Turns out VICE made a video about that Men’s Rights rally in Toronto. GO WATCH IT.
This is not an embedded video, so don’t click on it.
I don’t know how I missed it, but a couple of weeks back Vice posted a short video about that EARTH-SHATTERINGLY HISTORIC Men’s Rights rally in Toronto that captured the attention of the world a tiny fraction of a percentage of people in the world (including the people at it and readers of this blog) a little over a month ago.
Alas, WordPress won’t let me embed the video here, but you all need to go look at it. Not only does it capture pretty well what a dinky event it was, but it also contains a bunch of mini-interviews with some A Voice for Men folks that are rather revealing.
The most revealing one of the bunch starts about 2:40 into the video, when AVFM’s Suzanne McCarley explains that
Men, as a class, have never ever oppressed women, as a class. Men have always protected and provided for women. And protected them from oppression from others.
From others? What kind of others? Like, space aliens?
Women have never objected to this, and in fact have always been grateful because it’s how they survived. It is only in the last few hundred years when women of privileged class who don’t even know what they’re being protected from feel disadvantaged because they’re not comfortable with the level of protection they have.
Wow. A few hundred years? Sometimes people accuse MRAs of wanting to take us back to the 1950s. McCarley apparently wants to take us back to the 1750s.
They don’t even understand what they’re being protected from.
Wolves? Sharks? Dishpan hands? Space aliens?
They have no concept how dangerous the world is for them but gosh they’re just not happy because, you know, the males in the family tell them what to do and make all the decisions for them and control all the money. That’s not oppression. That’s protection.
Wow. So I guess slaves and prisoners are the most protected classes of all.
It’s what kept our species alive and what built … [she gestures at the park and the buildings around it] this beautiful city.
Wait. I thought Jefferson Starship built this city. On rock ‘n’ roll.
Anyway, there’s also some footage of a speech about the evil oppression of white men given by an unknown speaker at the rally. He also complains that men working for the government are men who’ve had “their things cut off and are toeing the politically correct line.” (Hopefully after the bleeding has stopped.)
There’s an interview with Paul Elam, who for some reason looks like he’s wearing mascara (which I’m pretty sure he isn’t). He delivers this puzzling pronouncement:
Looking at men in government and saying they have all the power is like looking at women in grocery stores and saying they have all the food.
Not only is this way more revealing about gender inequality than Elam may realize, but it’s also a tad ironic, because Elam not that long ago used (unreliable) data about how women “control” most consumer spending — that is, they do most of the shopping — in order to argue (twice!) that women were the ones primarily responsible for destroying the environment.
There are assorted other bits of misinformation and ignorance and just plain old bigotry from the MRAs.
There’s also some commentary from the counterprotesters that made me wince. No, MRAs aren’t all Marc Lepines waiting to happen. They’re shitty enough people as it is; you don’t have to compare them all to a misogynist mass murderer to make your point. And in fact, you undercut yourself with that kind of rhetoric. Focus on what they actually say and do. It’s bad enough.
And the “racist, sexist, anti-gay” chant? Drop that. MRAs are, for the most part, driven by misogyny — not by other bigotries. Yes, some are racist, including one of the speakers featured on this very video, but that’s not the driving force for most of them. Some are homophobic, but that’s not the driving force for most of them. Some are transphobic — including Elam himself – but that’s not a central issue for most of them.
It’s worth pointing out these other bigotries, but to make these issues the centerpiece of your counterprotest is to miss the point — it would be a bit like attacking the Ku Klux Klan as “sexist and racist.” I’m sure plenty of KKKers are sexist as hell, but with the Klan racism really is the main thing; with MRAs, misogyny is.
And in this case it gave AVFM’s Karen Straughan the opportunity to appear (at least for a moment) like a reasonable person by pointing out that she in fact is not straight.
Anyway, watch the video. It’s amazing.
Posted on November 2, 2013, in a voice for men, actual activism, antifeminism, evil women, FemRAs, FeMRAsplaining, GirlWritesWhat, imaginary backwards land, imaginary oppression, incoherent rage, ladies against women, men created civilization, misogyny, MRA, oppressed white men, paul elam, reactionary bullshit, Suzanne McCarley, things that aren't fascism, we hunted the mammoth and tagged a voice for men, antifeminism, men's rights, misogyny, MRA, toronto. Bookmark the permalink. 1,097 Comments.
@kitteh’s
I don’t think it can be considered equivalent to a WATM, since women fall in the POC and LGBTQ category as well, and oftentimes the misogyny the misogyny that the MRM displays is racist and/or anti-queer. I just think that she read David’s post as being dismissive of the claims of racism etc.
FTR, I do agree with David, and the rest of y’all, that the majority of their racist etc. posts revolve around their misogyny so the chants aren’t very productive. I disagree with David’s point about “some” MRAs, however. Since the racism etc are endemic to all major manosphere sites, and are practically never called out, or even disagreed with by the other posters, I think it’s fair to call the movement itself racist etc.
And my evening just got another 200% better!
Is dardnarbler a noun (“You farfing dardnarbler!”) or an adjective?
The commentator seems to have missed that “a small, hate-filled contingent” is what they already are.
This is right up there with the idiocy of people who suggest that racist hate groups would change their ways if PoC would just engage nicely with them. It’s also got a massive side-order of the notion that it’s up to women to take care of men’s emotional problems. Yeah, these guys want to do violence to us, but they’d be Nice if only we’d be Nice first!
Fuck that.
I feel like their racism and homophobia is pretty closely tied in with their misogyny, given how often the racism manifests as some version of “they’re stealing our women” or “those women from foreign lands are appropriately submissive, as all women should be”, and how closely the homophobia tends to mirror classic gender essentialist thinking. If you’re going to insist that women behave in ways A, B, and C because biology, whereas men are supposed to be D, E. and F, and these things form a complementary whole, then gay men present a problem that’s most easily solved by arguing that they’re doing being a man wrong.
Shadow – I knew I was stretching it a bit with the WATM comparison, but Feminist Bees’ wording really seemed to want to ignore the misogyny – against ALL women, straight, queer, WoC, white, whatever – to concentrate on the other bigotries. I completely agree with David’s comments on that, or as hellkell put it, about the cherries on the shit sundae.
Which again circles back to my original issue with the comment Feminist Bees made (well, other than the ableism). Bigotry clusters, we know this, but some bigots like to focus primarily on one particular target, and the MRM is a good example of that. People pointing this out are not claiming that the MRM isn’t also racist and homophobic and fascist in ideology, they’re just pointing out that misogyny is the primary focus for most of them.
(There are a few MRA sites, like The Spearhead, where the misogyny and the racism are more evenly balanced in terms of where the bigotry and hatred are focused.)
BTW anti-French sentiment in Canada is primarily a Western phenomena. I mean, our current party in power more or less arose from a merge from Reform, which was created out of Western resentment towards the idea that the French were taking over Canada (which, in regular right-wing projection, actually meant for once the French were starting not to be second class citizens).
I mean, the Canadian West was basically founded on the brutal takedown of a Metis uprising, led by a Francophone (Louis Riel). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Riel
Tone policing? Pointing out that their chant left out the core of MRM hatred – misogyny – isn’t what I’d call tone policing.
To quote David:
I’m actually not sure… I think noun. It’s something I picked up from a podcast called Nerd Hurdles… pretty sure it’s mostly aimed at cats.
I hear ya Athywren.
From a purely anecdotal perspective, I have a friend who’s big into the MRA (he’s a fan of Thunderf00t, AmazingAtheist, and GirlWritesWhat.)
I’ve had conversations with him about feminism, and at first he was open to my opinions and thoughts. But as we had more conversations, and I continued to pull out statistics and facts, while he only gave hyperbole and anecdotes, he eventually refused to speak to me.
These days I rarely chat with him, but he’s quick to tell others that I’m turning into (or have turned into) a crazy, closed-minded feminist. :/
And, for those who saw the last thread, I’m not referring to “Nate.”
There’s more than one of them? Shit, that can’t be fun.
>>>Pointing out that their chant left out the core of MRM hatred – misogyny
“Racist, SEXIST, anti-gay”.
I’m confused.
“Sexist” really isn’t the right word for the way the MRM talks about women. It’s like calling a hurricane “a bit windy”.
And yes, I call it tone policing, because it’s in line with the Red-baiting David pushed on the Bash Back comrades the last time he talked about that MRA meetup.
That’s nice. Maybe you can help your comrades make better propaganda by divulging what were the much better chants you used the last time you protested an MRA meeting?
I’m not seeing the tone-policing. Now there’s Red baiting? WTF?
LOL
Were you there. Black Bloc? If not, you can kindly stuff the “what have YOU done” derail you’re pulling.
There needs to be a term, like Godwin, for that time in every comment thread when women are told that if we would just be nicer and show some compassion to the abusers they would stop being enormous mendacious disembodied anus…wait. What’s the plural for anus?
Anii? Anuses?
And you can stuff your armchair coaching and tone policing.
What’s a one-word way to express the idea that someone is asking every woman in the world to be their mom?
I’d say if anyone was doing that, it’s you. Don’t you have some art to destroy?
@Cassandra
It is and it isn’t. While a majority of their posts are exactly how you described, they also make plenty of posts about “the ghetto”, affirmative action, the plight of white man, anti-immigration rants etc.
Again, I don’t have any issue with David’s (and everyone else’s) point about the MRM’s driving force being misogyny. However, I do think that MRAs have done enough for us to not have to qualify with “some” when we call the movement out for racism etc., and I felt like THAT part of David’s post WAS dismissive.
@kitteh’s
I understand what you were getting at, and I’m not sure of FeministBee’s background so that’s colouring my reaction a bit. I just feel like comparing it to a WATM is going too far, because it’s akin to saying “shut up about the x-ism, I want to talk about the misogyny” that has been known to happen way too many times. To be clear, I’m not accusing you of this, just trying to explain why I thought the comparison was out of bounds, even though I understand where you’re coming from.
::rolls eyes:: Yeah, BlackBloc, because there are SO many MRM rallies around the world. Pardon me if I’m not stopping in front of every half-dozen badly-dressed dudes I see mouthing off in public on the off-chance that they’re an actual MRM rally.
Any chance you could cut out the derailing asshattery now?
@naltia
I have that exact same friend! Its our dogmatic and ignorant adherence to “facts” and “rationality” that proves that we’re closed minded. :P
It makes me sad, though… I always thought of him as a skeptic, but I saw him arguing on facebook once. I mean, aside from all the times I’d seen him comment things like, “if gender is a social construct, then homosexuality is a choice.” ¬_¬
The pro-feminist guy linked to a .edu site for a feminist topic… apparently I don’t have the link for that site, at least nowhere easily found. My friend scoffed, because, you know, .edu sites aren’t at all reliable, and posts this to demonstrate this. At this point I had to comment, to ask if he’d bothered to read that site before linking it, since it’s quite clearly an analysis of creationism, rather than propaganda for it. He said he thought the more interesting question was whether the pro-feminist guy had read it.
*sigh* What happened to you, man? You were rational. I saw it. I swear I saw it! :(
I’d actually have more of a problem with the chant knowing that it’s a stock piece that they trot out, rather than something context-dependent. In that case, “sexist” is just the second stressed/unstressed sound pairing in the chant. Maybe they are more concerned with the anti-gay part, and I really don’t have a problem with that myself.
Arguing from intersectionality and being, in this case, “what about the poc/gays”? about it though is problematic from my perspective. Yes, most of them are racist. Yes most of them are homophobic. And let’s not even go to their opinions on trans folk. But let’s not lose sight of the fact that what draws MRAs together, what they wring their hands over in their sweaty, cheeto-dusted basement lairs is that women are the problem to all of society’s ills. Sure, those oddly-hued people are problematic, and they disapprove of gays from a number of perspectives, but ask them (no really) and they will sooner or later come down to the fact that it’s feminists who took over society and made it so that non-white people are now 5/5ths of a human and we have all been taken over by the homosexual agenda.
What’s the key to their hate? Women, first and always. And proof of the evil and perfidy of women is that they have demanded more space in society for “deviant” ideas like the equal humanity of all those dangerous “Others.”
David mocked one of the activists from Bash Back because he was wearing a rainbow hammer & sickle shirt, and it was generally a “look at the extremist lefties being as bad as the MRAs” tone in that last post. And now there’s more of this “stay on message, don’t point out the fact that the MRA is not simply a bunch of misogynists but are actually part of a Western fascist movement revival which is bigger than themselves”.
Shadow – gotcha, and actually I think I was too close to the “shut up about X” thing with that comparison, so I apologise for that. I couldn’t think of another term other than WATM, though the balance there is obviously all wrong. FB’s comment just came across as taking the focus off misogyny too much, for me, but I put it badly.
@ Shadow
I’d be fine with calling the MRM as a whole racist, it’s just that the racism isn’t their primary focus. Does that make sense? The same way that most neo-Nazi organizations are deeply sexist, but again, that’s not their primary focus.
>>>Yeah, BlackBloc, because there are SO many MRM rallies around the world.
Bash Back doesn’t protest the MRA. They oppose fascism, of which the MRA is just a tiny faction.
Um, as someone on the left, I actually quite appreciate a discussion of how counter-protesting against bigots can be made more effective, even when I disagree with the suggestions offered. It doesn’t mean I don’t appreciate that they showed up to counter-protest.
OFFS BlackBloc, the thing about the tee was because of the associations the hammer and sickle have for most people. USSR, Stalin, Lenin, whatever, are NOT positive images, and that’s what people are going to see. You’re determined to be a martyr about every damn aspect of this, aren’t you?
Like hellkell said, haven’t you some art you disapprove of to go destroy? (No people haven’t forgotten that side-eyeing comment.)
gillyrosebee – applause! You’ve put it perfectly.
Bash Back doesn’t protest the MRA
We are all hallucinating together.
You mean when he said that he was uneasy with the use of a symbol that has become synonymous with Stalinism and other totalitarian forms of communism among most people?
I get that the symbol has a meaning outside of that association, and I get that it’s widely used, but is it really red-baiting to point out that it has negative connotations in the minds of most people?
Anupodes!
I am marking it on the calendar that the blockquote monster got me today for the very first time.
RE: thebewilderness
There needs to be a term, like Godwin, for that time in every comment thread when women are told that if we would just be nicer and show some compassion
It’s not just women. I’ve seen it with queers, trans folks, disability, racism, poor folk… it’s pretty much endemic.
RE: CassandraSays
What’s a one-word way to express the idea that someone is asking every woman in the world to be their mom?
“Sexist, Misogynist, anti-lass/Women ain’t here to wipe your ass”?
BlackBloc, make up your fucking mind. This is about them being at an MRM rally. You then ask us, on a misogyny mocking site, if we were there. In case it’s escaped your attention, not everyone here is a communist of whatever stripe, nor a member of any Canadian organisations, nor in Canada, nor members of an anti-fascist movement. This is about the MRM rally, not about fascism; it’s about the specific rally these protestors attended. You’re derailing even more and now it seems you’re complaining ‘cos we’re not in your particular groups doing your particular protests.
Grow the fuck up, seriously.
Ninjaed by Athywren!
Third time today, must be something in the water.
thebewilderness, congratulations on having come to the notice of the blockquote monster at last! :P
And now kittehserf has engaged in Red baiting as well.
@ LBT
What a perfect chant for a Scot! I should teach it to my granny.
Oh, get off the cross.
Sigh… I’ve been red-baited, plenty of times. That ain’t what’s going on here.
Red baiting LOL LOL fuck, yeah, what a poor little martyr you are. Evidently any criticism of anything done by anyone identifying as any sort of communist/anarchist/whatever = Red baiting.
Try thinking with your brain instead of your ego, willya?
Kittehs, you are just like Joseph McCarthy though.
BlackBloc could of course be doing some elaborate performance art here. Zie’s doing a great impression of an MRA rage-wanking.
cloudiah, I know. It’s the haircut, people get us confused all the time.
I actually have somewhat of a sentimental attachment to the iconography of the Soviet Union (I even have a little bust of Lenin in my apartment), and even so I wouldn’t use it to identify myself/a group I belonged to because I know how that would read to other people. That’s not Red-baiting, it’s pragmatism.
Okay, I don’t recall the discussion to be definitive about it, but I don’t remember mockery about the hammer and sickle. Robust discussion of the issue, yes. Some discomfort, yes. But I seem to recall that it was basically pretty openly debated, which is for me, always relevant and absolutely never off the table. That figure carries a whole lot of mythological historical content and just reusing it in pink does not eradicate or release that baggage.
But this would be precisely the problem, for me, anyway. When you oppose neo-Nazis, you do so by deconstructing and countering their racist mythmaking. When you oppose homophobes, etc. When you counter MRAs you do so based on their misogyny, because misogyny is the framework through which they filter and focus their bigotry.
Anything else falls into a kind of pro-forma flailing that is too easy to dismiss as hooliganism or simple anarchic “anti-ism”. It’s too inchoate, too unfocused to be effective or persuasive. It’s a “Whaddaya got?” approach to activism.
Okay… I don’t know if this moderation filter is still running, but let me give this another try.
Intersectionality does not downplay the importance of one system of oppression (misogyny/sexism) in favor of another (racism and heterosexism). In fact, as Patricia Hill Collins notes:
(This is actually something I tried explaining to GWW once). But the point is that intersectional attempts to understand oppression resist placing primacy over individual systems of oppression. The things the MRM do aren’t bad simply because they hate women, they’re bad because they contribute to a system which oppresses women. They also contribute to a system that oppress queer folks, people of color, people with disabilities, etc.
And that is exactly what was wrong with my usage of the term “lame.” Despite any efforts on my part to vet ablist language from my usage, it happened and I became part of the oppression of people with disabilities. It wasn’t bad because “I’m motivated by a hate of people with disabilities” (because I’m not). It’s bad because I abjectified people with disabilities.
That is why I demand an intersectionalist account of oppression on the part of other feminists, and why I am very unhappy about the criticisms levied here (both in the comments ignorance of intersectionality, and towards the protesters).
@ gillyrosebee
Thank you, I didn’t have the patience to type all that out.
Haha, it’s almost like we have the same friend, Athywren. :)
My friend was also a really bright, smart guy. He’s the one that first taught me about straw-men and other logical fallacies, and I loved talking to him. He had such a beautiful brain, that I even developed a crush on him a while. He friend-zoned me though (mock angry fist-shaking.) :)
Now I find him using the very same fallacies he once condemned. I wish I knew what had happened to that beautiful mind I use to love so much. :(
>>>Evidently any criticism of anything done by anyone identifying as any sort of communist/anarchist/whatever = Red baiting.
No, the act of criticising someone for the simple of identifying as a communist/anarchist/whatever is Red baiting, just like you do when you criticize someone for wearing a hammer & sickle shirt and saying that that is detrimental to “the Cause”, or call it “pragmatism” to throw radicals under the bus.
@BlackBloc
Recognising the negative connotations that come along with the corruption of communism is not red baiting. Those connotations may be unfair, in another place I would vigorously argue that they are, but they are what they are. Until we find a way to reclaim them -and maybe wearing them in pink on our t-shirts will do that- they’re pretty much ruined for us. Why get bogged down in arguments of symbolism when we can make a case against class and capitalism? I don’t see the point.
(Reminds self to carry Lenin bust around with me, just so the comrades don’t feel like I’m letting the side down.)
Is there a way to turn the bust into a purse, Cassandra? Or is practicality bad too?
BlackBloc is having a completely different conversation from what the rest of us are having, eh?
It’s not all that big, could possibly be attached to the strap as an ornament. It’s metal though, so it would hurt if I hit myself or someone else with it while swinging my bag over my shoulder.
thebewilderness: Pretty much.
BlackBloc, is it acceptable for people on the left to criticize Stalinists? Or is that throwing Stalinists under the bus? I’m just trying to figure out how you define red-baiting, because I’m a red and your definition doesn’t seem to match mine.
Wow, BlackBloc really has borrowed an MRA’s brain for this one.
Listen, what do you think lots of people are likely to think of when they see the hammer and sickle? Soviet Russia, or by extension any of the communist dictatorships. Stalin, Lenin, Mao, you name it: there’s a good chance it’s going to bring up the dreadful things done by those states. You can’t get away from those associations. If you want to be really exclusive and do a NACALT, fine, but you’re living in fantasy land if you think pointing out those negative associations is either Red-baiting or throwing comrades under the bus.
Cassandra, here ya go – a genuine approved not-throwing-the-comrades-under-the-bus tote.
So back in my union days, one of my best friends was a former CP member and Stalinist, who eventually became quite critical of the Soviet Union. And therefore, I guess, she was a terrible, terrible red baiter. Anyway, I used to tease her about still being a Stalinist, and she would tease me about being a Trotskyist, and it was all great fun (if you’re into that sort of thing). I was staying with her once, and I snuck pictures of Stalin into all of her picture frames. Front and center, peering over someone’s shoulder, and so on. She said she was still finding them months later.
Good times, good times.
I’m never going to be invited to stay at any manboobzers houses, am I?
I feel like carrying that around would mostly make elderly Chinese people avoid me on the bus.
cloudiah: that’s funny. You’re invited. We can try to put Mao masks on the cats.
@ cloudiah
If you’re the kind of person who would make Uncle Joe photobomb my family pictures then you’re welcome at my place anytime.
Consider yourself invited! Photobombed by Stalin? Heh, awesome… I know he was a massive dardnarbler, but dat ‘tasche!
Bullshit. Red-baiting, if we can have some historical fucking accuracy up in here, is the act of taunting, persecuting, singling out, denouncing, or otherwise attacking someone based on ambiguous signs of potential, suspected, asserted, or alleged communism or communist sympathies.
The hammer and sickle is the accepted and acknowledged symbol of self-identified communist regimes. This is not bigoted fuckwads putting yellow stars or pink triangles on people they don’t like, or blacklisting someone and ruining their careers because they once signed a petition.
The hammer and sickle was chosen by revolutionary leaders because it symbolized the union of the proletariat, of the industrial and farm workers. It was used for decades proudly as a symbol of communist states and carries that historical content no matter what color you want to print it in.
Red baiting (go look up the definition of “baiting” to help you out here because your terminological sloppiness is doing you no favors) is making assertions and casting aspersions against people who may or may not want to identify as communists. The hammer and sickle was used by people who were proud of it and wanted it known. And something we have to deal with is that a lot was done under that symbol that makes it suspect no matter what else we might hope to say with it. You can’t use it and then complain that people associate you with the negative consequences of any number of communist/socialist states any more than you can fly the damn Confederate battle flag and then complain that people think you are racist.
cloudiah, that’s even better than when my workmates and I hid Far Side cartoons all around the office. You’re invited!
(Just make sure they’re Uncle Joe when he’s young and spiffy.)
Cassandra – but acknowledging that Mao was a mass murderer is throwing the comrades under the bus! It’s Red baiting! /snark
Are you kidding? That shit moves you up to the top of my guest list! ;-)