Just wanted to highlight some internetty goodness from two Friendz of Man Boobz:
Ozymandias, whose blog post “Who Cares About Men’s Rights?” went all viral recently, has started up a new blog called No, Seriously, What About Teh Menz?, devoted to promoting men’s rights. Not “Men’s Rights” as most MRAs define it, but, you know, the actual rights of actual men. And she’s got a great post about Fathers’ Day, and her particular father, up today.
Meanwhile, Holly Pervocracy, fresh from the Man Boobz/Pervocracy (or is that the Pervocracy/Man Boobz) meetup on Friday, slices and dices a very dumb piece in the Washington Times on all women being whores the “economy of sex.”
Thank you David! My dad is awesome, jsyk.
David,
Longtime reader, first time commenter. Love the blog. Just thought you might be interested in a post I just put about so-called “reverse sexism.” I think it addresses a lot of common MRA arguments.
-Jeff
http://ami-rants.blogspot.com/2011/06/ugh-o-rape-joke-is-rape-joke-it-isnt.html and i have a rly tiny thing about a stupid male rape joke in a movie! xD (my other longer, serious posts lately are ones I adapted from comments I left on MB XD )
*crickets*
xD
(those are great posts! I often wish I could say something great and personal on Father’s Day but I can’t : or it’d be rly inappropriate and a huge downer : )
OMG MUPPETS!
These are great posts.
And poor Ami. 🙁 Keep on keeping on.
…and I didn’t leave my link: http://mendaredo.com/2011/06/19/reverse-sexism/
“it’d be rly inappropriate and a huge downer ” That sounds somewhat like the reason I have not posted on the father’s day post. I might traumatize you like I did that one cashier a few years back. It was around fathers day when I finally managed to save up enough for my brand new Playstation 3 and a game. When I excitedly went to buy it, the cashier remarked “looks like someone is going to have a very happy father’s day”. I drew back in disgust, and possessively clutched my stuff, “This is for me! If that loser crackhead wants a Playstation, he should get a job, like I did! Like I would spend my hard earned cash on that thieving piece of…” My sister interupted me about there and moved me along, but that cashier was stammering and shocked. I was extra ticked at my father that week because I found out he had been stealing money from my sister, so I went into rage mode a bit quickly there.
*a bajillion e-hugs for Ami*
Holly, my hat’s off to you on your takedown of the Washington Times piece. I keep kind of going back to it and reading a little bit and then giving up all over again in disgust. I like your “one vagina for one penis” marketplace theory; my own is even simpler. It’s more like volunteer work, if I have to analogize. If I don’t like your nonprofit (or, more to the point: you), I’m not gonna volunteer my vagina or my mouth or my hands or any other part of my sexuality. If I like you, I’m not necessarily looking for exact compensation. Maybe some orange juice and a little respect and a name tag. The thought that some writer at the WT says my behavior devalues all women’s sexuality is, frankly, a little enraging. Am I supposed to care, for some reason? My boyfriend, who doesn’t want to get married, would somehow be forced to marry me (I don’t want to get married either), if only I valued the vag higher — and forcing two people into a situation they don’t want to be in is good because it would be beneficial … to … um … other women?
The other reason this piece is really pissing me off is because I spent a long time last week looking at this site, by a photographer who interviewed and went undercover to research women who are sold on the black market. So when people start talking about women’s vaginas having a price tag, excuse me if I start thinking that the next step is luring desperate young women into slavery and abuse. Not quite what the WT is talking about, but … not that far away either.
DSC, ugh, that’s awful. On the flip side, you didn’t have to share your PS3 with that asshole.
Bee – Thanks!
The whole article is pretty muddled, too. The argument seems to be that women all want to get married, and this could happen and make everyone happy, if not for all those darn women who don’t want to get married.
Holly, for some reason I can’t comment. I did want to point out that dowries varied. In England they were the brides property. Her husband managed it, but if they separated (or he predeceased her) the dowry went with/to her (this is the origin of the, “Dowager House”).
It had abuses, I don’t doubt some men killed off unwanted wives to avoid repaying the dowry. I know there were suits about dowries mismanaged.
You can’t? Stupid Blogger. It’s been having all kinds of problems…
The biggest problems I’ve heard with dowry have been from India, where dowry is such a burden on a family that female fetuses will be aborted to avoid it.
Dowry in modern india is really problematic.
@Darksidecat *big big hugs* I’m so sry : That’s why I dun try to talk about it, and I’m glad nobody’s ever said that to me.. I’m always worried if I start, it’ll all just pour out and I’ll seem like I’m trying to ruin everybody’s day or do a “well what about me!?” thing :
Ami
From what I have seen of you here I would be proud to have a daughter like you. It seems like you would have fit into our family very well, it is sad that people get born into the wrong ones!
You have a good point about those who wait for marriage who happen to be male Holly. My best friend (who I was in love with for years) is one of the ones who is waiting until he gets married. He is in his thirties now and still waiting. Of all of the women he has ever dated, I was and am the only one completely willing, understanding and accepting of his choice.
Interesting idea for a blog, unfortunate title. Reminds me of the Good Men Project site, basically male-oriented stuff without the macho, hostile/extremist vibe given off by many MRA sites.
Remains to be seen if they keep up the quality without descending into familiar feminist territory, where women can do no wrong and men can do no right because patriarchy! privilege! mansplaining! (sorry, read Jeff’s post just now. I keep waiting for this mysterious all-powerful patriarchy to advantage me somehow because so far I’m not seeing it. Is there a regional HQ, or do I have to contact my local representative or something?)
“where women can do no wrong and men can do no right because patriarchy! privilege! mansplaining!”
You don’t know what these words mean, at least in context. If you did, you’d realise none of them refer to ‘women doing no wrong and men doing no right’. Patriarchy is upheld by men and women. Men and women both have varying amounts of privilege depending on their individual situation. Mansplaining is more tricky, but it has never meant ‘a man explaining’, only ‘a man assuming a woman doesn’t know something that she does, as she is a woman, and trying to explain it to her’. That’s pretty specific. A good example is this article (http://articles.latimes.com/2008/apr/13/opinion/op-solnit13) where a man explains to a woman the merits of a book she wrote, even when she demonstrates a lot of knowledge on the subject.
“I keep waiting for this mysterious all-powerful patriarchy to advantage me somehow because so far I’m not seeing it.”
You don’t see it because it is invisible. And partiarchy or privilege won’t give you magic advantages over other people like you. You have the luxury of being able to ignore the advantages you do have that others don’t, to the point where you are literally blind to it.
I’m a woman, and I don’t mind people saying I have privilege (as I am white, cis etc etc), because it’s true! That doesn’t make me a bad person, it means our culture has some problems and as a result it gives me a lot of unfair advantages compared to others worse off than me. No one is saying white people are bad and nonwhite people are good. It’s just a case of…opening your eyes and looking at the real world.
Also, I realise I’m pretty behind but how does this blockquoting malarky work? Not sure of any wordpress tags.
You don’t see it because it is invisible.
That’s pretty convenient, isn’t it? You get to tell men “there’s something wrong with you but it’s invisible and you can’t see it. But it’s there, trust me because I say so”. Honestly, I have yet to be convinced those terms aren’t just academic buzzwords created to define concepts that don’t exist outside the ‘feminist blogosphere’.
Like I said, my response was mostly a reaction to that guy’s post who was basically arguing that sexism against men doesn’t exist because we live in a world of patriarchy, privilege, and blah blah blah men bad, women get free pass, please forgive me for being male, receive this gift of my balls on a silver platter and allow me to be your faithful lapdog. Yeesh.
Ion – The patriarchy isn’t invisible at all! Here, I have a picture:
http://newshour.s3.amazonaws.com/photos/2010/11/19/106969312_blog_main_horizontal.jpg
That’s the new members of the 112th US Congress.
Now, does this mean that you’re set for life and get free jetskis and blowjobs just for being a man? No. But it’s a bump, a benefit, an improvement in your chances. It makes it less likely that you’ll be too busy staying home with the kids to become a congressperson, and more likely that you’ll “fit in” in currently male-dominated political circles. That’s privilege. Not a guarantee of getting into Congress, but slightly fewer hurdles in the way.
Which does not make you a bad person. Of course it doesn’t: you can’t even help this.
What makes you a bad person is willfully ignoring this, and thinking “there must be more men in Congress because men are better at governing.”
(David – Disregard the preceding moderated comment; I forgot to login.)
Ion – The patriarchy isn’t invisible at all! Here, I have a picture:
http://newshour.s3.amazonaws.com/photos/2010/11/19/106969312_blog_main_horizontal.jpg
That’s the new members of the 112th US Congress.
Now, does this mean that you’re set for life and get free jetskis and blowjobs just for being a man? No. But it’s a bump, a benefit, an improvement in your chances. It makes it less likely that you’ll be too busy staying home with the kids to become a congressperson, and more likely that you’ll “fit in” in currently male-dominated political circles. That’s privilege. Not a guarantee of getting into Congress, but slightly fewer hurdles in the way.
Which does not make you a bad person. Of course it doesn’t: you can’t even help this.
What makes you a bad person is willfully ignoring this, and thinking “there must be more men in Congress because men are better at governing.”
“I’m a woman, and I don’t mind people saying I have privilege (as I am white,”
say that to the people in Belarus.
“cis etc etc), because it’s true!”
yes, one is really privileged to be cis. Imagine always being the victim of stupid jokes with man boobs and things like that.
“You don’t see it because it is invisible.”
the thing that was very visible to me was that I as a male had to serve military service.
It will be interesting to see how the “what about teh menz” site goes, I’m presuming that it will be carrying a veiled attempt to attack the men’s movement, fathers rights, victim equality, men openly expressing their painabout the family courts. etc as the theme has come up in every piece on the site about it.
Taking on misandry in the media – its already well developed and counter articles and videos are always made to take down the feminist journalist responsible and there exists hours of video and much literature on the misandry that’s intertwined in the news, sitcoms, advertisements and Oprah type drivel…. its good that male feminist is talking about it because feminists will either listen or mock him and tell him “man up, what about teh mens lol” both outcomes are good in my eyes.
I suggest that the writer reads
Spreading Misandry – The Teaching of Contempt for Men in Popular Culture by Paul Nathanson and Katherine K. Young from 2006
“Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young argue that since the 1990s men have been portrayed in popular culture as evil, inadequate, or honorary women, from Designing Women, Home Improvement, Oprah, and Cape Fear to Hallmark cards, comic strips, and the New York Times columns of Anna Quindlen. The first of a three-part series, Spreading Misandry offers an impressive critique of popular culture to identify a phenomenon that is just now being recognized as a serious cultural problem – misandry, the sexist counterpart of misogyny.
Nathanson and Young urge us to rethink prevalent assumptions about men that result in profoundly disturbing stereotypes that foster contempt. Spreading Misandry breaks new ground by discussing misandry in moral terms rather than purely psychological or sociological ones and by criticizing not only ideological feminism but other ideologies on both the left and the right.”
If he are going to make any sort of serious attempt to take up on men’s movement memes, there needs to be at least some understanding of them.
Plus, if this male feminist writer is going call other whiny, he should try not to sound more whiny than the ones he is labeling whiny.