About these ads

Men’s Rights hate site A Voice for Men finds a woman to blame for Trayvon Martin’s death

Rachel Jeantel, Men's Rights scapegoat

Rachel Jeantel, Men’s Rights scapegoat

Well, it took them a little while, but the folks at Men’s Rights hate site A Voice for Men have finally figured out an angle on the Trayvon Martin case. According to regular AVFM contributor August Løvenskiolds, the whole thing can be blamed on a woman — specifically, Rachel Jeantel, the friend of Trayvon Martin who was on the phone with him just before he was killed.

According to Løvenskiolds, who seems to know more about what happened that night than it is in fact possible for him to know,

During a post-trial interview with Piers Morgan on CNN, Rachel Jeantel, the reluctant phone witness who was talking to Martin just before Martin assaulted Zimmerman, finally revealed that she had warned Martin that Zimmerman might be gay, or even, a gay rapist preparing to approach Martin.

This isn’t news; Jeantel said in her testimony that she told Martin she was afraid the man following him might be a rapist. But Løvenskiolds moves quickly from “sworn testim0ny” to “making shit up.”

Martin freaked out over the idea that Zimmerman might have sexual designs on him or his family, and this seems to have precipitated the attack on Zimmerman – which, of course, would make the attack a violation of Zimmerman’s human rights as a (purportedly) gay man, and make Jeantel the proxy instigator of the attack.

Yes, that’s right, the whole thing was “violence by proxy” instigated by an evil homophobic woman.

Would you like some armchair psychoanalysis to go with your unfounded speculation?

So, Trayvon Martin was killed in the act of gay-bashing (in Jeantel’s and his own minds, anyway). The fury of Martin’s sudden turnabout attack is now explicable (he had been avoiding being followed up to the point of the introduction of the gay rapist idea) and it indicates the degree of Martin’s revulsion that he went from flight to fight mode in so short a time.

And this of course makes it all All About The Menz Rights.

The men’s human rights issues related to a woman (Jeantel) being held blameless for using gay/rape threats to precipitate man-on-man violence ought to be obvious.

It’s always a woman’s fault, isn’t it?

Elsewhere in the post, Løvenskiolds seriously suggests that when a police dispatcher told Zimmerman that “we don’t need you” to follow Martin, that was Super Seekret Man Code for “we actually DO need you to follow him.” No, really.

Such negative suggestions are as clear to savvy men as this: “Honey, you don’t need to buy me roses for Valentine’s Day” – meaning, of course, “if you know what is good for you, I’d better get flowers AND chocolate AND jewelry AND a nice dinner AND…”

The fact that the dispatcher further expected Zimmerman to meet with officers – drafting Zimmerman into the militia, as it were – made it clear to Zimmerman that his continued pursuit of Martin was expected by the police as well.

The societal expectation of militia service by all able-bodied adult males is certainly a men’s human rights issue and an indication of inequality between the genders that needs to be redressed.

MRAs may not be good at much, but they’ve got mental gymnastics down to a science.

EDIT: I added a graf after the first quote from Løvenskiolds clarifying that Jeantel says she did in fact tell Martin that she thought Zimmerman might be a rapist.

About these ads

Posted on July 20, 2013, in "proxy violence", a voice for men, a woman is always to blame, crackpottery, evil women, homophobia, imaginary backwards land, misogyny, MRA, oppressed men, racism, that's completely wrong, victim blaming, whaaaaa? and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 280 Comments.

  1. RE: auggziliary

    I know, right! I’m starting to wonder why the hell I ever WANTED to be masculine, as a wee gay man. I swear to god, there’s no substance more frail, whiny, and overrated.

  2. auggziliary — it’s much easier to keep those plugs dry! Seeing how they aren’t always // nearly always keeping skin in contact with their surface.

    Nova — I will have to try that, thank you!

  3. Well, I smell like cabbage, but I think that got them cleaned out and I got the plugs back in easy enough. And smelling like cabbage is certainly better than smelling like ear gunk! Thanks Nova!

  4. And to be clearer, Caesar (I believe) was so drunk on Cleopatra that he allowed his empire to fall

    vs

    Gaius Julius Caesar was a Roman general, statesman, Consul and notable author of Latin prose. He played a critical role in the events that led to the demise of the Roman Republic and the rise of the Roman Empire. Wikipedia

    So wow. Social Kenny really (metaphorically) drowned us with his historical brilliance all right. Man, that Cleopatra sure did bring about an END to the Roman Empire, hey?

  5. Effing blockquotes.

  6. RE: Unimaginative

    Yeah, socialkenny’s just batting zero on the history today. CLEOPATRA lost her empire, not him. But hey, that conniving woman totally ruined everything, am I right?

  7. Those conniving women always do. You know, trained from birth and designed by evopsych biology as they are.

    Also completely missing: any acknowledgment that the evil beasts mentioned in the bible (snake, leviathan) almost always had the same imagery of contemporaneous goddesses. Yeah, the garden of eden snake was TOTALLY a dude.

  8. I never understood why I was supposed to be mad at Eve in that story. She is the reason human beings can tell the difference between good and evil. Give me ethics over Eden any day.

  9. I was very confused by that as well. I can remember reading the Garden of Eden story in Sunday school probably around age 5 or so, and my takeaway at the time was that, because Eve chose the apple, history happened. If she hadn’t done that, it would have been just Adam & Even in the garden, forever.

    So, flash forward to my early twenties, I started learning about feminism, and a shocking number of the books I was reading opened with a story of the author’s pain, her whole life long, at being punished for Eve’s sin. Literally punished. I’m still boggling, twenty-something years later.

  10. Rogan – I loved your comparison (think it was yours and not Mac’s) of masculinity to the big fierce-looking dog that runs yiping into the distance the minute anyone looks at it. Perfect comparison.

    Didn’t Cleopatra cause the fall of the Roman Empire by introducing Caesar to buttsex and undermining his manly man manliness? History, dude, history!

  11. RE: Kittehserf

    Yeah. I mean, I’ve seen masculinity NOT done in the yipey-dog way, but it definitely is looking more a feature of the PERSON, not the masculinity.

    It’s true. And then Cleopatra turned Ceasar into a beta and got on the alpha cock carousel with Mark Antony, laughing while Caesar cried and sat on a hard chair.

    (Never mind that Egypt was among the NICER places to be a woman in, if you were stuck in that day and age. Women could actually own property there.)

  12. It was inadvertent.

    Just like the last few times, huh? You’ve been told to knock it off, dude. Do so.

  13. neuroticbeagle

    The Garden of Eden story is supposed to explain why people grow up. The Garden represents childhood and the apple the physical and mental (Adam and Eve realize they are naked! And they look different!) changes that occur with puberty. They get kicked out cause time doesn’t go backwards-once you grow up (physically at least-hard to consider mras grown ups) you can’t go back to being a child. The fact that Eve was the one to bite the apple explains why women mature (physically) faster than men and have to suffer pain in childbirth.

  14. Eve actually seems like a reasonable person. So does Adam. I’d bake them apple pies but they’re not real/dead.

  15. (Never mind that Egypt was among the NICER places to be a woman in, if you were stuck in that day and age. Women could actually own property there.)

    Yup. I don’t know much about Ptolemaic Egypt, but during the New Kingdom at least, it was the place I’d choose to be a woman in the societies of that time we know anything much about. Hell, how many rulers thought the idea of women being able to go about their business without being attacked was something worth mentioning? Ramesses III did, he wrote about it on one of his monuments.

  16. Hmm, seems I haven’t fed the blockquote monster lately!

  17. Idk, my only fondness for the garden of Eden story these days is that white wolf borrowed it to make Cain the father of all vampires (by all the gods, no really, all of them, is oWoD, and probably nWoD so much more interesting if you know your myths and religious legends)

    LBT — I realize this is a completely different MST, but whichever of you (or the IS folks) was comparing Grey to predatory animals was hilarious.

  18. CassandraSays

    @ LBT

    I both thank you and curse you for introducing me to the G0y subculture. Did you see the (multiple) part(s) where the guy who runs the cockduelling site claims that wanting to perform frottage with other men is part of the one and only True Masculinity? It’s a perfect inversion of classic homophobia – men who don’t want to rub up on other men are now officially unmanly.

  19. This is appropros of nothing, but I just stumbled on a graphic definition of the various forms of asexuality — http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/19/asexual-spectrum_n_3428710.html?1371648467

    …I may have to print that for the next time my psych acts like my refusal to date is some obvious sign that I need massive help for my interpersonal issues. Like, I’m not interested, I am not upset by this, so why is she? (And seriously, there’s a reason I don’t date, I want your BRAIIINNS isn’t a good strategy with most people)

  20. CassandraSays

    If it’s not bothering you, why is this something that your psych feels like she needs to address? I know I’ve said this before but I think you need a new therapist, because this one seems to have boundary issues.

  21. Because it’s yet another thing that’s probably related to my history of trauma (ok, and so what if it is?)

    And yeah, it’s looking like I’m going to need to get all hopped up on Ativan and call the insurance hotline thing (FTR, all hopped up here means 2/3~3/3 my allowed daily dose). The nonsense we discussed over email was kinda the last straw. I mean, I emailed the rantier version to pecunium when I first got back from the appt, and his reply? Do I want him to come up and explain wtf their appt’s do to me (I’m making a habit of coming back from my psych appt’s and doing an emotional dump on him)

    In any case, primary sexual attraction and I are rarely in the same room, and I’m fine with having friends and not romantic partners (I am a cuddle slut, but that’s only semi-relevant) and hey, friends! *waves* hi guys!

  22. CassandraSays

    She seems to want to push you into sink or swim situations in general, and although that’s one way of handling things (person is scared of spiders? make them sit in a room with one!), the fact that it seems to be her method of choice in most situations concerns me.

  23. “…I may have to print that for the next time my psych acts like my refusal to date is some obvious sign that I need massive help for my interpersonal issues.”

    Like Cassandra said, you need another psych. This one’s just another bullshit artist.

    Fuck her, I’m fifty and never dated, never experienced primary sexual attraction with in-the-flesh persons, and am happy as a cat on ‘nip with that arrangement. Since when does dating indicate mental health? And what’s with the deriding of friendship? It’s like the NiceGuys(TM), like being someone’s friend without sex being involved is some huge horror at worst and just second-rate at best.

    Why are so many shrinks unfit to psychoanalyse a flea …

  24. CassandraSays

    I’m picturing her counseling the Dalai Lama.

    “So, you said that you’re a monk and that means you don’t have sex, nor do you attempt to date women. Is this about your mother? Was she very cold to you when you were a child?”

  25. *shakes head in amazement*

    If I remember my Roman history correctly (and it’s been thirty years since I studied classics, so I may have become hazy on the detail) the republic had been in trouble long before Cleopatra came on the scene. While the senate didn’t like Julius having so much power they put up with him until there was a viable alternative. They needed him and they needed his military genius and they needed his wealth. Julius didn’t “lose” his “empire” because of Cleopatra, he never had one in the first place. When Octavian showed up he was just what they were looking for. He was Julius’ heir, was an equally brilliant general and had bags of personal charisma. After Actium they begged him to become (I think the term was) Pater Patrii and gave him the title of Imperator as weasel words to avoid calling him king (they really didn’t like the idea of an hereditory monarchy) I’m sure Octavian had organized the whole show but the Senate accepted him, even if they had reservations. The ironic thing is that in trying to save the republic the senate was instrumental in destroying it and giving total power to one man. Augustus, for his time seems to have been a reasonable person and a good leader. They weren’t so fortunate in succeeding generations.

    The republic would have fallen with or without Cleopatra, who, to me, seemed to be doing the best she could to protect Egypt’s independence and not some kind of evil femme fatale, luring men to their downfall. She was certainly a complicating issue but to suggest that 1. The Roman republic was Julius’ empire and he could somehow lose it is just silly. He was powerful but he was never emperor or that 2. She somehow managed to destroy the (non-existant) Roman Empire shows that SocialKenny has no clue about Roman history and, if genuinely interested should probably seek out a reputable history of the period, rather than relying on movies and NatGeo specials. There are many good texts out there and they aren’t hard to find.

    And to compare her to Ms Jeantel is equally silly. She was on the phone with him and was afraid for his safety. A fear that turned out to be perfectly justified.

  26. Agenti Aertheri said:

    “…I may have to print that for the next time my psych acts like my refusal to date is some obvious sign that I need massive help for my interpersonal issues. Like, I’m not interested, I am not upset by this, so why is she? (And seriously, there’s a reason I don’t date, I want your BRAIIINNS isn’t a good strategy with most people)”

    If you aren’t interested and are fine with that why is it any of her business? There isn’t a problem as long as your happy with the state of affairs, or lack thereof!

  27. Cassandra – I find myself wanting to have a session with this alleged psych just to mess with her head.

  28. I shoulda known y’all would jump all over socialkenny and his historical misperceptions.

    I wish I could say that his notions are bizarre, but sadly they’re very common.

    I would just like to add that Julius Caesar didn’t have an empire, and Cleopatra didn’t bring it down. The empire was Augustus’.

  29. Off topic sorta, but my parrot’s name is Augustus, but we just call him Auggie. I can’t remember if we were influenced by the general, but I think he would make a good one, since he’s very protective and jealous sometimes.

  30. RE: CassandraSays

    I’m afraid the g0ys have stolen my snarky heart. I haven’t looked at the Cockrub Warriors guy since, really. I’m totally unsurprised though. They are incredibly self-righteous and self-conscious about their preference in sexual acts.

    RE: Seranvali

    Pretty much. I mean, Rome isn’t my strongest point (I mostly wanted to learn about Carthage, Egypt, and Judaea) but from what I’ve read, Cleopatra was pretty much desperately trying to juggle everything to keep Egypt out of Roman hands. Considering she had at least two siblings who wanted the throne, plus Roman intrigues, PLUS varying levels of support at home, I think she was pretty clever to have lasted so long. She was dealt a bad hand at the start, and she played well, but there’s only so much you can do in that kind of situation. Egypt was the bread basket of the ancient world; keeping the Romans away was pretty much a doomed enterprise.

    Seriously, socialkenny probably couldn’t have chosen a worse subject in history, except for maybe contemporary Judaea.

  31. You guys are forgetting that Kenny is a PUA, therefore he believes that if he states any sort of ridiculous nonsense in an authoritative enough way women will be fooled by his manly alpha confidence into assuming that a. he knows what he’s talking about and b. we should offer him a blow job. Because alpha, that’s why.

    The reception he’s getting demonstrates why, if you’re a lonely guy in search of dating help, PUA is really not the smart way to go.

  32. RE: CassandraSays

    Yeah, I’m surprised he said he’d drown me with his historical knowledge, after that complete FAILURE of understanding.. Confidence is useless if it’s misplaced, ESPECIALLY when it’s so easy to prove that you’re factually wrong.

    Also, oh god, we need brain bleach and brain recovery techniques. The day was going great until we had breakfast, and then it was sunk. Son of a bitch.

  33. Kenny can’t string a coherent thought together, so much for him “drowning” anyone with his historical knowledge.

  34. David: Sorry I didn’t mean to imply you had made anything unclear one of the comments right above mine was just asking if Rachel had in fact said the gay rapist thing.

  35. On a bit of good news, Derek Black, the son of Don Black (the founder and administrator of the racist site Stormfront), has renounced white nationalism. You can read more about Derek’s change of heart on the SPLC website, but this bit stands out to me:

    In an E-mail (pdf) to the editor of this blog earlier this week, Black, 24, wrote that he had come to see the arguments of white nationalism as “principally flawed,” adding that he had realized that American society is marked by an “overwhelming disparity between white power and that of everyone else” and that white nationalism was really about “an entrenched desire to preserve white power at the expense of others.”

  36. If a woman makes a dumb decision for a guy she thinks is handsome, would you blame him? Is he an evil tempter now? Was she innocent of her decision and some poor, poor victim of his handsomeness?

    No, she was an evil hypergamous bitch riding the alpha cock carousel. Come on, @auggziliary, get with the program.

    The only correct time for a woman to have sex is when an MRA wants it, and the only right person for her to have it with is him, obvs. Once she has sex with him once, she is supposed to be hooked for life because science. Women are evolved to be monogamous. Oh wait no, they aren’t, they’re natural born cheaters. Whichever, I keep getting that part mixed up.

  37. Ok, evo psych time!

    Women have a “bonding hormone” that they release during sex, but they only have so much of it (that part may be fundie nonsense, not evo psych)…so when they ride the cock carousel they use it all up making them unable to bond with a long term partner.

    Men are programmed to be poly apparently, per evo psych I saw over the weekend. But that’s bad, because it causes wars because there are men without partners. And only Muslims are ever suicide bombers because they’ll get virgins for being martyrs. Relevance of that last piece of shit? Same article, so apply salt to the rest of the paragraph.

  38. Yeah I’ve heard this.

    1) Oxytocin (like so many neuromodulators and neurotransmitters) is a renewable resource. But people have different baseline levels due to genetic variation and probably environmental factors. There’s some evidence that autistic people and other people with empathy deficits aren’t as sensitive to oxytocin (or don’t produce as much in response to environmental cues) and thus have difficulty understanding social reciprocity, etc.

    2) Men also release oxytocin during orgasm, but they supposedly have a second chemical release in addition to that (vasopressin). From the evidence that exists now, it looks as if cismen have lower baseline levels of oxytocin than women do on average, which is often touted as an explanation for why women are calmer and less violent. Lower baseline levels don’t necessarily mean less sensitivity, however– in fact, it may mean that smaller changes in the concentration of oxytocin in the brain can cause more noticable perturbations of the whole system. Also, I’m not up on the literature, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the variance of baseline oxytocin levels within sexes is as wide as it is between sexes.

    The neuroscience behind this stuff is actually complex and not well understood. The evo psych studies are mostly riddled with methodological errors and full of wild speculation based on surveys and self-reports.

  39. Also, oh god, we need brain bleach and brain recovery techniques. The day was going great until we had breakfast, and then it was sunk. Son of a bitch.

    Would a kitten knocking over dominos help?

  40. I saw a passing mention of oxytocin last night, in a documentary called The Secret Life of Dogs. It was about the phenomenon (which I’d guess everyone here knows) about the bonding between humans and dogs during petting – that hormone’s released in both. Dogs get the same lower heart rate and blood-pressure benefits from cuddling up with humans as humans do. It all goes back to bonding with their mothers (and the dog kissing your face goes back to licking mum’s muzzle to get her to regurgitate food). I also presume it works the same with kitties, because the benefits work the same way.

    @katz, love the kitty!

  41. FTR, I know it’s bullshit when applied like that. Whereas saying it’s released during breastfeeding and encourages bonding with the kid makes actual sense.

    Now I need kitteh video!

  42. Heh – anything coming from evo psych faithful is almost guaranteed to be bullshit.

  43. I’ll work the can opener but I’m not throwing up for anyone.

  44. Yeah the scientist in me just bristles at everything MRAs say about biology so I had to get that out…

  45. I’ll work the can opener but I’m not throwing up for anyone.

    The real reason humans evolved thumbs! Biology!!1!eleventy!!

  46. LBT said:

    “Pretty much. I mean, Rome isn’t my strongest point (I mostly wanted to learn about Carthage, Egypt, and Judaea) but from what I’ve read, Cleopatra was pretty much desperately trying to juggle everything to keep Egypt out of Roman hands. Considering she had at least two siblings who wanted the throne, plus Roman intrigues, PLUS varying levels of support at home, I think she was pretty clever to have lasted so long. She was dealt a bad hand at the start, and she played well, but there’s only so much you can do in that kind of situation. Egypt was the bread basket of the ancient world; keeping the Romans away was pretty much a doomed enterprise.”

    To me she came across as a very astute political operator and her situation was desperate enough that she had to use every weapon and talent she possessed just to stay in the game but to suggest that equally competant politicians like Julius and Marcus Antonius were mere “putty in her hands”, as SocialKenny maintains, would be selling both men seriously short as well as being misandrist as hell. They knew what they were doing. Trade with Egypt was important and if they could bring Egypt to heel, as it were, by controlling Cleopatra, obviously they would try. It would save them from having to take Egypt by force of arms and destroying what they wanted to posess.

    Octavian didn’t play that way, though, and was more than happy to drag her back to Rome as part of his triumph and rather than be humiliated that way she (probably) killed herself, although probably not via an asp (cobra? Eeeew!), poison would more likely have been her choice.

    She played a losing game and played it well.

  47. One more thing about Cleopatra that gets ignored – her daughter Cleopatra Selene’s success. She was raised with Octavia’s children (her half-siblings, iirc) in Rome and became queen of Mauretania. It doesn’t seem to fit the usual narrative that Cleopatra should have surviving children who did well in their circumstances, does it?

  48. My contribution to this thread is completely OT. Oxytocin is released during labour in order to cause contractions. We have it so well synthesized that we can give it to induce labour. And! We give it after baby’s been born in order to help contract the uterus to prevent postpartum haemorrhage.

    (Let’s see if I can work this into the thread)

    We are giving women who are delivering babies extra oxytocin in order to bond with people more (after they’ve been all hypergamous and slept with an Alpha and are now forcing their Beta husband to raise the Alpha’s child) in order to avoid their natural expenditure of oxytocin stores. Therefore, childbirth is misandry and we are totes facilitating female privilege by not forcing them to have no oxytocin left any more because they’ve used it up sleeping around.

    (Not bad eh? I’m getting the hang of this evo-psych MRA bullshit)

    Also, Falconer, Kirk-Piece of the Action-Amazing!! :D

  49. Thanks, SittieKitty!

  50. RE: Seranvali

    Yeah, when I actually READ about Cleopatra, rather than the mythology she’s wrapped up in, i was fascinated. It’s one heck of a story! Also makes me want to learn more about Hatshepsut and Akhenaten.

    RE: Kittehserf

    I got to meet and speak with an author who wrote a series of fantasy books with Cleopatra’s daughter as the main character! I don’t remember if it was THAT daughter, per se (I know she had more than one child, don’t know how many made it to adulthood) but we had a cool conversation about Ptolemaic Egypt.

  51. SocialKenny: And to be clearer, Caesar (I believe) was so drunk on Cleopatra that he allowed his empire to fall just because of this 1 hot ass: hot-black ass might I add

    1: Caesar didn’t have an empire (Julius never did, they killed him to prevent it, and his son Octavius [known as Augustus] won the battle to gain power; and then killed his 1/2 brother, Cleopatra’s son, to secure it).

    2: Cleopatra wasn’t black. She wasn’t even “egyptian”, since the Ptolemies were Alexandrian Greeks.

    You are as clueless about history (which you could look up) as you are about men and women.

    @LBT- She was of lighter complexion because of that admixture or races, but nevertheless, according to the way Americans do it (assuming you live in America), once you have any sort of black in you; you’re classified as black and now white. So either way, it is what it is. But you’re right; she wasn’t pure black, but the blackness in her gave her that exotic appeal which they weren’t used to seeing in Rome. Anyway, different story.

    Nope. 1: That’s not, “american”, that’s Southern White Supremicist/Jim Crow.

    2: N. Africans aren’t black.

    3: She didn’t have any N. African in her ancestry.

    4: You are dumber than a box of rocks.

    And don’t try schooling me on history, race, the Bible nor religion, because I’ll drown you…metaphorically.

    Go to town son, just try it. So far you’ve failed to understand how the Roman Empire came to be, how the Ptolemaic Dynasty of Egypt came to fall (and from the evidence how they came to be), that N. Africa isn’t the same as Sub-Saharan Africa, the structure of Roman Armies (there is no way a foreign potentate can “get between” a legionary commander and his legions; this is why Generals were not allowed to bring their forces across the Rubicon, google, “alia iacta est” for the background on that).

    You’ve also blown race relations in the US, in such a way as to imply you comprehend neither the scale of the country, the nature of its government, the variety of its polities, nor the differences between 50 years ago and today.

    In short, you couldn’t argue your way out of a paper sack with a firehose.

  52. Octavian didn’t play that way, though, and was more than happy to drag her back to Rome as part of his triumph and rather than be humiliated that way she (probably) killed herself, although probably not via an asp (cobra? Eeeew!), poison would more likely have been her choice.

    She might have used an asp (not a cobra) they are a pretty mild way to go, better than a lot of the poisons of the time.

  53. It’s apparently alea iacta est, score one for neither of us being able to spell in Latin? Mostly though this is me popping in to say I REALLY want to see Kenny try to school you on the Bible or religion, I’ll make the popcorn :)

  54. @ Argenti
    I really like that definition link.

  55. neuroticbeagle

    ” I REALLY want to see Kenny try to school you on the Bible or religion, I’ll make the popcorn”

    Any of the trolls trying to school pecunium on anything is bound to popcorn worthy.

  56. neuroticbeagle — math, in which case he can make the popcorn while I go to town :)

    Tag teaming the trolls is extra fun. I was going through an old thread with Crack Emcee in it and found him and I tag teaming the naïf last summer, I’d completely forgotten he existed, and am amazed he’s been around that long.

    Whack and troll, like slinky it’s fun alone or in pairs XD

  57. neuroticbeagle

    Argenti- the problem with math is that the only thing I’ll understand is that you are right and the troll is wrong. don’t get me wrong, that is entertaining, it’s just a little more entertaining when I understand the subject matter as well. Actually, I think my favorite is when the trolls get whacked with the power of the Furrinati or, in your case, the Fishinati.

  58. The fishinati have taken over my brain, I just got done measuring the space for a DYI sump. One that’s probably going to end up with twice the capacity as the puffer tank (mm, massive overkill on the filtration! They’ll need it once they grow up)

    Math…I try to make it make sense, but sometimes I just want to do this to the troll —

  59. Heh, add me to the “will never understand maths” crew – “seldom understands arithmetic” for that matter (wish the term dyscalculia had been around when I was at school). I do the same as neuroticbeagle: assume you’re right and the trolls are wrong.

    On Octavian (Augustus Caesar) – he was Julius’ son by posthumous adoption (ie. by testament). Descent-wise he was Julius’ great-nephew.

  60. LBT:

    “Yeah, when I actually READ about Cleopatra, rather than the mythology she’s wrapped up in, i was fascinated. It’s one heck of a story! Also makes me want to learn more about Hatshepsut and Akhenaten”

    That tends to be the way it works. The real story is generally so much more interesting that myths, movies and extrapolation. Hatshepsut is a case in point. Now there was an interesting woman! She controlled Egypt for decades and was co-pharaoh with two others. The second was Thothmes 3, who was also one of Egypt’s greatest pharaohs (there was a very interesting story about him and the sphinx) and she seems to have been in a long term relationship with her vizir, who started life as a stone mason! Apparently, there is some really interesting graffiti about them in the villages that housed the workers who built her tomb…

    And Akhenaten…please look him up because he was fascinating. A political and religious revolutionary and his reign must have been totally terrifying for most Egyptians. He outlawed the old gods and replaced them with a really interesting and rather scary monotheism.

  61. Seranvali – I’ve seen pics of the graffiti of Hatshepsut and Senmut (assuming it’s them). This is one – NSFW!. John Romer points out that the figure bending over seems to be male-proportioned but lack genitals; it’s like the artist was trying to convey the idea of Hatshepsut being unwomanly, or usurping a male position, or something.

    Also on art, it seems the depictions of Akhenaten have zip to do with what he looked like, going on studies of the mummy thought to be his. He didn’t have any deformities; it was all down to artistic style, for whatever reason.

    Totally with you on history being a helluva lot more interesting (and nuanced, of course) than the fiction based on it. Prime teeth-grinding example: the godawful turgid mess of character assassination that’s “The Three Musketeers” vs what the real people Dumas despised were actually like, and actually did.

  62. Pecunium said:

    “Caesar didn’t have an empire (Julius never did, they killed him to prevent it, and his son Octavius [known as Augustus] won the battle to gain power; and then killed his 1/2 brother, Cleopatra’s son, to secure it).”

    True, Julius was instrumental in the downfall of the republic and Octavian put the final nail in its coffin, became Augustus and ruled Rome for decades. People may not have been completely happy about that but I guess they must have considered him preferable to the chaos that would have ensued if he’d been deposed. As I remember it Octavian was Julius’s great nephew, rather than his son but he was certainly his heir.

    As for the mode of Cleopatra’s suicide, it’s almost impossible to be sure at this point. The asp was sometimes used if someone was considered important or deserving of a less humiliating death than public execution (though it would have been in Octavian’s interest to display her at his triumph and either executing her or enslaving her) the cobra was one of the symbols of Egyptian royalty so she might have considered it as an appropriate tool for her suicide, and she probably had access to opium and/or hemlock. Who knows?

    And yes, SocialKenny has no idea what he’s talking about. That scenario seems far too sentimental and “romantic”. It sounds more like Shakespeare or the Burton/Taylor movie than the primary sources.

  63. Kitehserf said:

    “Seranvali – I’ve seen pics of the graffiti of Hatshepsut and Senmut (assuming it’s them). This is one – NSFW!. John Romer points out that the figure bending over seems to be male-proportioned but lack genitals; it’s like the artist was trying to convey the idea of Hatshepsut being unwomanly, or usurping a male position, or something.”

    That seems reasonable. It may have been something she may have actively encouraged. She seems to have worn the Pharaoh’s ceremonial beard on state occasions and she may also have assumed male dress as well. I’m sure some people considered her un feminine and assuming a male role.

    “Also on art, it seems the depictions of Akhenaten have zip to do with what he looked like, going on studies of the mummy thought to be his. He didn’t have any deformities; it was all down to artistic style, for whatever reason.”

    The statues of Akhenaten were are very odd and I’m left seriously wondering WTF they were all about. Some kind of disability caused by inbreeding would be one explanation. The Egyptians tended to present a very idealized view of their pharoahs so it’s odd that Akhenaten is presented that way but he was a very unusual man. Do you have a link to the report on his mummy? It sounds fascinating.

    “Totally with you on history being a helluva lot more interesting (and nuanced, of course) than the fiction based on it. Prime teeth-grinding example: the godawful turgid mess of character assassination that’s “The Three Musketeers” vs what the real people Dumas despised were actually like, and actually did.”

    I know what you mean. Dumas’ story.Is fun if you’re in the mood for it but it has nothing at all to do with history and I wish people wouldn’t take it seriously. Historical fiction is still fiction. I wonder sometimes about the ethics of that type of portrayal of real people.

  64. The current MRM presence online, their only real presence, makes it hard to advocate for legitimate Men’s issues. Even if you self identify as a feminist, fighting for issues facing men causes people to assume you’re a subscriber to the AVfM conspiracy movement. I don’t know how anyone can take them seriously. I’ll admit that when I first looked into men’s issues I browsed their site. But after reading a few articles, no rational person could take them seriously.

    I think there is a real need for a men’s Issues Movement, but not if it means associating with AFVM, or the men’s rights sub-reddit.

  65. I know what you mean. Dumas’ story.Is fun if you’re in the mood for it but it has nothing at all to do with history and I wish people wouldn’t take it seriously. Historical fiction is still fiction. I wonder sometimes about the ethics of that type of portrayal of real people.

    I’ve always thought Dumas the equivalent of the gutter press. He hated Louis. Used to be my dearest wish to give Dumas such a kick in the arse that he’d end up in orbit somewhere past Pluto. Fortunately since then I’ve learned that Louis doesn’t care two hoots about it and never did. If anything he finds it mildly amusing, though he’s sorry I spent years angry about it when it never hurt him. It hurt his earthly reputation like nothing else, though.

    I think that sort of stuff is totally unethical. Granted people don’t know what the effect of their books will be, but someone like Dumas, writing with such malice – I’ve read enough of his comments elsewhere to have no real doubt that it was malicious – what a hateful bloody thing to do. Taking someone intelligent, complex, courageous, and turning them into a weak, cowardly creature – nothing ethical about that. I sometimes wonder if Mr “couldn’t keep it in his pants” Dumas despised Louis partly because he 1) did keep it in his pants and 2) was more attracted to men than women in his earthly days. /justmysnark

    TTM is like Shakespeare’s “history” plays without being well-written and without the political pressure to create them. The real MacBeth, f’rinst, reigned seventeen years after taking the throne in battle – young Duncan invaded his territory – held power securely enough to be able to go on pilgrimage to Rome. He was killed in battle (or died soon after of his wounds) when Malcolm III invaded, but he was, albeit briefly, succeeded by his stepson Lulach. He was the son of the famous “Lady MacBeth,” Gruoch, whose claim to the throne was stronger than any of the male candidates (primogeniture was not a thing in Scotland then, iirc).

    Much more interesting than Shakespeare’s play, even if Jon Finch did look rather luscious playing him in Polanski’s film.

    /rant

  66. Okay, so I didn’t read the last two pages of this comment thread, and I’m also late to the party, but I’ve been given enough to think about that I should comment before I forget my train of thought.

    So, we know that the fear of rape is pretty pervasive amongst women, as well as teen girls. However, when I was growing up – and I’m sure the prevalence of this differs from area to area – we did understand that if a boy was young enough, child molesters might still come after him. Now, fourteen would be the high end of “young enough”, but still within the age range. Certainly my male peers growing up didn’t seem to worry about rape as often as we girls did, but it was there. Also, we were young adolescents, and yes we did harbor some pretty homophobic beliefs, even though we (most of us) didn’t outright hate homosexuals. I don’t think it’s that we believed homosexual men were more likely to harm children, but more that heterosexual men were for girls to watch out for, whereas boys should watch out for homosexual men. Given the still-pervasive cultural narrative that rape is about unsatisfied sexual desire, it just seemed to make sense.
    So firstly, we know Jeantle warned Trayvon that Zimmerman was a rapist, which makes sense to me, given Trayvon’s age. Having come across the allegation against Zimmerman of molestation, I think it makes even more sense for Jeantle to have believed it (since the allegation for all I know, and for all she knew, is true). In fact, I would say that if you’re aware of someone having molested a person, and that someone is now following your friend, regardless of your friend’s gender, you might indeed assume said alleged molester is going to do the same to your friend.
    That brings me to the next part. Did Jeantle actually say that George Zimmerman was gay? She may well have, for reasons I explained above, but from what’s been in the comments and in David’s post, all she did was warn Trayvon that Zimmerman was a rapist. While I’ve already stated that adolescents (due of course to the culture they live in, and adults around them who believe such things) often certainly have homophobic beliefs, it doesn’t mean that Jeantle’s warning means she did. For all that I’m aware, Jeantle could have known that rape is about power and not sexual desire, which would mean she knew sexual orientation has fuck all to do with it. So it thus follows that her saying Zimmerman was a rapist does not necessarily mean she thought he was gay. Now, maybe she did say and think that he was gay – which really wouldn’t be surprising and it would be awful if she thought that – but as others have said, that’s not the reason Trayvon Martin is dead.

    Regarding the Valentine’s thing, I seriously don’t expect gifts. If I happen to have a significant other, then I definitely want his company that day, but I don’t require gifts. Gifts cost money which a lot of people don’t have much of, so that’s why I’d say, “You don’t have to get me anything.” That said, I certainly do appreciate it. My last boyfriend on our third date presented me with a potted mini rose, a bottle of ice wine, a card full of pokemon puns, and home made cookies. It was only then that I remembered it happened to be Valentine’s Day, and I was quite charmed, not only by the gifts, but that they all appealed to my likes. But that’s not something I’ve ever expected of anyone.

    Anyway, long post is long. Also, hi everyone! :D

  67. Hi Alex — good to see you!

  68. You too! Sorry I’m so irregular here. lol

  69. Aw man, I missed awesome talk about pharoahs! I’m so disappointed.

    Regarding depictions of Akhenaten, well, he was an unusual ruler. Perhaps he attempted to institute artistic changes as well? And I’d also heard Hatshepsut wore the male beard and ceremonial clothing. It’s all really interesting. Can anyone recommend certain books about them? Something like that, it’s so hard to decide where to start…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 7,873 other followers

%d bloggers like this: