Categories
a voice for men antifeminism grandiosity hypocrisy misandry misogyny MRA radfems oh my

Seen one feminist, seen them all.

Feminists are all exactly the same.

So our dear friend Fidelbogen, self-declared Counter-Feminist Agent of Change and the wannabe philosopher-king of the Men’s Rights movement, has written an exceedingly dull and verbose post for A Voice for Men rehashing the whole Agent-Orange-RadFemHub-thing. Now, it’s a lovely, slightly too-hot Sunday afternoon here at Man Boobz headquarters, so naturally I didn’t do much more than lightly skim the whole thing. But I did notice this interesting little “argument” part way through.

Apparently Fidelbogen has concluded that it’s perfectly fine for critics of feminism to completely ignore the ideas of most feminists and focus only on the dogmas of the most radical of RadFems:

We should lay to rest the silly notion that such feminists as these are only “fringe radicals” or “extremists”, and that we mustn’t judge the entire movement by them. My question is, why shouldn’t we judge the entire movement by them? Compared to them, what do the moderate feminists really add up to? Anything much? What does a heap of feathers amount to, compared to a cannon ball? What really fuels feminism, anyway? Is it driven relentlessly forward by mellowness and grooviness — by fun, fluffy, happy feelings? Or does it run, let us say, on pure hate, pure spite, pure malevolence, pure malignancy? Well, you get the idea: darker emotions?

That weird choice of alternatives at the end is pretty much a textbook example of a “false dichotomy.” You would think that someone with a brain as big as Fidelbogen’s would be able to recognize and avoid such an elementary logical fallacy.

Fidelbogen continues:

Say what you will, but I am partial to the old maxim that happy people don’t make history. And which is more, I’ve got some experience with feminists; I have studied them, as chaps like me will do, and I have logged a few years in this trade. And I can attest that feminists are all alike. Monolithic, you might say. They vary in superficialities, but under all those sheathing layers lies the high-conductive cable core on which the feminist message travels. It is the same message every time. Every feminist I have ever personally encountered, or been informed of, differs from the radfems we are now studying only in the strength of the underlying signal. One way or another, let them veil it ever so artfully, the message never skips a beat: “Men are the problem. . . men are the problem . . . men are the problem.”

Dude, “projection” ain’t just a river in Egypt.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

107 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Pecunium
8 years ago

The best part… he has to read what we say about him, or his schtick fails. He disdains to comment, but he comments (just not here).

He’s damned himself to mockery in two fora. He won’t come here (I presume he is afraid he would be bested) and he can’t even get the respect there he would get here (it’s not as if no one here responds to the Mellers, the Brandons, the NWOs, the Antz, the Marcs, the Toysoldiers (when he was allowed to comment here), etc..

But the inanity of his pretense of “debunking” us, and holding us up to obloquy… who is reading him? Who would be reading him who didn’t already despise us?

It’s public wanking, but in the dark corner of the room.

Pecunium
8 years ago

Henh: Rather, it is a term used to refer to a man who prostrates himself at the feet of women and, more specifically, feminism.

By which he means, “doesn’t think all women are lying, conniving, idiots who rule the world and oppress men, even though they aren’t smarter than a nine-year old”.

I’m sure he thinks I’m a mangina. He will pretend I “prostrate” myself at the feet of feminism. He can’t really pretend I’m not “manly” (whatever the fuck “manly” is), even if I do spin yarn, and cuddle puppies and dandle babies on my knee.

Argenti Aertheri
Argenti Aertheri
8 years ago

Is that where that came from? I was wondering…that’s a new level of low even for the MRM. Though, if they’re going guilt by association, then Elam basically does them all in doesn’t he?

Pecunium
8 years ago

Looking at the numbers, Rationalisation Hamster has about 70 people who look at it; based on the upvotes for the most popular ones.

A bastion of the MRA it is.

cloudiah
8 years ago

@pecunium And judging by what’s popular, I think most of the 70 are us.

pecunium
pecunium
8 years ago

I’m assuming about the same number of us, as MRAs, since upvotes = 2 and downvotes = 1