A couple excellent pieces on Anders Breivik and misogyny.
First: The other day I posted a link to a piece by Michael Kimmel on Breivik and the sexual politics of far-right thought. It turned out that the article was a draft that got published prematurely.
Now the final version of the post is officially up at Sociological Images: A tale of two terrorists redux. Kimmel argues that what we know about Breivik thus far
indicate[s] that … it will be impossible to fully understand this horrific act without understanding how gender operates as a rhetorical and political device for domestic terrorists.
These members of the far right consider themselves Christian Crusaders for Aryan Manhood, vowing its rescue from a feminizing welfare state. Theirs is the militarized manhood of the heroic John Rambo – a manhood that celebrates their God-sanctioned right to band together in armed militias if anyone, or any governmental agency, tries to take it away from them. If the state and capital emasculate them, and if the masculinity of the “others” is problematic, then only “real” white men can rescue the American Eden or the bucolic Norwegian countryside from a feminized, multicultural, androgynous immigrant-inspired melting pot.
Meanwhile, Amanda Marcotte at Pandagon offers some thoughts on Misogyny and Terrorism:
[T]here’s definitely a strong link between misogyny and violence that can’t be denied. Misogynists are far likelier to be violent people than non-misogynists, which is why rape and wife-beating are such common crimes. (Domestic violence is the number one cause of injury for women 15-44.) All bigotry provokes violence at its ends, of course. This isn’t the Oppression Olympics. But misogyny and violence go hand in hand so often because misogynists really buy deeply into the idea that women are weak and men are “strong”, by which they mean aggressive. A steady drumbeat of misogynist thought couldn’t be better designed to reach the unhinged and cause them to lash out violently, all while imagining themselves to be big, tough men who claim they were forced—with “why did you make me do this?” being the battle cry of wife beaters—into violence.
Discuss.
… as in, duh? A bit deep for you perhaps? Out of your league? But what can we expect from feminists?
Damn, didn’t take the bait. : /
I guess feminism = chivalry in that you think feminism treats women as delicate creatures that should be protected and provided for while they sit in their castles and embroider bonbons all day?
If that was a joke, it’s too obvious. If it was serious, that’s just sad. 😛
Uh oh, watch out Molly, the scathingly passive-aggressive Ion strikes again!
What exactly was passive-aggressive about that? Or has that just become a blanket term you toss out in place of “person I don’t like” now?
Chuckadee – It seems like your major issue with quotas isn’t quotas per se, it is that western cultures these days tend to espouse the belief that women are just as qualified for their jobs as men, and as such, men should not be given preferential treatment.
To hit on a couple of other points you made, first you are correct in that whether or not specific quotas exist depends upon which country you are talking about. I live in the U.S.; therefore, my statement that no quotas exist per se is based upon U.S. laws. Some other cultures have imposed strict quotas in the workplace, and you are correct that this has lead to much higher involvement by women in the upper-management positions that were traditionally held by men. However, I would again point out that these women appear to be holding their own once they are put in those positions. And, keep in mind that the reason quotas exist is that equally qualified or more qualified women were being passed up in favor of men. Personally, I believe that neither gender should be preferred for jobs. The only way that can happen though is if people give up on their beliefs that men are necessarily better or that women are necessarily better, and actually judge candidates on an individual basis.
Along the same lines, I agree that women who choose to enter fields of work that require a certain level of physical ability should have to pass the same tests as the men in those fields. If the tests are created to ensure the safety of the workers, then everyone should have to pass the same test. But again, there are women who can and do pass these tests. And yet, you seem to be espousing a belief that women, because they are women, shouldn’t be allowed into these fields.
Finally, you talk about education and the lack of competition/the implementation of nurturing environments for children in schools. First, competition is very much alive. In fact, with the addition of equal opportunities for women (as well as other minorities), there is a lot more competition. It seems that you just don’t want boys to have to compete with girls. But if it is truly in the male nature to be competitive and aggressive, the addition of more competitors shouldn’t really be an issue. I wasn’t handed my grades, and neither were any of the women who I went to school with. We earned them. We competed for them. The men who happened to be behind us in the school rankings were apparently not ready for the competition. I refuse to feel bad about that.
Wow Ion, I really don’t know, I guess it must have been the emoticon!
Ion’s back. Whoo! I guess we’re about to keep it real now.
So… if I use emoticons I’m passive-aggressive now? Damn, what does that make someone like Ami? XD XD XD XD
She must be SUPER passive-aggressive then, along with VILE, CRUEL, and EVIL Yeah, that’s probably true. Not.
So she’s “not SUPER passive-aggressive” then. But I am, that seems to be your point.
Am I using too few of them? Maybe if I use enough emoticons I’ll break through the passive-aggressiveness zone and emerge on the other side? That’s just crazy enough to work!
@redlocker:
As if there was any doubt in the first place. 😀 MRA’s definitely go to great lengths to distort other people’s views like he has.
OK, I admit it, I’m so full of hate when I’m walking around and see these women (they’re incredibly common!), I’m always thinking “WTF they’re everywhere, oh, these fishes I hate them so much!!! For every woman there’s one handsome dude like Anders Breivik less on the earth!”
Right. If you’re so concerned about those issues that feminists are supposedly ignoring, why not tackle them yourself? Men’s Right’s issues are tackled even by NSWATM, a blog made by a feminist and having contributions from many men on various issues: https://noseriouslywhatabouttehmenz.wordpress.com/
That’s just the embrace, extend and extinguish tactics, copied from Microsoft…
Embrace: “We care for you men, don’t go to the MRAs!”
Extend: “I think we all agree that men can only be happy, when women are happy!”
Extinguish: “Sorry, men, we must care for women first, they have it so much worse… you must understand!”
or easier:
(Admiral Ackbar:) IT’S A TRAP!
@Sharculese:
feminist blogs focus on feminist issues? tell me ,more about your stunning expose.
Wasn’t feminism about EQUALITY? And now it’s just about women…!!! 🙁 🙁 🙁
@David Futrelle:
So you think this bizarre mixture of illogical thinking and homophobia should convince us that there’s something wrong with … feminism?
Damn… it failed!
(Protip: always look after “Foucault”, the blogs you find there… guaranteed fun!)
PS: Any volunteers for the MRA-Feminist-Swinger-Party?
@Rachel
“Chuckadee – It seems like your major issue with quotas isn’t quotas per se, it is that western cultures these days tend to espouse the belief that women are just as qualified for their jobs as men, and as such, men should not be given preferential treatment.”
Science, history and biology clearly show as fact that women are not as qualified physically as well as in certain mental fields of science/math/spacial acuity. Feminist ideology has decreed men and women are mentally and physically interchangable as a fact. Ideology cannot trump fact. Just because feminist ideology says women are inherently equally qualified in all fields of every mental endeavor doesn’t make it true.
If women were equally qualified there would never have been a need for AA, Title IX, quota’s and an unlimited number of laws enacted as an equalizer. And yes there are quotas by the score in both education as well as employment. In order for any company to obtain a Government contract that company must play by the rules by having X number of women employed. That is a quota. If that company has no need of more employees they create jobs in human resources, quality control, ect. that are completely unneccesary. That cost is transferred to the consumer.
Your extremely pathetic attempt at implying men can’t compete against women on a level playing field in the rest of your comment typifies feminist distortion of reality and equality. Only feminist thinking could consider The vast resources of the State giving women a leg up in all realms of society and punishing individual men as well as any company/education system which doesn’t comply a level playing field. Feminism seems hell bent on proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that women need help in even the slightest task to achieve equality.
When the actual evidence says the exact opposite of your assertion? Yes, it is hadrd to believe. Because, evidence.
Fucking reading comprehension, how does it work?
“That’s just the embrace, extend and extinguish tactics, copied from Microsoft…
Embrace: “We care for you men, don’t go to the MRAs!”
Extend: “I think we all agree that men can only be happy, when women are happy!”
Extinguish: “Sorry, men, we must care for women first, they have it so much worse… you must understand!””
Uh…what?
Did you even read the blog? Ozymandias clearly set up a blog that is clearly about Men’s Issues, but it doesn’t have the ugliness and bigotry that comes with the MRM. It tackles the issues at hand, without beating down half the world just to prove itself. Yet, a feminist set up that god damn blog and invited many intelligent men to create content for it.
Has the MRM created anything that is like that? Do MRAs have a place that discusses men’s issues in a genuine right, instead of obsessing about and hating half the world’s population?
@redlocker
“Did you even read the blog? Ozymandias clearly set up a blog that is clearly about Men’s Issues, but it doesn’t have the ugliness and bigotry that comes with the MRM. It tackles the issues at hand, without beating down half the world just to prove itself. Yet, a feminist set up that god damn blog and invited many intelligent men to create content for it.”
Ozzys blog is simply feminism for men. It’s feminist ideology. Thats all it is. The only commentors there are the manboobz gang and a few from the feminist good men project. Toss in a little Dr. mindbender and suddenly it’s all about teh menz, cause everybody else gets banned.
Ya might as well call it feministe light. Gee, the main concerns seem to be not shaming men for wearing dresses, make up and high heels, and being more supportive of a mans choice to bawl like a two year old in public. The rest of it is a cross between S&M porn and mocking Christians from the tolerant athiest Ozzy.
What a huge fucking joke.
As I said…
1. Embrace.
2. Extend.
3. Extinguish.
We’re in phase 1.
Uh…what?
Did you even read the blog? Ozymandias clearly set up a blog that is clearly about Men’s Issues, but it doesn’t have the ugliness and bigotry that comes with the MRM. It tackles the issues at hand,
yes, like…
– rape culture
– to be ashamed to use fleshlights
– to be ashamed as a man to show your emotions
– the stereotype that the men biologically are prone to objectify women
– friendship between men and women
– intersex people
you get the idea…
without beating down half the world just to prove itself. Yet, a feminist set up that god damn blog and invited many intelligent men to create content for it.
Has the MRM created anything that is like that? Do MRAs have a place that discusses men’s issues in a genuine right, instead of obsessing about and hating half the world’s population?
I’m an amoralist and an anti-humanist (you can read the manifesto here). I don’t care how hateful or ugly your ideology is, I just care about internal consistency, true foundations and that you’re open to criticism. Feminism as MRA-ism is all of that NOT. You complain about that evo-psych isn’t testable… haha, what an irony, what about all your nonsense from rape culture to privilege that works in mysterious non-detectable ways?
xD
Hey Ion’s back! 😀 I guess he got over the angry xD Sorta… xD
Also XD at Molly and the penis monument XD (OF HORRIBLE JOKE DOOOOOM XDDD apparently xD )
So Chuckadee is the brave anti-feminist who broke the programming? o_O
And NWO is screaming about the Trojan Horse that is NSWATM xD Even tho there’s still plenty of MRA and anti-feminist commenters there (they seem to dominate the comment threads)… it’s just HE’S banned so it MUST mean that they ban ALL MRAs and dissenting commenters, not just that he’s banned cuz he doesn’t contribute and just derails xD
Embrace, and extinguish is what I’m all about! XD Who wants a hug? 😀 *hugs all*
xD
“Maybe if I use enough emoticons I’ll break through the passive-aggressiveness zone and emerge on the other side? That’s just crazy enough to work!”
Yeeeeah… I wouldn’t count on it Ion.
yes, like…
– rape culture
– to be ashamed to use fleshlights
– to be ashamed as a man to show your emotions
– the stereotype that the men biologically are prone to objectify women
– friendship between men and women
– intersex people
you get the idea…
You don’t like tackling those topics? o_O (there’s way more topics, including the abuse of boys and men being raped but you know this xD )
If you were running the blog, what topics do you believe they should talk about? :3
If women were equally qualified there would never have been a need for AA, Title IX, quota’s and an unlimited number of laws enacted as an equalizer.
By that logic, the same thing applies to other groups benefited by AA.. like African Americans… so they are not equally biologically qualified? :3 (just curious what you believe :3 )
“’m an amoralist and an anti-humanist (you can read the manifesto here). I don’t care how hateful or ugly your ideology is, I just care about internal consistency, true foundations and that you’re open to criticism. Feminism as MRA-ism is all of that NOT. You complain about that evo-psych isn’t testable… haha, what an irony, what about all your nonsense from rape culture to privilege that works in mysterious non-detectable ways?”
Internal consistency and foundations are related to Humanism. What you’re doing is trying to excise yourself from a particular field of thought and stating that you, yourself, are fit to judge what is right. In other words, you’re placing yourself on a pedestal and saying that no one is worthy of it.
Geez, the lengths that you will go.
Also, from your link, Marc:
“Anti-Humanism is a belief system for those who think humans are not the entirety of what we should be considering. We want to live on as a species, and we realize that requires thinning the herd. Problem: conventional morality, aka humanism, is totally opposed to that. Answer: do away with the obsolete morality, and slaughter the 90% of our species who do nothing productive and never will. Breed better humans, and fewer of them, and then some humans live on instead of all of us facing certain death because of the stupidity of the humanists.”
…I’m starting to see why you sympathized with Brevik and Solanas. Granted, I’m still not sure if you’re serious or fucking with us, but…holy shit.