“Kloo2yoo,” the moderator of Reddit’s Men’s Rights Subreddit, is worried that racists in his subreddit will give Men’s Rights a bad name. So he’s put out a call to some of the more artistic readers of the subreddit to come up with a nice new logo for it, to show how broad-minded and all-inclusive Reddit’s Men’s Rightsers really are. Well, not literally all-inclusive. As Kloo put it in his call for artiistic help:
New logo needed, to emphasize racial and lgbt inclusiveness, but not feminism.
Oh, but even that turned out to be a bit too inclusive for some of the commenters there. Specifically, they objected to the “L” portion of LBGT. And some of the Ts. As white_cloud put it:
I don’t think you need to appeal to the L in LGBT. It is well-known that lesbians are the most radical of all feminists. They will never feel welcome here and we should not go out of our way to make them feel welcome. Male to female trans pretty much the same thing. They’ve already renounced their male gender, they don’t care about male rights
Scott2508 concurred:
ok i am in favour of inclusivness and im not sure if i am going to word this right so stick with me , the one thing i am curious about is how we bring ourself in line with the lesbian [angle] of it all simply due to the hostility that can arise from that community towards men
Kloo replied:
point taken. we can embrace lesbian mras, without embracing lesbian supremacists.
Apparently these are the only types of lesbians in the world.
In any case, despite these design constraints, I have come up with what I think is a very compelling logo that I think will convey just what Kloo would like to convey. What do you think, guys?
Next MRAL will be saying that Julie Bindel MADE him post those violent words. He’s using some classic abuse tactics so far.
Nah, I think he’s more ashamed that he got called out yet again.
“I don’t even know who Julie Bindel is (I’ve been a feminist since 1983, and surprise, I don’t know all feminists), but no matter who she is or what she writes about, your violent fantasies are inappropriate.”
Goes to show how much you know. She is prominent columnist in the guardian, and the voice of feminism there.
The “thug” thing is a dogwhistle, like “urban youth” and other such nonsense. Everybody involved knows what’s really being said but these non-racial-specific euphemisms allow a layer of plausible deniability. Plus when anyone points out the obvious racism, they just turn around and use the usual “You’re the REAL racist here!” line.
“Unless you think she shouldn’t be calling people out for being ass hats.”
Julie Bindel is an asshat.
I figured that the trolls must have shown up when the new post had 100 comments alrdy xD
Also… MRAL.. is it possible for you to criticize ppl without just screaming and yelling? o_O I have serious issues w/ Bindel (to put it lightly), and for good reason (as you should prolly know if you know what she stands for) and I still am like o_O at your sudden wishes of violence and etc -_-;;
How come ppl always conflate sexuality w/ sex? o_O There’s no point in chasing that tail and trying to play the troll’s game of “prove to ME why lesbian sex is real sex?” I mean if sexuality was about who you had SEX w/ then nobody is hetero either until they’ve had hetero sex (and nebody who experimented even once in their lives is bi xD ) -_-;;
As for inclusiveness, I’ve heard the “T shouldn’t be there” before xD Even from T ppl! B/c sometimes our GLB allies can be jerks (London Pride a few years ago, refused trans women from using the women’s washrooms xD and then made TONS of excuses about it -_-) or ppl like Julie Bindel.. xD Or the HRC cutting out gender identity protections out of ENDA a few years ago to make it more “palatable” also >_> Sometimes it feels like some GLB ppl alrdy dun think T belongs. e_e (who can be just as gender essentialist, and believe trans ppl who their birth assigned gender and just cross dressers or fetishists) But there are many who do and are great allies :3 And generally, we’re in the acronym not b/c transsexuality or transgenderism is a sexuality, but b/c we still do face similar hatred and prejudices and they tend to intersect also and the general acronym has been expanded to be more than just about sexuality but about non “conforming” sexual and gender identities :] (LGBTT2QQIA to decompress it xD ) it doesn’t rly bug me at all, cuz I think often the issues are related and society does try to use some oppressions to oppress others (like transphobia against intersex ppl) and I think working together is better than not as long as we are inclusive and understand the various privileges and etc :] (tho I also do understand the frustrations of many sometimes that some queer activism in the media narrative becomes just all about the white gay guys >_> but you know me, I am more positive about the inclusiveness and etc about stuff like this than others :3 Like I do also w/ feminism and trans ppl)
That was long :3
Also I dunno why these things always becomes about feminists needing to defend feminism and chasing the troll’s tails and having to play the “refute a negative” game…
Most feminists I know who are anti-racist, anti-queerphobia, etc etc.. and trans inclusive… do not say “but not for gay men and trans men” (if nething the rad fems tend to be more okay w/ trans men than trans women, but I’ve alrdy said in an earlier comment about the similarities between the MRA article in the spearhead and trans-exclusionary Radfem transphobia when it comes to what they think trans women are, and that they’re much angrier at us than they are about trans men) and I think that’s the big difference here… : When feminists say “we want to be inclusive” they don’t say “except for the gay dudes, and the FtM ppl” -_-;; And that’s what they seem to be arguing for here :
Also men’s rights absolutely affect trans ppl, obv trans men, but also trans women since it’s not like pre-transition, or as kids ppl can pass a scanner over us and know we’re trans -_-;; Stuff ilke “boys will be boys” to justify bullying, or telling male-assigned kids to suck it up, or etc etc about gender conformity and behaviour and other things… a lot of us have also exp’d : And this isn’t oppression olympics xD it’s just… what it is… and that’s not to say trans women should control the narrative or lesbians should or nething.. but being inclusive isn’t the same as saying “keep in mind whose issues we’re trying to help w/” and stuff :] So I dunno why this is such a big deal to just be inclusive, while also laying out ground rules (like talking about intersectionality and respecting ppl’s lived exps, and checking your own privilege, etc in feminist spaces :] )
I am amused at us being gender traitors tho xD At LEAST we’re recognized as our gender :3 (and ty for that MRAL, and I get your frustration at Bindel, if you want we can talk about her on email or something and discuss our issues w/ her? :] )
Arkisbalt: Lesbianism also technically isn’t a sexuality since there’s no real sex involved, given that the act is biologically impossible between two females. The extended foreplay between two ‘gay’ females is a far cry from the real sex experienced by a man or a woman or a man and a man, and therefore calling it a legitimate sexuality is a stretch.
Um… no.
Foreplay is a lousy word. Sexplay is a lot better. I’ve had a lot of sex (even entire relationships, of long duration) where no PIV took place. I have at least one ex who waited until she was engaged/married (I didn’t ask) to have PIV. I recall a dinner conversation (some years after we broke up) where she was starting to worry that she was in some way suffering from a problem because she wasn’t having “penetrative” sex.
She wasn’t frigid. She was just expressing her sexual appetite in ways different from the, understood, norm. If two people are doing something together, and sexual stimulation/orgasm is the object, it’s sex.
Luke, yes it does which is why she said “I had no idea who this person is” because she was showing a limitation of her knowledge.
Try thinking next time. It does not hurt, I promise!
@ilithiana:
“At least it says something that I guess you’re sort of ashamed of it.”
I don’t think he’s ashamed of it. I think he’s pulling that straight from the standard abusive personality playbook. He loses control, people get understandably upset, he reacts by trying to walk it back, promising to not do it again, get it under control. Until the next time he does it, of course. It’s not about feeling sorry for what he’s done, it’s about getting the heat off himself.
@SallyStrange: I apologize if I offended you. Thanks for the reading material though!
“Luke, yes it does which is why she said “I had no idea who this person is” because she was showing a limitation of her knowledge.
Try thinking next time. It does not hurt, I promise!”
Something who wants to defends feminism should at least know that she’s defending a hate movement.
Uh-huh, Luke. OK, it’s a hate movement. Now scoot, you bore me.
“I guess that “six pleasant posts communicating with other people about what interests them or topics of general interest” is not likely to happen, is it.”
I think it goes back to what you said earlier about perspective. 🙂
I’m with you in hoping that David doesn’t delete that violent post. MRAL’s been given an enormous amount of sympathy on this blog, and this is what he does in return.
Why did you like the article filet?
i know I’m late to the party, but… jeebus effing christ, MRAL, do you realize what a fucking hypocrite you’re being?
“Waaaahhh, feminists hate men, waaaahhh.”
“Prove it.”
“Theeeeyyy dooooooo!!!!! Because I actually have to suffer rejection!”
“That doesn’t count.”
“[Violent, hateful screed about a woman]”
So tell me, MRAL, where has a feminist ever said such hateful things about someone else? When has ANY feminist on this blog posted a desire to do violence on a man? You could take that exact comment and post it on The Spearhead or probably nearly any blog on The Boob Roll and get accolades from people who think it’s perfectly fine to use physical violence against someone who’s just saying something you disagree with. Try it, see what happens.
That’s why people call the MRM the Abuser’s Lobby. Because these men have no sense of perspective, feel bitter that they are not receiving what they think they ‘deserve’, and who’s greatest sense of oppression seems to be ‘not getting laid.’ They are hateful, narrow minded, bigoted people – and you consider yourself one of them.
Huh, I think this is a record for the shortest time it took for a troll to bore me. Congrats Luke123!
But it is not a hate movement. That is like saying the civil rights movement is all about hate because not everyone involved is Martin Luther King Jr. level patient.
Also, can you name the last time a feminist group bombed anything? How about the last time they shot a man? I know I cannot. So if there is hate in the movement somewhere, it certainly has not delved into calls to blow up or kill men. But you certainly seem to be okay with the” men’s rights movement” demanding the death of some feminists.
“Now scoot, you bore me.”
Some of the trolls never do seem to realize that they’re the floor show here. Dance, trolls, dance!
No problem, Clio. I was not offended, I just wanted to point out a common mistake. I’m white, and I’ve made similar comments before; I was told it can be alienating to people of color. So I want to help other folks avoid making the same mistake.
As for Luke… yes, you can claim feminism is a hate movement until you’re blue in the face. That doesn’t make it true.
” When has ANY feminist on this blog posted a desire to do violence on a man? ”
Valerie Jean Solanas (April 9, 1936 – April 25, 1988) was an American radical feminist writer, best known for her attempted murder of Andy Warhol in 1968. She wrote the SCUM Manifesto which encouraged male gendercide and the creation of an all-female society.
MRAL: Way to engage in dishonest debate.
Are men’s issues important? […] In my mind, no. is not an accurate representation of
Are men’s issues important? Depends on the issue. In relation to the violence/discrimination/erasing/indifference carried out against other groups? In my mind, no.
It’s, in fact, a lie, because what you wrote is completely at odds with what FoS said.
Here, let me do the same thing to something you said.
MRAL: Julie Bindel is a pretty classic fymynyst[…] I mean, she’s pretty.
So she’s posting from beyond the grave? Troll logic . . . isn’t.
The worst the anti-feminists can talk about is some harsh words that were written once a long time ago. Where the MRAs already have armed terrorism to their credit (us Montrealers remember Marc Lepine).
Wow…one example. In forty years of the movement’s existence. And we have one right here in this very thread demanding the death of a woman (a feminist no less)-well two if one wants to consider your belief on Ms Valenti to be a desire for her death during her complication pregnancy.
Luke…read that sentence you quoted again…particularly the bit that says “any feminist on this blog” [emphasis mine]
1) I have been a feminist since I was a wee one, and I had never even heard of the SCUM Manifesto until I started commenting here. As if most feminists didn’t care about it or didn’t think it was worthwhile.
2) The SCUM Manifesto is badly written satire.
3) Valerie Solanas did not post the SCUM Manifesto here – remember, I asked for hateful comments on *this blog*.
4) Even if she did, you can bet she’d have gotten called out on it. Several feminists have posted questionable things on this blog, and have been called out for it.