universally considered to be ‘the inferior gender’. This goes back to my first post. Men are held to be superior in certain spheres, women in others- and this serves as the springboard for most misogyny and misandry in our society. Men have (or had, in the past) things quantitatively ‘better’, but there were and are areas where they were and are considered not adept. It’s pretty simple.”
This would be great, except even skills that are supposedly in a women’s sphere are still dominated by men. In cooking, the top chefs are more often male than female. GOOD had an article just today about how there are fewer women in writing than men. There are more male politicians and CEOs in the US than women–or do you think politicis and running businesses are gendered skills?
And Real Men only eat meat, Dani. Any man who willingly eats vegetables or is, dog forbid, a vegetarian/vegan, is an emasculated pussy-begging mangina.
The fact that men die, on average, slightly earlier than women is not at all related but is pure misandry on the part of…er…the Grim Reaper.
(Does anyone else remember the SCTV SLUT about a restaurant called Beef and Brews or something like that?)
SKIT. Skit skit skit. Not slut.
I swear I will someday post something that isn’t completely incomprehensible.
I actually love steak. If you like meat, it can totally be up there with sex.
Steak is nice, but a good simmered beef stew is… ahh.
Steak isn’t that expensive? It rarely makes its way into my house, and only the really tough cuts at that. I wouldn’t be surprised to find that steak as a special meal is tied to working class realities. You know, the class that’s always been seen as real men who dig ditches and build stuff. Its interesting how certain meats got positioned in terms of status and price.
After all, any woman can raise a flock of chickens.
Well, to say “steak is not expensive” is taking steak as a monolith when really there is a plurality of diverse types and price levels at play. There is no single steak that speaks for all steak. You can probably find say a three quarter pound chuck steak at your grocer for 4 bucks. For me there’s nothing like getting a cheap chuck and frying it up on the foreman. However, if you want to get strip sirloin, or filet mignon, etc., you’re going to pay substantially more.
At any rate, I shouldn’t have to explain the nuances of stake erasure to you! Read a book!
Note: I am not endorsing these stereotypes about gender, food, and sex. I’m just trying to explain where some of the appeal of steak and blow job day might come from.
There is a certain type of machismo where some men put red meat, especially steak, up on a pedestal as the ultimate manly food. It’s more expensive than chicken and pork, so it is seen as something special. Most people I know, including my own family, has a tight grocery budget, so you only buy steak for special occasions. If you can only buy a small amount of steak and then give more of it to the man, it’s like you’re making him the king of the castle.
Another thing about steak is it is best cooked on a BBQ grill, so you’re likely to serve it at neighborhood parties. It’s a way to impress your neighbors that you bought fancy meat for them rather than cheaper ground chuck to make burgers. So yes, it’s fair to say that for some people, steak is a status symbol.
Fresh fish and seafood is hard to come by and expensive in the midwest, since we’re far from any ocean. You can have fresh fish like bass from ponds, but it’s not as good. However, cows are everywhere on nearby farms, so it’s more readily available. A lot of people have a deep freeze, and fill it with 1/4 or 1/2 of a cow from a butcher once a year.
It’s true that read meat is unhealthy and high in cholesterol. That’s probably part of its appeal to the men that buy into the machismo image. It’s seen as manly to say “Who cares about healthy food? I like meat, potatoes, beer, and cigars!” I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with meat, potatoes, beer, and cigars, but just saying that they’re symbols of macho defiance to having a healthy lifestyle. On the other side of that is the idea that eating salad and exercising are feminine and therefore inferior.
Sometimes men like to bond over their steak rules, like “A high quality steak doesn’t need A-1″ or “If your steak doesn’t have red in the center, it’s overcooked”. That rule is another machismo thing, where men can show off how tough their GI tracts are for eating and digesting steak medium-rare. If a man wants his steak well done, it’s seen as weak and womanly.
Sorry to be so wordy. I just wanted to add some thoughts into why a “Steak and Blow Job Day” might be considered such a big deal for a certain type of cis straight man. The steak is a way for him to show manliness and be the king of the castle. The blow job is his way to feel powerful that a woman is focusing on his sexual pleasure instead of having sexual needs of her own. I realize that many women love giving blow jobs, but I’m only describing a stereotype of a man that feels powerful when a woman gives him one begrundgingly. Those same types of men would probably slut shame a woman if she showed how much she enjoys giving head.