Another elevator joke for you all:
So Pierce Harlan of the False Rape Society blog gets into an elevator ….
Well, OK, not a joke. In his latest post, Harlan offers a reaction, of sorts, to the whole atheist elevator incident –- by relating an anecdote of a recent elevator experience of his own.
EDITED TO ADD: Harlan has now deleted the post in question. It can still be seen, at least for now, in Google’s cache of the original page, which you can find here. Grab screenshots! Back to the story:
Seems he was riding a hotel elevator with a sweet old lady. Neither one said anything to the other (Harlan apparently hates talking to sweet old ladies) but when he got off the elevator – well, let’s let him explain:
I glanced back at her and saw that … she was immobilized with fear. In fact, she was practically cowering in the corner. Her eyes couldn’t have been wider if I had whipped out my dick and lathered it up with Grey Poupon. Hers was the face of utter, unbridled fear, and she was watching me like the scardest of scared deer. She said not a word but her demeanor practically pleaded, “Please don’t rape me, sir!”
Now, Harlan seems to have what you might call a taste for overstatement. He describes feminists as “screeching banshees” and “extremist loons allied with the sexual grievance industry.” I doubt he could describe a chicken-salad sandwich without resorting to angry hyperbole. (That was a little bit of overstatement on my part.) But let’s just assume that there is at least a kernel of truth here: this woman was creeped out by Harlan.
So what was Harlan’s response to this woman’s obvious discomfort?
[N]o one has more empathy for his fellow human beings than I do. The first thought that came to my mind in response to the obvious fear on the face of this pathetic, sweet looking, older woman — who probably never hurt anyone in her entire life — was fuck you!
Obviously we are supposed to ask just what it was that drove Harlan – the self-described world’s most empathetic man – to say something so seemingly callous? Well, as is usually the case with those we write about here, it all comes back to man-hating ladies and their male allies, with their evil insistence on sexual assault education (sorry, “indoctrination”) and their callous demands to “’take back the night,’ although the night has always been theirs.”(I don’t quite know what that means, but it sure sounds selfish of these women to want a whole extra night just for themselves.)
Ours is, Harlan says, “a culture marked by crass, hysterical fear-mongering about male sexual predation and violence.” (Evidently some guys haven’t gotten the memo on this.)
But all this evil misandry seems to have left poor Mr. Harlan in an uncharitable mood towards, well, almost everyone — though he directs his worst opprobrium at sweet old ladies.
Fuck them all. The paranoia of the woman in the elevator is her problem, not mine. Ironically, the elevator, the hotel itself, the car she rode in and the roads she rode on to get to the hotel were all undoubtedly conceived, designed, and built by men — men she’d fear just as much as me if they were standing in that elevator with her. I felt no guilt or shame or bewilderment over the fact that she fears me because of my birth class. Let her fear me. I can’t change it, and I have too much to do to worry about it.
And maybe, just maybe, it’s good that some people fear us. Maybe we should exult in the power we wield by reason of their paranoia. One thing I know: I will never do anything to alleviate their paranoia. In fact, I’m just fine with it, thank you very much. If someday, my riding the elevator causes some old woman to have a heart attack, that, too, is not my problem. Blame it on a culture that I don’t approve of. Blame on sweet looking, older women who give in to the paranoia.
Truly the world’s most empathetic man.
Harlan goes on to talk briefly about the Rebecca Watson elevator incident. Needless to say, he adds nothing interesting to the discussion.
That’s supposed to be funny.. how? o_O
The entire joke seems to be “haha cross-dresser/tranny!” -_-
It’s like the Katt Rigg rule:
When someone tells a joke about Asian people and there’s no actual joke–the joke is the Asian people.
There doesn’t appear to be an actual joke in the video outside of “it’s a man dressed up as a woman claiming to be a woman!” -_- The thing where he says he’s a woman and the person goes o_O are things that actually happen to trans women : Unless somebody can explain another reason to me why that’s supposed to be funny? -_-;;
I get that they “pull no punches”… but…it still doesn’t change how I feel about this >_> I’d feel the same if it was a joke about how Asian ppl talk… or a guy with tape on his eyes, etc :
Marc: I’m sorry for what I’ve written. I’m ashamed of it, now, how can I ever correct what I’ve said?
Taking you at face value… own up to what you say.
Let’s take the first part (it relates to almost all of the problems between us, as regards rhetoric and logic). It’s possible that your approach, isn’t rhetorically wise. When a significant number of people don’t see what you are trying to say, in the way you are trying to say it; esp. what that number is the majority of your respondents, your approach is counterproductive.
Now to the second part, why should we assume that the final elimination of the male sex is anyone’s final aim?
I’d rather take Watson at face value (see above, re what people say, vs. what you impute them to mean). Watson said she wanted to go about making it more pleasant/comfortable for women to attend atheist/skeptic conferences (which I said ought to be something male attendees might also want to foster, as; among other things, the odds of some of those women, when comfortable, being in the mood for, “coffee in my room” goes up. A win-win-win).
I don’t see any reason to leap from that, to “the multi-phased elimination of the male sex.”
Oh I hate little Britain… It thinks it is ‘edgy’ because it makes fun of transpeople, the disabled, the mentally handicapped, fat women…it never ends.
For a really edgy black comedy British show I’d reccomend Big Train. Or possibly Jam, but Jam is freaky as hell a lot of the time. The difference is that even tho these shows make jokes about uncomfortable subjects, marginalised people are never the butt of the joke.
I’m sorry for what I’ve written. I’m ashamed of it, now, how can I ever correct what I’ve said?
It’s NWOSlave!
Because Mr. Harland reminds me of Emily Howard-he pretends to be something (someone who believes in honest debate) and then gets mad when people refuse to go along (by actually honestly debating him.)
You do understand that the whole character is composed of nasty myths about real life trans people, right? Myths that trans people are pretending to be something that they are not? And that they’re wrong to get mad when people call them impostors and liars for, you know, existing?
It’s entirely possible to call someone a mendacious hypocrite without saying by extension that real life trans people are mendacious hypocrites.
(Back in for a quickie! ;D )
Please, Marc. You are fooling no one. You’re on the side of no one here other than the MRA’s… like Mr. Harlan. If that bothers you, look in the damned mirror.
Do you think that your pseudo-polite facade is convincing? It is not. So pick a side, already… either you’re with us, or you’re with them.
(Elizabeth, summer_snow, Ami, Laura, et al: I’ve seen, I think, exactly one clip from Little Britain… Anthony Stewart Head, best known over here as Giles from Buffy the Vampire Slayer, was in it. Come to think of it, the clip did make fun of gay men and Italians. It sure was, funny, though. I’d have to see more skits to see what you’ve seen, I guess. Anyway, if I offended anyone with my comment, it was purely from ignorance.)
mediumdave: We’re talking about this one specific clip of Little Britain that Beth posted in this thread. We are talking about the character of Emily Howard in that clip. You don’t need to go researching anything else. You can scroll back and watch that clip. There’s plenty of transphobia right there in plain sight.
summer_snow:
So… I did that. Yeah. You’re completely right… not the slightest bit funny.
Which sucks, because when I saw the clip with Anthony Stewart Head, I thought: “This is hilarious! A Brit TV comedy show I’ve never heard of, and it’s really funny. Not your fault of course, just… arrgh. It was like the times that I thought I’d like a certain SF author, and then found out that (s)he was personally an asshole. Kinda kills the old enthusiasm.
And no, not comparing my disappointed feelings to those of people who feel personally attacked by TV shows or books, etc. Well, I should go to bed.
You were not the one offending MediumDave-I was by posting the clip but that is what I saw in my head when reading Harlan’s last post. A man who is flouncing off while trying to pretend to be something he is not.
Although, Summer_snow, I think the character is actually more about Eddie Howard’s ridiculous assumptions about what a “Victorian Lady” was like rather then his being a cross-dresser.
Well, I guess I didn’t make it to bed after all…
Elizabeth, not to pile on you, but having seen the clip I agree with the critics. It’s their ox that’s being gored; you and I aren’t the best people to be making that judgement.
And for that matter, “feminizing” Mr. Harlan (even in your own head) isn’t terribly helpful here. We want to combat sexism, not perpetuate it… right? Feminizing is a weapon that the MRA’s use (not to great effect, but it does amuse them) all the time. Why should we play into that? Mr. Harlan tries to present himself as a swaggering macho guy, when he’s obviously a cringing coward. There’s no need, and no benefit, to using gendered insults against someone like him.
Yyou wanted to know who I was referring to MediumDave and if you do not want to pile on, why are you doing just that?
Because I spoke in ignorance, Elizabeth. Now I’m less ignorant. Examining privilege is never a comfortable process… but it’s so worth it.
Beth, I get that the clip is dressed up in parasols and crinolines, but that really isn’t the meat of the joke. Look at the jokes about using the wrong bathroom, trying to get a doctor to call you by the right name and pronouns, having a voice that makes people misgender you, trying to get surgery to make your body conform to your gender, trying to get accepted in public by strangers as someone of the right gender. These are not jokes that have anything to do with Victorian ladies. These are jokes about modern trans people.
I’m sorry that you’re feeling attacked here. That’s not my intention at all. Please just think a little harder about the clip.
Guys, I think Beth has thought about it. She said she offended, and why she thought it was topical. She also said she didn’t see the problems in it before, and does now.
Pecunium, I’m not trying to badger Beth for an apology, and I’m sorry if it comes out that way. I’m trying to help Beth understand what was so hurtful about that clip.
Pecunium, Beth can speak for herself, and she has. I’m through with being defensive about this; others can do what they want. I’m moving on…
Because I had a wonderfully wicked thought early this morning… what if Pierce Harlan fabricated the entire “elevator” anecdote? Other people have already suspected him of embellishing the incident, but what if it never happened at all, and the “elevator lady” never existed? It is rather convenient, after all. Mr. Harlan “needed” an anecdote to counter Rebecca Watson’s, and *bing* he suddenly has one! Maybe that what his freakout/banning/post deletion was really about… he was afraid of being exposed as a liar! That wouldn’t do, especially in front of his sycophants at the FRS.
I thought the meat was the Victorian lady part honestly Summer_snow, I never even thought about it making fun of transvestites. I see it now that it has been brought to my attention.
MediumDave, If you want me to change the way I think, feel free to do what Summer_snow did which is explain why I was not seeing what I should have seen-not tell me you are not trying to tell me how to think then turn right around and tell me how to think.
And this has been beaten to death. Let us move on.
Please, Marc. You are fooling no one. You’re on the side of no one here other than the MRA’s… like Mr. Harlan. If that bothers you, look in the damned mirror.
No, I don’t want to fool anyone, as I said many times before I am NOT a MRA.
I don’t know how often I need to repeat this?
Maybe it’s a language problem that you don’t understand me, mind you, I am not a native speaker. Though I don’t know what one can get wrong in the sentence “I am not a MRA”.
I was always supporting your goals, and I still do — more than ever before — please, just because we had this minor quarrel… don’t blow this out of proportion.
Do you think that your pseudo-polite facade is convincing? It is not. So pick a side, already… either you’re with us, or you’re with them.
I picked my side long ago, I am with you, with nobody else.
I have to admit that sometimes it happens that other things I believe in can conflict with my other standpoints. But does that make me “dishonest”? If you really can say “YES!” to this answer… it would make me very sad.
Please, think about this and you might understand me!
I give you an example (sorry, it will be long):
I am also a supporter of the anti-nuclear movement. In northern Germany we had a nuclear plant called Krümmel (boiling water reactor type) which was shut down after a short-circuit in a transformer for a year.
Though this and other problems with the reactor, the operator decided to make the plant operational again — that was last year, .
The head of the plant now should be a woman (Ulrike Welte). Can you imagine? She should be the first woman in Germany who is the director of a nuclear plant, which would of course be a major step, a woman in such a position of responsibility (who would hold more direct responsibility than even people in the highest political offices), a position where only people with profound technical skills and experience would be qualified.
Now everything came out differently:
She failed the final practical exam.
That’s a test where a reactor failure is simulated on the exercise control stand.
To pass the test one has to bring the reactor to a safe state within 30 to 60 minutes. But she was not able to do this in two hours.
So that came to a surprise to all, to the local population as well to the operator of the plant.
On the positive side: In the end it was clear after this setback: the reactors would not be switched on so soon.
And also her failure gave new ammunition to the protest-movement against Krümmel: How can we trust a company who wants to appoint someone incompetent to the director of a nuclear power plant?
But of course her failure confirmed the prejudices that many people still hold that a woman is just not fitted for a job like that.
Of course, I was happy when she failed the test. But is this so wrong? I was happy for the right reasons!
Now, after the tragedy at Fukushima it was possible to finally make it come true: This plant will never return to service. It stays shut down and later will be dismantled.
Would it have been operational before Fukushima, probably the decision would have been different…
So you could me call dishonest to be happy how a woman confirms all possible prejudices, but in reality I was just in conflict about my different ideological standpoints.
Sorry for this long off-topic example, but I hope it makes clear how, if you don’t know people very well, you shouldn’t judge them too quickly.
Yes, you are. You are not my friend, and I don’t want your friendship. You’re no different than Mr. Harlan… and this is not a minor quarrel. You massacred my words, and I do not forgive that. Now go fuck yourself (please).
Thank you, Beth and mediumdave.
Now, there’s a new post full of Manboobery demanding to be mocked. Moving on!
I think everyone has made their points about the Little Britain video; let’s move on.
Marc: This story doesn’t help in thinking you are honest.
We aren’t saying you are a fellow traveller of MRAs because you dislike nuclear power. We are calling you a fellow traveller of MRAs for things you have said here.
You misrepresent people. You say false things. You argue, for whatever reason, in parallel with MRAs. It’s not a case of “with us or against us”, there are lots of people who just don’t care. So long as they aren’t going about saying feminism is things it’s not, or arguing against equality, they are neutral.
You aren’t doing that. You are posting ad absurdem arguments, and then getting offended when it’s pointed out that your arguments are nonsense. You are making weak, or non-relevant analogies, and defending them.
Then you turn around, having vehemently defended what you said, and claim the misunderstandings are because you aren’t a native speaker of English.
That’s dishonest. You can’t have it both ways: that your grasp of English is so great that you can design irrefutable arguments by analogy, and that your English is so weak it’s causing the “misunderstandings” you say are the root cause of the problem.
As I said, you want to get less in the way of detailed takedown? Be honest, and own your words.
“But put the prevalence issue aside: why must every discussion of false rape claims with you people always to come back to “rape is a worse problem.” Assuming for the sake of argument that’s true: SO WHAT? Does that make false rape claims unworthy of discussion? Seriously? ”
I never said that we can’t discuss false rape claims. I said what the woman did was wrong and it was a false claim.
Explaining why this happens doesn’t make her blameless, it just explains why she’s doing it. Just like explaining why a guy hits his wife (to control her) doesn’t excuse it.
“Women’s groups have rightfully insisted for decades that women are at least as capable as the guys in every sphere of life — in the law, medicine, the military, government, you name it. Everywhere — except the boudoir, where it’s 1950 all over again, all the time, and women are as helpless as the most distressed of Disney damsels.”
Nope. There are bad women out there just like there are bad men out there. I don’t think I’ve ever met a feminist who denies this.
But bad women who falsely accuse men of rape tend to be the excuse men use to disbelieve good women and bad women who actually did get raped.