Oh, the Men’s Rights subreddit is on a roll! Earlier in the week, as regular readers will already be well aware, a sizeable number of the regulars there were waxing indignant about a spermburgling girlfriend who turned out to be imaginary, and expressing sympathy for the imaginary girlfriend’s imaginary boyfriend, even though he’d admitted to punching her in her imaginary stomach.
Now they’re directing their wrath at a British journalist whom they’ve decided is being insufficiently grateful for being rescued from being hit by a speeding automobile by Ryan Gosling.
The backstory: Earlier in the week, British journalist Laurie Penny was wandering the streets of Manhattan, lost in thought, when she almost stepped off the curb into the path of a taxi. A man standing nearby grabbed her and pulled her to safety. That man happened to be famously hunky young actor Ryan Gosling.
Naturally, Penny tweeted about it, and her tweet aroused something of a Twitterstorm, in part because of the novelty of the situation, and in part because the thought of someone so dashing performing this little act of urban heroism made more than a few ladies (and men) swoon a little. I would probably react the same way if I heard a story about Kate Winslet saving a kitten.
Anyway, Penny was a little bit overwhelmed by all the attention her story was getting, and ended up writing a funny, spiky little essay for Gawker reminding people that while, yes, Ryan Gosling had indeed done a very nice thing for her, for which she was grateful, that it wasn’t really the biggest deal in the world. For one thing, she pointed out, lots of ordinary decent people perform similar acts of “heroism” all the time. For another, there are bigger heroes out there – like those working tirelessly to keep Rick Santorum from becoming our next president.
She ended the piece with this:
I really do object to being framed as the ditzy damsel in distress in this story. I do not mean any disrespect to Ryan Gosling, who is an excellent actor and, by all accounts, a personable and decent chap. …
But as a feminist, a writer, and a gentlewoman of fortune, I refuse to be cast in any sort of boring supporting female role, even though I have occasional trouble crossing the road, and even though I did swoon the teeniest tiniest bit when I realized it was him. I think that’s lazy storytelling, and I’m sure Ryan Gosling would agree with me.
And the thing is, I’m sure he would. I’m sure he’s as embarrassed about the attention as Penny is.
Well, for some people, Penny’s refusal to play the “boring supportive role” was simply unacceptable. Over on The National Review, antifeminist asshole Suzanne Venker wrote a snide and misleading piece portraying Penny as an ungrateful bitch:
If Western women want to know where all the good men have gone, they need only look in the mirror. Not only can men no longer hold the door open for women or pay the check after dinner, they can’t even save a woman’s life and get a simple thank you.
Never mind that Penny wrote explicitly that she was “grateful to the dashing and meme-worthy Mr. Gosling.” We can conclude that Venker either has terrible reading comprehension, or is deliberately lying about Penny. In any case, she continued on in this vein:
Feminists have totally destroyed the relationship between the sexes. Not all women seek the feminized version of the American male. Most women like big, strong, sexy men. They want men who are willing to put out fires, fight in combat, and, yes, even save damsels in distress. But in post-feminist America, Marlboro Man is a rare breed. We can thank women like Penny for that.
Well, actually, the reason the Marlboro Man isn’t around any more is that he died of lung cancer. (Well, to be more specific, two of the actors who portrayed the Marlboro Man did in fact die that way.) But let’s continue:
If Americans don’t wake up to the evils of feminism, the next time a woman walks down the wrong side of the street, the men of America will simply walk right past her and let her get hit.
And we’ll have no one blame but ourselves.
Really? Really? I’m pretty sure that Penny’s Gawker essay isn’t actually going to turn American men into a bunch of woman-hating psychopaths. I think we can all agree that Venker is being a giant turd here.
Well, not all of us, I guess. Someone posted Venker’s little screed to the Men’s Rights subreddit – you were wondering when I’d get back to them, weren’t you? And the regulars responded, well, like you would expect them to. Here are two of the most highly upvoted comments there, from two of the subreddit’s most prolific posters.
Stay classy. Men’s Rights Redditors!
Actually I think Magz was attempting to be funny. The smilie is kind of a big clue.
@Robert
That’s great that you consider Elam & Co to be radical, really it is. However, as far as any of the regulars here have seen, you’re in the minority. Whenever we ask the MRAs that show up here to point us to what they consider reasonable leaders/sites, AVfM and The Spearhead inevitably get pointed to. That’s an issue within YOUR movement, it’s not our doing.
@Cassandra
My mistake.
If Valenti and Marcotte are the face of feminism, whoa Nellie. Whose the other mousey haired third waver I always forget?
Actually if you asked a person who doesn’t spend much time on the internet to name a feminist they’d probably come up with Wolf or someone similar. If you asked a person who doesn’t spend much time online to name an MRA I doubt they’d even know what you were talking about.
@Cassandra- Well, what do you propose to do about it? I agree that Elam and his ilk are vocal… but again, that’s their right. I’d say a distinction could be made between father’s rights and “men’s rights”… but I think our concerns extend beyond fathers (indeed, I think the alleged custody disparity is overblown; looking at the statistics, fathers often get custody when they want it. There are more pressing men’s issues IMO).
I’m interested in a men’s group that addresses men’s issues. I don’t want it to be focused on women at all, except in an indirect sense- just like feminism is not focused on men. I think we have the beginnings of that with Farrell, but yes, unfortunately it’s been derailed with idiots like Price and Elam who (ironically) want to make it all about women (that is, how much women allegedly suck). This is not good.
But again- feminists have their own extremists.
That’s because we an organic movement, from the bottom up. Unlike much of feminism, we don’t rely on academic “thought leaders” (as Orwellian as that sounds). Being a public MRA isn’t a career path, as it is for those like Marcotte and Valenti.
Mags, the MRM isn’t “bottoms up” just because most of those in it have their heads up their asses.
Honestly, I think you’re going to have to engage with the extremists directly at some point. Just ignoring them doesn’t seem to be working, and if they’re allowed to dominate now then any actual issues that you want to see addressed are going to end up being ignored. It’s either that or come up with a new name to clearly differentiate yourselves from them. There are radical femininsts, leftist feminists, liberal feminists…why not splinter off? It’s either that or confront and try to take the reins, and whether or not I agree with any of your goals I can understand why you wouldn’t want to confront those people.
Weak, David. Weak. As the Dear leader, I expect more from you.
Only an idiot like you could look at a movement over 200 years in the making and conclude that this is not the case because of the next point (which is untrue, mind you, but even if your premise were valid the conclusion would be foolish)
You do realize there is no such thing, right? Hence feminisms?
How much money has Elam scammed to do precisely nothing, again? I mean, what you’re actually saying is that your movement can’t support activists, because it’s too insignificant and weak to have people focused on organization, outreach and hte like. Which would suck if you guys were actually about men’s issues, but you know, you’re not, so there’s no harm here.
Why is it feminism’s job to sort out your shit, again? Less compressed, y’all are working for the fucking majority; why does it fall on the marginalized to help both you and us (Mind you that feminism still does help the majority, but what’s with the attitude that you’re entitled to that help, exactly?)
Holy shit, you’re a god damn unicorn; that is the reality of the situation, yes. And yes, I’d agree that ‘father’s rights advocates’ are seperate. I only consider them as misogynistic as the rest of society, not especially so.
Well, a non-binary trans person runs a place focused on men’s issues, What About The Menz. If that’s insufficiently man-oriented, which I could kinda empathize with, there is the radical option of starting your own. The problem is you’ll need a name, and you obviously can’t take men’s right’s activist [For much the same reason that, no matter how much I may love my country (I don’t, but it’s for the sake of argument), I can never start the National USian Socialist Party or whatever]
Are you familiar with “White Pride”, dude? It’s not really ironic or surprising that a group that is allegedly there to exalt the majority (further) is actually anti-minority.
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but htey’re legitimately not as bad. It’s popular to throw radfemhub under the bus, but seriously, do a side by side comparison with The Spearhead; I have. It’s fucking aggravating if you’re not a white cis woman who is middle class or higher, but it’s straight up not as violent. Even Allecto, for all her insane rhetoric, is still not as violent as say, Price or Elam, and I’m frankly assuming absent evidence that she is at all.
@Cassandra- I suppose I agree, but Elam and co. have almost a shocking number of extremist misogynist followers. It’s really disheartening to me. They’re completely ruining what I think is an important thing for men to have.
Some people I have spoken to (mostly online), say things just, hey, just become a feminist, we’re against gender roles and all that. And that makes sense in theory, sure. I respect feminists, and support them as a woman’s movement for the benefit of women… but when I see internal debates about whether men can even be feminists (much less whether feminism as a movement should explicitly concern itself with me) or sarcastical stuff like “what about the menzzzzzz”, I find myself thinking that’s just not practical, and maybe not fair. Men need a space, I think, where they can discuss men’s issues without feeling guilty or second-guessing whether they should even be doing that.
@ Robert
Have you considered starting your own site? You might want to talk to Ozy in terms of how to go about that, if zie is willing to help. Despite what our friend Magz believes, every feminist organization was built from the ground up by interested people who had an issue they wanted to focus on and decided to do something about it. Since you’re not happy with what you’re currently seeing then the logical next step is to try to build something yourself, and that’s a lot easier to do in the age of the internet than it was in the past. Sure, the angry misogynists are going to yell at you, but if it’s your own site you’ll have the ability to wield the banhammer. You have to start somewhere.
Rutee, don’t have a coronary. Your blood pressure. Remember what the doctor said. It’s just anonymous people on the internet. Nothing to get worked up about.
How do you fucking say that non-ironically? That’s “everywhere except feminist spaces”. Y’all are the fucking default. Your problem is that you still have to challenge masculinity to do it, not that men don’t have places they’re taken seriously.
Yeah, and it didn;t really make any sense. I should have said the MRM *was* bottoms up mainly because most of those in it have their heads up their asses.
As for feminism not being “bottoms up,” how do you think Marcotte and Valenti etc got where they are? They weren’t imposed on the world by Big Feminism and showered with money. They wrote blogs, wrote articles, got the attention of literary agents, sent book proposals in to publishers, wrote books that people bought, etc etc.
Nothing stopping, say, Paul Elam from making it big as a writer, aside from the fact that he’s a terrible, bombastic writer whose prose is full of cliches, and that he’s never had an interesting or original idea in his life. Also, he’s kind of a dick, to put it mildly, and I can’t imagine any editor or agent or publisher who would ever want to work with him.
Hell, is there even one MRA who can write well enough to sell a book? I suppose there’s always Warren Farrell, but I’m pretty sure his glory days have come and gone.
Maybe Fidelbogen could write a bestseller.
(That was for Mags.)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v339/Zecro/trolling.png
I would love to see Fidelbogen publish a book, just to see the stunned and baffled responses from random people who picked it up. I’m thinking hidden cameras at Barnes & Noble and then interviews afterwards.
It would really suck to be his editor, though.
Ah, poor Robert. You don’t know the POWER of the dark side. Let your anger flow through you. Give in to your anger. With each passing moment you make yourself more our servant.
<trolldance>Why would the crown jewel of MRA writers need an editor? </trolldance>
Also, Mags, I know this is beyond you, but you didn’t actually raise an objection to what I said. You just implied that you made me angry and called it a win. Is it beyond your capability to ever actually engage in an argument? (I know the answer to this, it’s gleaned from your record)
Rutee, do I have any capability to engage in an argument. Well, pretty much that’s what I do for a living. But, if I have my way, I will finish this MLIS degree I signed up for and become a librarian. My dream. Quite frankly, I don’t do the argument thing here to much because, as you yourself (or anyone else can review), people like you start lashing out with invectives and insults. I don’t mind them, because I know it is just business. But, it is very tiring to match wits with someone whose arguments are supplemented with insults. Furthermore, people like David, who for some reason I have a soft spot for in my heard of black stone, thinks I am “passive aggressive”. What he really means is that I don’t react with an equal but opposite reaction to the unprovoked hostility that often comes, and that pisses people off.
@Rutee- I mean, I don’t think the father’s rights movement is a complete waste of time. I don’t believe there’s evidence of all that much direct preference… but the question becomes, why aren’t men as involved with their children? Why don’t they petition for custody as often as women do? Probably for similar reasons that there aren’t more women in the sciences, despite incentives and scholarships. It’s the flipside of an ever-present feminist concern, and I think it’s worth addressing from a male perspective- and a men’s group would be able to do this without derailing the feminist conversation.But these assholes have poisoned the well to such a ridiculous extent that you can’t even mention men’s issues online without getting the side-eye.
I think it’s not very controversial to say that fathers who have healthy relationships with their children and family- as opposed to just being financial support- this will not only be good for his children, but for him as well.
Feminism had a very organic beginning. Philosophers as early as Plato suggested giving women more rights and social standings for the better. Hypathia of Alexandria stressed giving higher education to girls as well as boys. Philosophers like Mary Wollstonecraft and Olympe de Gouges argued for equal rights for women, women’s access to politics and higher education. (They were also ardent abolitionists.) Artists such as Mozart and Beethoven strongly believed in equal rights and abolishing dogma and social hierarchies.
Women gained more and more equality and were recognized less as an inferior sex during “Enlightenment/progressive” movements which questioned cultural norms with glaring scrutiny such as the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, Romanticism, the 1920s, the counter-culture movement, and (arguably) the OWS-ish movements.
And early civilizations such as Ancient Egypt were pretty gender egalitarian. As were many early human hunter-gatherer tribes. And many aboriginal tribes as well, like the Iroquois and the Apache. For all of the bullshit of how gender equality is against “nature” societies closest to nature were very gender egalitarian.
And the more we critically think, the more we uncover hidden truths that were denied us, this “ancient cosmic wisdom/knowledge of the earth” variety.
This is as organic as it gets.
By contrast, the extreme MRAs we have witnessed so far are a backlash against such ideas, and many of their ideologies, especially regarding gender, come from doctrines which are a REVOLT AGAINST NATURE.
Maybe that’s why the most well-known members of the MRM are blockheads with a loudspeaker.
As for feminism not being “bottoms up,” how do you think Marcotte and Valenti etc got where they are? They weren’t imposed on the world by Big Feminism and showered with money. They wrote blogs, wrote articles, got the attention of literary agents, sent book proposals in to publishers, wrote books that people bought, etc etc.
I don’t know what you’re talking about, David. Everyone knows that Amanda Marcotte and Jessica Valenti are two of the wealthiest and most powerful women in America, thanks to the millions of dollars funneled to them by the Secret Feminist Cabal. Even though they have brown hair! How crazy is that?