Hey, everybody, here’s another massive list of ridiculous comments from the Reddit’s Men’s Rights subreddit on the subjects of women, feminists and feminism. Some, er, highlights:
Never trust a woman. When you are out and they are around, go the other way. Your life may actually depend on you crossing the street or not taking that elevator or not working late in a office with another lonely woman.
Women are keen to assert all of the benefits that modern society affords them, but at the same time quick to twist their hair into pigtails and play the “I’m just a girl” defense when the traditional benefits of being a woman would suit them better.
Misandrist feminists want gender based apartheid, and the male population culled to lest than 10%
Feminism does NOT create strong women – it creates dependency and a stunted intellect.
In the feminist community, bigotry is met with a groundswell of support, and is very rarely called out.
That last one is just a teensy bit ironic, given that most of the comments above were heavily upvoted – in other words, “met with a groundswell of support.” Further evidence of this irony: oh, just the hundreds of misogynistic statements from MRAs I’ve linked to on this blog.
For links to the original comments in context, see the full list on Reddit. Props to the Redditor known as Squibbling for having the patience to assemble all of this.
Why on Earth would we want men to be less than 10% of the population? That isn’t nearly enough to financially support all of us and give us babies.
Maybe the picture has something to do with “Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free and it comes with a free kitten?”
My theory on the picture is that cats, like women, aren’t usually willing to take orders, and a certain kind of man finds this offensive.
(I’m not entirely joking – I’ve found that men who love cats are often a lot less sexist than the ones who hate them, allergy issues aside.)
What is ridiculous about Reddit’s observations here, Futrelle? A nationally famous feminist, a columnist for the New York Times, America’s birdcage lining of record, wrote a book a few years ago titled “Are Men Necessary”–by Maureen Dowd.
Thought I forgot about that one, didn’t you? I suppose you could tell what Ms. Dowd’s conclusion was.
I, on the other hand, say that feminoids like Dowd(y) aren’t necessary. If someone would put her, and horrid women like her, on a desert island, and they were never heard from again, I wouldn’t know the difference, and could care less!
Uh, Maureen Dowd was not actually calling for the elimination of men. That was simply an title designed to attract attention. I imagine she meant it a reference to a book by James Thurber called “Is Sex Necessary?” (Note: Thurber was not saying that sex was unnecessary.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Are_Men_Necessary%3F_When_Sexes_Collide
No, I actually can’t. But from the summary and your reaction, I bet I know what you think it said!
That… that makes no fucking sense. Even for an MRA.
I find it fascinating that, for so many MRA views, there is an equal and opposite MRA view that is still hateful towards women/feminists. For examples:
But remember, saying that a woman might have a valid reason to be afraid of a strange man in certain contexts because most rapes are committed by men is sexism.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterfliesandwheels/2011/10/a-man-generally-cannot-know/#comment-10539
(As you’ll find out if you read the thread, this commenter also believes that feminists want to destroy all men)
Minus the population culling, that’s Anthony Zarat.
The Men’s Rights crowd, or more accurately the Whine-Whine Feminists Are Meanies crowd, has no intellectual consistency beyond an abiding hostility towards feminism and women.
Not only do feminists not all rally behind Maureen Dowd, I don’t know any who do. I am aware of some who deny she’s a feminist — and while that doesn’t mean she’s not, it does rather suggest that her beliefs aren’t representative of “mainstream feminism,” whatever that is.
Moreover, as Rutee said, MoDo didn’t call for the elimination of men.
Maureen Dowd, feminist hero? David, you really need to start warning people before you say things that absurd. It’s not good for a keyboard to have tea snorted out of the nose onto it.
When asked this question, apparently Maureen Dowd’s answer was:
“Well, yes, but don’t tell them, it will make them cocky. Of course, they’re necessary. What’s interesting to me is that I wanted the title, and obviously I, I put the cover on it for that reason, to be playful and mischievous, like the push and pull of a Jane Austin novel, “Pride and Prejudice”, strong willed men and women kind of having a fantastic time together.
And, but a lot of guys are a little scared of it because they think the answer is “no”, but you tell me, why would men assume the answer is no? Of course the answer is yes.”
http://www.thirteen.org/openmind/feminism/are-men-necessary/1691/
So umm, Mr David Futrelle seems to be seriously misinformed.
Oh, I got the person wrong, damn.
Seriously, I was lucky my coffee mug was empty. When has MoDo ever considered herself to be a feminist?
DKM? Couldn’t you care less by just not paying attention? Isn’t that what you are already doing?
My first thought was “Dear god, i can’t even imagine how difficult it would be to get laid”
But oh wait, women never want sex in their world. I forgot.
Maybe I’m just naive, but I am honestly baffled as to where they get the idea that feminists hold these views. Who is actually saying these things? Who is proposing that exterminating 90% of men would be a good idea? The closest thing I can think of is that occasionally, someone–feminist or otherwise–will be discussing reproduction and population dynamics and will make the entirely factual observation that biologically, you only need 1 male for every 10 females to maintain a healthy genetic diversity in your animals. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone extrapolate from that fact to “Therefore we should cull 90% of human males.” I mean, WTF?
Oh, WAH, a career woman wrote a lament about the hardships of career women in a professional world that still revolves around men. Mom, she’s being meeeeeaaaaannnnnn!!!!
They forgot that most feminists just don’t like MRAs like this, not men as a whole. It’s a bit troubling that they are assuming they are just like any man, so most men must be hateful misogynists too. That is, fortunately, not the case.
And considering that many women are actually quite fond of men, I don’t really think androcide is imminent.
Seriously, this persecution complex is getting ridiculous.
Well, if they were to admit that most men are not like them, where would that leave them? The whole MGTOW thing isn’t going to be very effective at forcing women to be more servant-like if the majority of men refuse to play along.
Yah, I’m perfectly willing to believe that avoiding women/crossing the street/not getting in elevators with women are excellent ideas for these particular MRAs, and that there might be women out there who kind of wish they didn’t exist. But that’s not because of their gender, it’s because they are terrible people and they shouldn’t be around anyone and probably lots of people kind of wish they didn’t exist.
@Karalora: it’s pretty typical persecution complex. They just KNOW that’s what we’re SECRETLY thinking.
Okay. FUN LOGIC TIEMZ!
I am a feminist. I do not believe men should be killed–really, under any circumstances other than “about to commit murder and can only be stopped by being killed”–let alone a 90% gendercide.
Am I:
A) Not really a feminist
or
B) Lying?
Well, I know I’m not lying, anyway. So we come to A. I’m not really a feminist, because I do not hold the feminist belief in gendercide. How many other feminists here also don’t believe in gendercide?
I’m going to charitably guess it’s all of us. Sohe question is–how many feminists have to disavow a belief before it becomes not a feminist belief?
If we can’t disprove that we want a gendercide, then we can’t disprove any claim. So fuck it! Go hog wild! Claim that feminists want to kill koalas and blow up the moon! If evidence doesn’t matter, think big! Feminists want to blow up the sun! Sure, they’ll claim they don’t, but sun-exploding is a feminist belief!
If gendercide is a feminist belief, it’s one that’s held by few to zero actual feminists, and that makes it… not a feminist belief.
WE HAD FUN LOGIC TIEMZ!
How can someone read enough Amanda Marcotte to hate her guts but not enough to know that making fun of Maureen Dowd is how blogging feminists relax? It’s probably the clearest example on the internet of feminists being equally critical of a man and a woman doing the same job, even though modo’s the token chick and there’s no back-up lady columnist to rally around.
http://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/kzh2p/this_is_what_happens_when_you_dont_buy_your/c2okax5 You really need to do a followup on this guy.
“Never trust a woman. When you are out and they are around, go the other way. Your life may actually depend on you crossing the street or not taking that elevator or not working late in a office with another lonely woman.”
Yet idiots like NWO (or was it MRAL?) get all pissy when women don’t respond to them with just the right amount of eye contact or smiles. And lets not forget the “nice guys” who blame women for basically not throwing themselves at them right away.
Why should women express interest in these men when many of these men want to avoid women anyway?
Go your own way already.
Also the level of projection in these particular quotes is amazing. I’ve seen MRAs discuss reducing the female population for “breeding purposes” and childcare only. And they say feminists want to reduce the male population to less than 10% ? yeah right.