Confused Dudes Confused by Confused Cats Against Feminism

Sweetie Pie Jonus pities the fools.

Sweetie Pie Jonus pities the fools.

Oh dear. Some very confused dudes on the A Voice for Men Forums are angry at the Huffington Post for suggesting that Confused Cats Against Feminism might just be a parody of Women Against Feminism.

A guy calling himself Humansplaining w/ Jarred starts off the thread — titled “HuffPo tries – and fails – to politicize ‘Cats Against Feminism'” — with this little rant. (I’ve bolded some of the especially silly stuff.)

So, being that ‘Women Against Feminism’ is an internet phenomenon, through Tumblr as well as Twitter, the internet inevitably took this thread in the direction it takes EVERYTHING nowadays – cats.

If you read through all the ‘Cats Against Feminism’ memes, you’ll notice that they pretty much all revolve around, well…CATS. Go figure, huh? References to food, tuna, shedding, and biting predominate these posts. The references to ‘Feminism’ are basically incidental, since this is just piggy-backing on the viral success of ‘Women Against Feminism’. Those posting these memes never really express whether they are in favor of, or against Feminism. It’s clearly not meant to appeal to EITHER side of the issue. Rather, it’s simply a silly meme meant to produce a few chuckles for ANYONE that happens to run across them. Just like every other stupid cat meme on the internet, of which there must literally be TRILLIONS.

But HuffPo apparently sees things differently …

You know what? I think those CATS are smarter than the people at Huffpo that produced this article. THEY think that Feminism is a stupid and pointless human concept, and they wish you’d stop talking about it and fighting amongst each other, because they need you to FEED them!
Seriously HuffPo, learn to take a joke, and give the ideology a rest for 5 FUCKING SECONDS already.

Because the cats are laughing at YOU now…

AVFM forum dudes, I hate to break it to you, but the cats aren’t laughing at the Huffington Post. They’re laughing at you.

Maybe I need to start up a new blog: Confused Cats Confused by Confused Cats Against Feminism.

About David Futrelle

I run the blog We Hunted the Mammoth, which tracks (and mocks) online misogyny. My writing has appeared in a wide variety of places, including Salon,, the Washington Post, the New York Times Book Review and Money magazine. I like cats.

Posted on July 30, 2014, in a voice for men, antifeminism, confused cats against feminism, facepalm, kitties, mansplaining, misogyny, MRA, that's completely wrong and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 306 Comments.

  1. Missed this earlier:

    Well, Jesus, fromafar. You’re right. advertisers selling products is a form of state and legal oppression. ffs….

    Clearly oppression only manifests itself in legal codes and state sanctions. /heavy sarcasm

    And you think you’re the one who understands oppression better?

  2. you cannot argue that men are worse off in US society in all the important areas of life from life expectancy to family

    No, of course we cannot argue that. And neither, for that matter, can YOU. We can, however, argue AGAINST it, because you seem to have this idiotic notion stuck in your broken-record brain that feminism and women are somehow the cause of it all. Nope. Try again, trollsky. If men are worse off in US society, it’s because it’s ridden with capitalism (which makes everything worse for the 99% at the bottom), and because a lot of these machos are foolish enough to eat crap, smoke, and take too few health and safety precautions on top of all that. It’s not our fault if women do better than them on matters of personal responsibility; that’s on them, and if they’re not holding up their end, it’s because some privileged notions die hard. Guess that’s what comes of not getting paid the 30% Penis Surcharge, eh?

  3. Catherine von Überwald

    I think I’ve figured the way the troll separates “good feminists” and “radical feminists”.

    As I’ve already acknowledged, feminism has its strong points and has done us all some service. It has also done us some disservice. Virtually all the main aims of feminism have been achieved in most of the western world – this is something that, certainly in European countries, is acknowledged.

    So, “good feminists”* are some of those historical feminists who won women the right to vote and own property.
    And since, in trollland, those were and are “all the main aims of feminism” and they are now achieved, feminism is outdated and unneeded in today society**.

    Therefore every feminists today = radical feminists.
    Because it’s totally radical and unreasonable for women to want any changes in society or more right then just vote / own property.

    *But not too “good”. Because some undefined “disservice” done to some undefined “us”.
    **And especially in European countries.

  4. yep, this site is indeed amusing – now that I’ve created my own entertainment through you lot.

    Aw, honey, it’s way too late to return to trying to convince us that you have a sense of humor.

  5. cassandrakitty

    Niall is really high, right? That’s why he’s making progressively less sense as time goes on?

  6. Wow. Just caught up. Wow.

    Is it sad that I’m just cracking up with laughter over here? Only about 3/4 of the laughing is about our dearly-beloved, humorless niall, and the other quarter is for my adorable house-sit geriatric-pup, who’s just really excited about running around the station after getting to go for a ride.

    Bud, men have problems, and women have problems, but sitting in the punchbowl and yelling a bunch of false equivalencies and bad stats isn’t going to fix your problems.

    There is a figurative ton of ways to help reduce suicide rates and incarceration likelihoods for young men. The problem is that there aren’t enough men willing to volunteer for most of these programs. So, get out of the punchbowl, throw your pants in the dryer, put a clean set on, and go make the world a better place.

    There’s also a lot of research going into men’s health, but instead of yelling at us, why don’t you yell at evolution? I’ll help you out:

    Natural selection, why don’t you care about me anymore after I’ve finished raising kids to child raising age? Why? Why do you care about keeping around old Orca grandmas but not me?!?! WHY???

    Evolution probably won’t answer you, because it really doesn’t exist as a sentient, planning, calculating entity.

    Have fun!

  7. Sorry “I’m not a MRA” Niall, this article misuses sexual abuse in prison statistics the same way AVfM did in their now deleted prison rape fact sheet.

    In January, prodded in part by outrage over a series of articles in the New York Review of Books, the Justice Department finally released an estimate of the prevalence of sexual abuse in penitentiaries. The reliance on filed complaints appeared to understate the problem. For 2008, for example, the government had previously tallied 935 confirmed instances of sexual abuse. After asking around, and performing some calculations, the Justice Department came up with a new number: 216,000. That’s 216,000 victims, not instances. These victims are often assaulted multiple times over the course of the year. The Justice Department now seems to be saying that prison rape accounted for the majority of all rapes committed in the US in 2008, likely making the United States the first country in the history of the world to count more rapes for men than for women.

    The Shame of Our Prisons: New Evidence
    David Kaiser and Lovisa Stannow OCTOBER 24, 2013 ISSUE

    The NYRB article that they’re referring to (without providing a link) discusses several Bureau of Justice reports and says “Allen J. Beck, the senior BJS statistician who has been the lead author on all of these studies, tells us the new findings indicate that nearly 200,000 people were sexually abused in American detention facilities in 2011″.

    1) The BoJ study “define(s) sexual victimization under the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003, BJS uses uniform definitions that classify each sexual act by the perpetrator who carried it out (i.e., inmate or staff ) and the type of act.”
    “Inmate-on-inmate sexual victimization involves sexual contact with a victim without his or her consent or with a victim who cannot consent or refuse.” [This includes “less serious victimizations” such as “intentional touching”.]
    “Staff-on-inmate sexual victimization includes both consensual and nonconsensual acts perpetrated on an inmate by staff.” [This includes voyeurism, threats and verbal sexual harassment.]

    Note: The government is defining sexual victimization in prisons in a way that reflects both the extreme power dynamics between inmates and staff, and how prisoners often lack the freedom to escape an abusive situation.

    2) That 200,000 figure includes female victims. Whoops.

  8. @brooked: from your second link:

    They also reveal new aspects of a variety of problems, including (1) the appalling (though, from state to state, dramatically uneven) prevalence of sexual misconduct by staff members in juvenile detention facilities; (2) the enormous and disproportionate number of mentally ill inmates who are abused sexually; and (3) the frequent occurrence of sexual assault in military detention facilities.

    All of these problems are beyond appalling. If a government body is depriving people of freedom, then it should ensure that the environment into which it forcibly places people is not actually worse than the environment from which they are taken.

    And the (criminally) mentally ill should not be incarcerated in prisons. Ever. I don’t care if the mental illness started after incarceration or it was pre-existing, prison is no place for them. That also holds for people with drug addictions (some definitions of mental illness don’t include addicts, not sure if that lack of inclusion applies here or not).

    Where the fuck is the MRM crying out for justice on these outcomes?

  9. Seriously, niall? This is what you sound like to me:

    “You’re all mean meanie-meanies for pointing out the inconsistencies in my logic, for not believing in my assfax, and for mocking me on a mockery site! I already told you that I’m oppressed, why can’t you just believe me and rearrange your pesky view of reality to fit mine? Feminists are somehow to blame for the actions of misogynistic men! Also, all women who say something I don’t like are feminists, and feminists are bad. Why can’t women just shut up and not be feminists? Don’t they know it’s bad? Anyway, what were we talking about? I keep forgetting what I’ve said in my previous comments. That, too, is in some way feminists’ fault, I just know it!”

    I think niall really possesses the powers of Mr. Fantastic. All that reaching must require some kind of superhuman stretchy abilities.

  10. Evolution probably won’t answer you, because it really doesn’t exist as a sentient, planning, calculating entity.


    Next up, we’ll probably hear how evolution made us ladies delicate and dainty and constantly in need of male protection, and dudes manly and studly and inclined to sleep around on us because SCIENCE, bitchezzzzz.

    Anyone else want to venture a prediction down which blind MRA alley Niall will go next?

  11. Anyone else want to venture a prediction down which blind MRA alley Niall will go next?

    Since he’s focusing on the U.S. now, I think he’ll be appropriating the struggles of combat veterans, and/or shouting about the draft.

  12. Come on, guys. We’ve all posted high before. Let’s take it easy on niall.

  13. Oh, I’m not getting on niall’s case for possibly being stoned. It’s simply an explanation for the quality of his comments here.

  14. No, niall is actually pouting because he’s convinced that he’s *winning* by completely ignoring or derailing arguments that refute every point he’s made to support an extremely broad and, arguably, non-objective statement that he also expects us to debunk in one fell swoop.

    He hasn’t once been able to explain why the criticism of his sources and just plain false statements (all made in support of the statement he wants us to debunk, I have to emphasize) are not valid using logic or a source that wasn’t later criticized. He STILL can’t give his personal definition of radical feminist, which is a comparably simple question to answer.

    I’d laugh, but it actually kind of disturbs me how many people think that dropping points that aren’t true and reacting to arguments against them by subsequently ignoring the point and dropping another, or dismissing the arguer as biased, is a valid debate method. It is incredibly childish and would get you laughed straight out of the debate team.

    Then again, this is the same type of person who’d react to that by convincing themselves that they’ve won and the debate team is just full of biased idiots…

  15. tl;dr niall, don’t take your debate lessons from trolls

  16. Not a fan of the language, but I think this image pretty accurately sums up our friend Niall.

  17. Since he’s focusing on the U.S. now, I think he’ll be appropriating the struggles of combat veterans, and/or shouting about the draft.

    I’ll save him the bother: Women are the reason men get drafted and sent to die at war! Helen of Troy!!! Eleventyhundredeleven!!!!1111!!!!!

    There, done.

  18. @Bina – Succint! I like it.

  19. Damn. That should be “succinct.” Auto correct catches everything but actual misspellings, it seems.

  20. Catherine, I think you’re on target. Radical feminism is anything that might require Niall to do, say or think anything with which he is currently uncomfortable. Good feminism is that which does not.

    Remarkable how that works.

  21. naill’s thinks he’s winning because people are responding to him. Like, that’s pretty much all it takes for him to ‘win’ in his version of reality. Woohoo, they paid attention to me! I win!

    Which is… I want to say pathetic, but that seems too nice.

  22. @pallygirl

    The New York Review of Books series of articles on sexual abuse are a sobering and useful resource. If naill and other MRAs cared about male victims of prison sexual assault they should research the subject further on rather than derailing online discussions of rape without knowing what the hell they’re talking about, but what fun is that?

  23. Does anyone else feel like Niall is masturbating their ego under the table?

    “Oh yes, I am so smart and clever, SO SMART YES”

  24. Sorry all, I’m way behind on reading (just got through all 922 comments on a previous thread…so much good food…/ahem), but this comment from Contrapangloss on July 31 is awesome. I can’t agree more with everything said. I have the same hope.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 17,153 other followers

%d bloggers like this: