NOTE: Today is Day Two of the Man Boobz Pledge Drive. If you haven’t already, please consider clicking the little button below and sending a few bucks my way.
Thanks! (And thanks again to all who’ve already donated.) Now back to our regularly scheduled programming:
So the other day, the atheist blogger Rebecca Watson, aka Skepchick, had this little conversation on Twitter:
Watson, you may recall, got herself onto the Men’s Rights radar a few months back, after a brief comment she made in a podcast — suggesting that perhaps it wasn’t such a good idea for a guy to hit on woman he’s never spoken to before while the two of them are alone in an elevator at 4 AM – somehow turned into a Big Fucking Thing on the Internet, because how dare she say such a thing, it’s creep-shaming, she must hate men, bla bla bla.
So, anyhoo, one Men’s Rights Reddit noticed this little Twitter exchange, and posted it to the Men’s Rights subreddit. And there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth. MRAs hating women? How dare she suggest such a thing!
Here are some of the things that assorted Men’s Rights Redditors posted in response, to remind us all that the Men’s Rights movement isn’t all about shitting on women. Let’s start with this lovely rebuttal, boasting nearly 60 net upvotes:
This comment inspired a long and winding discussion of the word “cunt,” and why it’s like totally ok to use it all the time, because in England the UK people call men “cunts” as well.
Some got a little carried away:
This little exchange came with a side order of irony:
Speaking of fantasy, here’s a strange bit of paranoia, which nonetheless drew upvotes from the very same people who are outraged that Watson was a bit creeped out by a dude she didn’t know asking her to come to his hotel room at 4 AM:
And here’s still more evidence that MRAs, despite their many egregious flaws, do at least have vivid imaginations:
Some other comments, all of which got at least a few upvotes from the MR regulars:
Let’s end with this eloquent plea for people to not give a shit if MRAs hate women:
The folks in the Men’s Rights subreddit are currently debating whether or not to change the subreddit’s slogan, which is currently: “Mens’ Rights: Earning Scorn from Bigoted Feminists and White Knights Since 2008.”
So let me humbly suggest:
Mens’ Rights: Like it’s even relevant if mens rights is anti women in regard to if mens rights is a movement about addressing mens issues.
Or the even punchier:
Men’s Rights: i’m tired of not using the term “cunt”.
MRAs, you’re welcome.
Katz,
Steersman, why are you so strident about being able to insult and demean people?
Actually I’m not; I’m primarily interested in maintaining a level playing field – regardless of how high or low that is. For instance, Rebecca Watson had a great post on Why I Hate Atheists – even if that seems a bridge too far – wherein she described some of the people on Reddit as “assholes” and implied the same about the atheists in question – with which I agreed and went so far as to characterize them as “pricks” and sociopaths if not psychopaths. But given the use of that “nuclear” option people shouldn’t be surprised when the same type of ordnance comes back at them. Really tends to lower the quality of the conversations.
If someone finds something demeaning, wouldn’t it just be common human decency not to say it?
You may wish to ask Ms. Watson and Sally Strange precisely that question. Please do let me know their answers.
More boring comments in an attempt to prove that he isn’t boring? “The accused”? Oh, the drama.
CassandraSays,
This is the guy who thinks that “asshole” is a gendered insult.
You keep repeating that when I have made several comments indicating that I’m quite aware that it is not. You might want to take a look at Dave’s Comments Policy which has this:
Grossly misrepresenting another person’s argument, or simply lying about them, another big no-no.
Oh, now you’re going to mod us? Do fuck off, Mr. Rules Lawyer.
It’s a big internet, go find somewhere else to bloviate.
This one really does seem like Brandon – The Sequel, doesn’t he?
He does, Cassandra.
Hey Steers, get a real argument, and eschew obfuscation, OK?
And not a single fuck was given that day.
My favorite part so far was the bit where he feels that he has the right to have the last word.
Brandon 2 – The Tedium Strikes Back.
Someone forgot to tell Steersman that this isn’t Debate Club, it’s the Circus, and he (and other MRAs) are the main attraction.
Things Steersman refuses to believe without support from a dictionary:
-That he’s boring.
-That he’s obnoxious.
-That he’s insulting.
News flash: If you make people want to find some wet paint to watch, you’re boring! If you make people want you to leave, you’re obnoxious! If you make people want to smack you upside the head, you’re insulting! Arguing about definitions won’t make them suddenly change their mind.
Before you can declare that I am boring, we’ll need to very carefully, and with as many words as possible, define what boring means. Merriam Webster defines “boring” as “causing boredom.” “Boredom” itself is defined as “the state of being weary and restless through lack of interest.”
With this definition in mind, does the claim that I am boring hold water? Let’s examine the necessary criteria in detail. Firstly, my words must have made my audience “weary”. How best to test this, I’m not sure. Perhaps everyone should endeavor to remember how energetic they felt at this time every night this week, and average those experiences to try to understand what their usual energy level would be (as well as they can, considering this is qualitative, not quantitative). Then, evaluate your currenzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Oh, sorry. I fell asleep on my keyboard.
However, as all gendered insults are deprecated on Pharyngula, I suggest as an experiment you go there, try to pick a fight with one of the regulars and then call him, her, or zir a “prick” to see how you fare. Oh wait, you can’t, because you got banned.
Also, responsible adults choose to behave in ways that don’t needlessly cause harm, and is it that much of an imposition to not use certain poisoned words? Apparently it is, and Steersman is busing making a belated whine about the “language police” for the loss of another lil’ bit o’ male privilege.
Here’s what one woman has said about this burden of not using certain words: “I have pretty much quit using “dick” in public for the sake of consistency and not being gotcha’d by people like Abbie’s playmates, but I also think it’s not an insult in the same way. Being a woman is bad, you see, while being a man is good. Women are praised by being said to have balls. [eye roll]”
(Of course, Steersman will not pay that the slightest bit of attention, given the typical level of respect he pays to women, and that one in particular.)
Pecunium,
The difference between c*** n****** and f****** and prick, wanker, jerkwad, douchebag, etc, is they don’t use that corporate image to impugn the person at whom they are aimed.
You might want to try reading Wikipedia’s article on analogies and try digesting a bit of it before proceeding with the following:
Vagina [body part; genitalia] is to “c*nt” [insult; gendered] as penis [body part; genitalia] is to “prick” [insult; gendered] as anus [body part] is to “asshole” [insult; non-gendered]. Also,
Homosexual [sexual practice] is to “f*ggot” [insult; disparaging characterization] as masturbation [sexual practice] is to “wanker” [insult, disparaging characterization. For those great many aficionados of the dictionary here: “1. A person who masturbates. 2. A detestable person.”]
BlackBloc,
Someone forgot to tell Steersman that this isn’t Debate Club, it’s the Circus, and he (and other MRAs) are the main attraction.
No, obviously not as many if not most here have already made up their minds – whatever you do, don’t confuse me with facts, particularly dictionary definitions. But my mistake – I sort of figured that feminists were going to be taking the high road ….
The linguistics student in me sort of melted when I read “don’t confuse me with facts, particularly dictionary definitions.” This is not how dictionaries work.
GOOD REASONS TO USE A DICTIONARY:
1) You don’t know how to spell a word. Or how to correctly pluralize/past-tense/etc. it.
2) You don’t know what a word means at all, and want a basic explanation.
3) You want to know what language a word’s roots are.
4) You want to know how to pronounce a word.
5) You want to settle an argument in Scrabble.
—
BAD REASONS TO USE A DICTIONARY:
1) You want to determine the only possible meanings of a word, with assurance that there can be absolutely no other connotations, associations, cultural references, or implications to that word.
2) You’re looking for a source of higher moral authority and guidance about how to speak to others and live your life.
3) You’re looking for some sort of rulebook that declares people aren’t allowed to interpret your words any way but the way the dictionary tells them to.
Other acceptable uses for a dictionary: seeing where it falls open by itself, to learn new rude words. 😉
Except Steersman doesn’t actually believe dictionary definitions, because he kept insisting that c**t meant “an obnoxious person” even when we’d shown that every other dictionary in the world defined it as a degrading term for a woman.
Xanthe,
However, as all gendered insults are deprecated on Pharyngula ….
But “asshole” and a great many others are acceptable if not de rigueur, although, I should emphasize for Cassandra, very few if any are gendered including that first one [Cassandra, please note]. But let me tell you, I was simply shocked, shocked I say, to see Sally Strange apply that to me, and to see Ms. Watson apply it to some atheists. One would think that they would have been responsible enough not to have used such poisoned words – whatever is the world coming to when one can’t even rely on feminists for proper decorum ….
Here’s what one woman has said about this burden of not using certain words: “I have pretty much quit using “dick” in public for the sake of consistency ….
That is a sensible argument and, if I’m not mistaken – correct me if I’m wrong, more or less what I have been attempting to promote.
Hangs ’round like a fart in a Russian space station, doesn’t he?
Steersman? With all due respect, go away or shut up.
Trolls – the sand in the shoe of the Internet.
katz,
Except Steersman doesn’t actually believe dictionary definitions, because he kept insisting that c**t meant “an obnoxious person” even when we’d shown that every other dictionary in the world defined it as a degrading term for a woman.
Not quite correct; if I’m not mistaken I have acknowledged that different dictionaries have some different definitions. My point was that if that is the case then who gets to decide which one is in play? [Maybe we should be forced to have little subscripts indicating the dictionary and definition in play or hypertext all of our words – at least the problematic ones.]
And I might also quibble about “every other dictionary in the world” ….
Bored now.
Steersman, bye bye.
Steersman, did you learn English by sitting down and reading a dictionary, or did you learn it by hearing words in their cultural context in natural conversation?
It may shock you to hear that most of the words I use, I have never once looked up in the dictionary.
Dictionaries are attempts to describe language, not codify it.