So somebody, and I honestly don’t know who, tried a little experiment last night on Reddit’s Men’s Rights subreddit: claiming to be a “long time lurker and closet-convert to the MRM [with] some thoughts to share that I’ve been working on for a long time,” the (ostensibly male) prankster cut-and-pasted the excerpts of Norwegian mass murderer Anders Breivik’s manifesto that I highlighted in my last post and presented them to the Men’s Rightsers as if they were his own writings. The prankster also pretended to be posting on a throwaway account because his “GF has a reddit account and I’m not ready to open that bag of worms yet.” (All of the excerpts in question were from posts from far-right blogger Fjordman that Breivik had incorporated into his “manifesto.”)
So how did Breivik/Fjordman’s views (not identified as such) go over on r/MensRights? Pretty well, it turns out, with the post receiving (when last I checked) about twice as many upvotes as downvotes from the locals. “Nice post man.,” wrote darkamir in a comment. To FascistOrigami, meanwhile,
The beautiful thing about this post (beyond the fact that it hits all the major issues): every feminist on reddit whose bf is also on reddit will be wondering if the OP is her guy.
The biggest bone of contention? That the (fictional) OP felt he had to hide his views from his (fictional) girlfriend. “If you have a girlfriend who you have to hide things from, she should not be your girlfriend,” wrote one commenter. Others worried that the OP might be in an abusive relationship if “he” felt he couldn’t speak his mind. Tomek77, in perhaps the most ironic comment of the bunch, warned the OP that he might get a violent reaction if he revealed his views to his “GF.”
Just a piece of advice: I would be very careful about sharing your thoughts with your gf (if you care about your relationship).
For some reason that still escapes my understanding, many women go absolutely bat-shit crazy when they are faced with the reality of gender relations in the west.
To this day, I remember one of my ex-gf literally entering crazy-mode, screaming, yelling and physically shaking after I mentioned that it doesn’t make sense for men to get married under the current law. I swear, I was expecting to see foam coming from her mouth at any moment – and we have only been dating for a week!!
Even in more casual social settings, I have seen many women react very violently and irrationally when men’s issues were mentioned in the conversation. So proceed with caution..
Several hours after the original post, one of the regulars figured out what was going on. And posted a link to my post here on Breivik. Needless to say, my ideas got a much harsher reception than Breivik/Fjordman’s did, though judging from the comments very few of the regulars actually bothered to read my post before arriving at their conclusions about it.
I agree that ppl are agreeing w/ hateful (or at least hateful to most of the ppl here xD ) comments not just inoffensive comments that just happen to be said by a mass murderer but I wonder if the well is alrdy poisoned b/c he IS a mass murderer : Like would this be a post if it was just MRAs agreeing w/ regular hateful stuff from an extreme MRA? Is his stuff MORE extreme, or is it just cuz he happened to be a killer? : I guess my question is (and I dun have an answer to this cuz I haven’t rly thought much of it cuz it’s sad and upsetting and I am just busy being sad and upset lately about it 🙁 ) is his being a killer merely incidental to his MRA (and xenophobic, white-power, racist, etc which seems sometimes to also conflate w/ some extreme MRAs that I’ve seen) beliefs, or are they tied together, and can’t be compartmentalized? Cuz it seems like there are those that think it’s “agreeing w/ a killer” and others who think it’s “agreeing w/ a guy who happened to be a killer” :
I just wonder if it’s fair to point at MRAs who agreed w/ extreme MRA rhetoric, which we see them agree w/ normally neways… and say “look they’re agreeing w/ a killer”, b/c are those beliefs (even if only in part) tied to him being a mass murderer, or is he being a mass murderer incidental to it? : Or is his rhetoric even WORSE and they still agree? B/c presumably these MRAs have agreed w/ this kind of rhetoric in the past… :
I think the sticking point is that this guy used the racist and misogynist arguments that resemble things said in the MRM to justify mass murder. It doesn’t appear as though these beliefs are incidental to his murders, but instrumental to them. I’m not saying he was reading MRA sites or anything like that, but the logical extension of violent rhetoric and dehumanising people is, well, violence. Not that everyone who shares that logic will be violent, but that this is an endpoint which makes sense in the scheme of things. And is therefore problematic…does that make sense?
@Ami:
The way I see it, violent rhetoric is harmful, and killers are the reason why. In essence, its a “See, look what saying people should be gunned down can do!” It is, to put it bluntly, to show that you were right to be worried about it all along.
Its messy and complicated… Obviously there are crazy people out there, people who could take what appear to be innocuous statements and transmute them into violence. But sometimes that transmutation doesn’t need to occur. The idea that people are gonna die/need to die if x and y and z don’t change doesn’t need a leap of logic to go to people will die since x and y and z don’t change. And there are people out there in the world willing to do it.
I’m not in the position of saying “See, you agree with a killer! That makes you bad!” I’ve said before, even killers are people, and they probably have perfectly innocuous beliefs that I share, beliefs that a reasonable person couldn’t connect to slaughter. That isn’t what we are talking about here. We are talking about beliefs that even a reasonable person could easily connect to violence, and the only reason it hasn’t on a larger scale is because (thankfully) there are very few people willing to actually go through with it.
Long story short, we aren’t blaming the MRM because they “agree with a killer,” we are arguing that the MRM’s violent rhetoric is bad/wrong/etc, and as evidence note that it might have been part of the reason a killer killed. Really, (at least for me), the opinion towards that rhetoric hasn’t changed since this guy murdered people, it is simply another piece of data (not to mention a tradgedy.. I haven’t really said that yet…) reinforcing the idea that violent rhetoric is wrong.
@Nobby: The parts that the men on reddit agreed with said nothing about women losing their rights or being reduced to breeding stock, nor are those views remotely similar to the men’s rights movement. Again, it is a logical fallacy to claim that just because two groups share similar views they are somehow connected.
@kirbywarp: McVeigh’s position is a feminist one. Feminists make the same arguments about the United State’s hypocritical position on terrorism, bombing, and international conflicts. You cannot weasel out of that just because it is an inconvenient truth. Feminists have a lot in common with a lot of despicable people, from McVeigh to NAMBLA to Rush Limbaugh. That does not mean that their incidentally similar views are in any way linked or caused by one another.
@Lyn: The logic makes sense, but it is also is not limited to any one group. The same thing applies to feminism. However, that does not mean that just because many women who commit violence against boys and men tend to express views startling similar to feminist views about men that feminists caused said violence or influenced it or that feminists need to check their rhetoric. Coincidentally, I find most feminist rhetoric hateful, violent and dehumanizing.
@Toysoldier is that inherent to feminism tho? o_O I know there are feminists who claim that feminism inherently means being a socialist, or being anti-US-military or etc… there’s also queer ppl who claim that being a queer-activist inherently means being anti-Israel also…(it’s a big stir right now in Toronto over funding of Pride) : But I know many Libertarian feminists and other feminists who agree about feminism (gender, oppression, marginalization, stereotypes, etc etc) but not w/ socialist feminists, or communist feminists (I also know those!) and other such things… it’s interesting that some ppl view feminism as being inherently linked to those beliefs tho :] I also know some who think feminism is inherently transphobic also, while others don’t, and are trans feminists (like me! and the ppl at QT, etc) :3 I think that it’s interesting to say that McVeigh is a feminist b/c he held non-gender related views… does that make Allen Andrade a result of feminists b/c of the anti-trans feminists? o: How popular does a belief have to be running through a movement that is, in theory, unrelated to that belief, for it to be part of it (like anti-imperialism, or socialism)… cuz there seem to be a lot of MRAs who are also white-power types (or anti-immigration types) but I dun think it’s fair to say that nebody who commits race crimes, is motivated by MRA philosophies, or that the minutemen are… xD
@Toysoldier You know what, I’m sorry. You’re right, they were not the sections I thought they were.
However, the fact that we’re comparing hateful rhetoric stays the same. To whit:
“Feminists, often with a Marxist world view, have been a crucial component in establishing the suffocating public censorship ”
“Radical feminism has bred suspicion and hostility, not cooperation.”
“equalising the sexes has led to a crippling feminisation of Western society”
“the pursuit of equality is being used to destroy our society and undermine – and therefore be in conflict with – Mother nature.”
To paint your enemy as the cause of the destruction of society is hateful, and this is the kind of stuff David finds all the time. We are still, I repeat, not comparing ‘incidentals’, but direct ideological similarities. It still is not the same to say that Hitler said ‘water is wet’, which would be incidental. If we were comparing, i don’t know, Breivik’s preferences for carrots, it would be incidental. But we are comparing what he saw as the cause of destruction of society. Big F-ing difference.
I find it interesting that when the MRM refers to feminism, they almost always refer to radical feminism (at least what I have seen, which is by no means a representative sample because most of what I have seen of the MRM has come from this blog. I’ve not the stomach to slog through those portions of the internet myself). Almost all references to feminism have been to second wavers like Dworkin (which, really, what self identified feminist even agrees with her anymore, save twisty faster and her ilk), or modern radfems that many feminists in the circles I frequent go through many pains to refute and argue against. I’ve yet to see MRAs quote feminists like Clarisse Thorn, or Ozy, or Holly, or Figleaf, and act like what they are saying is The Most Ridiculous And Misandrist Shit Ever. They all look for the worst shit they can find. Which, in and of itself, is natural. We here at manboobz do that too. But the worst they can find is from Thirty fucking years ago, while here it’s like, from yesterday.
Toysoldier; If you identify as MRA but dislike a lot of the more hateful rhetoric of the movement, you may very well find something very valuable at No, Seriously, What About Teh Menz. It’s not a snarkfest like this blog is meant to be (which I don;t knock at all! I love snarkfests!!) and it has a lot of different opinions flying around in (mostly) respectful debate. We’d love to see you over there.
Even Twisty Faster doesn’t say “i hate men”, she says “men hate you” (with examples), and doesn’t seem to take herself nearly as seriously as the MRA guys.
Truth. Most of her talk of “Revolution” and “Sudden Death Island” seem to be largely tongue-in-cheek. And it’s hard to imagine someone who uses the word “dude” in so many new and creative ways takes herself entirely seriously. Her commentariat, however…..
Anyway, Twisty remains someone I respect who holds many views i wholeheartedly disagree with. Maybe it’s just because she sometimes says something I like, or because Harriet J has obvious affection for her and Harriet J is pretty much the reason i’m feminist…..
Anyway, I digress. To anyone who lists Twisty as a representation of What Feminists think, I shall direct them posthaste to Holly’s (now discontinued) blog segment “Twisty Faster is Fucking Insane (TFIFI)”
@Shora (you forgot me! xD but nobody quotes me as a feminist xD ) Also, TS is a frequent commenter on NSWATM so I think he alrdy knows of the blog :3
I really enjoy Twisty’s use of language. I haven’t read her commenters in quite a while.
@Ami: Sorry, I didn’t mean to forget you! 🙁 And apparently I haven’t been nearly active enough of NSWATM if i didn’t pick up on that. (Which is really sad, as I’m supposed to be a contributor/mod :/)
@Magpie: Twisty is a fucking brilliant writer. I sometimes read her shit just to giggle at her zany creative turns of phrase. But I can’t help but think that she would view me personally as subverting her Revolution (feminine, BDSM sub, bellydancer, among other things)
Oh and don’t forget horses! She has and loves horses, which is surely the quickest way to my heart.
I probably agree with Twisty more than you do, Shora. She really does love and take care of her horses and dogs, doesn’t she. I reckon that counts for something 🙂
I don’t know if she’d see you as subverting the Revolution – she seems to see feminine people as getting-by-as-best-they-can. BDSM would probably get you a good argument, though! Bellydancing looks like great fun. I’ve only seen it once, and the dancers were as old as me and had similar figures and twirled and twinkled in the lamplight – brilliant.
I miss having horses. I miss being able to really ride.
🙁
I have a workmate who needs someone to horse-sit when she goes away later this year – to the spanish riding school – in Spain. (U jelly?) 😉
@Magpie: I’m not feminine to get by the best I can though; I’m feminine because I actually enjoy and get something out of it (although I do tend to ignore the trappings of femininity that i find inconvenient or annoying like regular shaving or makeup.) I’m waiting for the next time she trots out BDSM to light her blog on fire and cackle in the flames a la Shosanna from Inglourious Basterds so I can have my turn wrestling in the mud pit.
And Bellydancing is indeed TONS of fun.
@Precunium: I know exactly how you feel. My last horse colicked real bad and had to be put down right before i left for college, and I haven’t been able to really ride in at least three years. It breaks my heart…. One day, thought, I will have money and start up again 🙂
Shona, I’m so sorry about your horse 🙁
I remember one of the belly dancers (they only do it for fun) was wearing a long-sleeved top that covered her tummy, with sequins around the bust and shoulders. Her costume fitted in well with the other short tops, though. The skirts are so long that even twirling they didn’t show their legs. Her hair was uncovered, but maybe a sparkly headpiece over a scarf would work. What do you reckon? Have you ever come across ‘modest’ bellydancers?
Magpie
I’ve only been bellydancing for less than a year, but my troupe stresses that no one should do anything they’re not comfortable with. So, some of the girls will wear tops that cover their bellies, and long leggings underneath their skirts. We’re pretty much just an amateur college troupe though.
I know that in certain countries of the Middle East it’s illegal to show your stomach when belly dancing, so a lot of outfits in those areas (Like Egypt, I think?) wear one piece dresses with windows and flesh-colored fabric that cover the stomach.
Really, though, from what I’ve seen in person and on youtube videos, styles vary wildly from style to person to troupe.
This is why I love manboobz so much. Along with the mocking of misogynists, you get discussions of horses and belly dancing.
Next: bellydancing horses!
It’s a popular hobby, so each troupe grows their own style, I suppose.
Sorry for mis-spelling your name, btw.
(cue image of a horse with a giant hip scarf around its middle kicking at the fabric of a long skirt with a cross expression on its face. Cue laughter)
And no probs on the misspelling thing 😉
Shora: You have my sympathy. When my former fiancée and I broke up I no longer lived with horses. But the real problem is my Rieter’s. It makes it really hard on my joints to ride regularly.
Which is bad for one’s practice. 🙁
When I manage to convince my partners we need to move back t Calif, maybe I can manage to have a horse.
So I make do with a motorcycle. It’s fun, but it’s not the same. I had this vague sense of Leus, though he looks better in this oneRunning easy. The Icelandic in front is Rudi.