So Mr. Paul Elam was apparently so offended by this video from Jay Smooth defending Anita Sarkeesian and her Tropes Vs Women video project against its many misogynistic detractors that he sat down and wrote out a carefully reasoned rebuttal of all of Mr. Smooth’s points.
Nah, I’m kidding. He wrote a snide couple of paragraphs calling Smooth a “leftist scumbucket,” and a “chickenshit feminist quisling,” and invited his readers to jump in with their own dopey insults. And they did. Some highlights (that is, lowlights):
I showed Paul’s comment to an MRA friend, and he said, “dude, you have to stop talking to me. I don’t exist! I’m no more real than Paul Elam’s ‘gay friend.'”
Andybob added this to the debate:
Yes, that’s right, he’s saying Smooth is being a “fag” in order to score with women. Clearly we have a brilliant mind at work here.
Several comments later, Iron John, a man apparently oblivious to irony, weighed in with this gem:
On Reddit, after someone pointed out the homophobia in the comments, Elam responded with “comment mine much?”
I’m pretty sure you don’t get to complain about “comment mining” for homophobia when 1) you’re the guy behind the site and 2) you’re one of the ones shouting “fag.”
Notice that Zorro’s original comment got an equal number of upvotes and downvotes. Then Elam jumped in to give the homophobia his seal of approval. After that, it was nothing but upvotes for those using or approving of the homophobic slur.
Calling a dude a “fag” on the internet: Men’s Rights Activism at its finest!
Seraph: I wish it were mind boggling. It happens all the time.
The MRM could solve a lot of their problems if they would bother to learn what the word “rape” means.
Yeah, no shit you’re not. Bigots seldom do.
As with the age-old problem of a hammer in the hand making everything in sight a nail…
When every third poster is a nail, eventually you can begin waving the hammers even before they post.
I think I’ve stretched this metaphor as far as it’ll go. Any further and somebody might get harmed when it breaks under the strain.
The thing which amazes me (still) is how often someone comes in and makes a statement which so clearly makes the pint of the OP.
Irony, they don’t see it, ever.
The basis for the claims of men are true.
Hey, this statement is actually true! I bet most claims made by most men have a factual basis, because most men are not MRAs.
Yes, posting pictures of kittens is ridiculing men. So is talking about the newest or favorite movie. And so is talking about role playing, hats or what plans we have for the weekend.
See slavey, we aren’t ridiculing men so much as we are ridiculing certain ideas espoused by people who somewhat unrelatedly happen to be men. Although not always, certain women also say ridiculous things and are merrily mocked.
Y’know slavey, your little “Oh, so [blank] is true just ’cause a WOMAN said so?” routine is getting really fucking old. You do realize that falling back on that same tired objection just illustrates how meaningless it is, right?
NWO: You clueless fool.
The, “fun” in feminism consists of, “jokes” ridiculing men. That is what you do here.
Unless we are talking about religion, or about how logic actually works, or discussing our vacations, or LARPing, or video games, or how to cook, or the horror that is rape in prison, or movies, or kilts, or pottery, or poetry.
What we don’t do is agree with you that women need to be beaten for disagreeing with NWO.
Or that women who resist being beaten need to be killed.
That’s your department. We disagree with it.
And it gives you a sad.
In honor of NWO,and his manly manliness of sooper-mechanical knowledge, I give you this.
The Physics of Falling Slinkies
It’s cool. I understood it when it was described, but I don’t have the mad skilz I’d need to explain it, so I found this.
Well, shit, you ridicule women often enough, you could at least crack a smile about it now and then. It’s not like you gain the moral high ground by hating women seriously.
Someone clearly managed to miss the week long LoTR fandom discussion, all the talk about vampires, and the Avengers discussion.
Speaking of the LoTR discussion — NWO = gollum — they both just never quit.
I dunno, I actually feel sorry for Gollum.
Jayem
Yes, that was what I was thinking of. It works for the A in activism too, not much activism.
Nah, Gollum has at least some redeeming qualities, and is a pivotal character in the story (and arguably, in a way, the hero). NWO is more like one of the flies in the Midgewater Marshes. Annoying as hell, but not actually important in the grand scheme of things.
…although you do now have me picturing NWO muttering to himself about “nasty tricksy womenses, we hates them, yes, precious,” which is rather an entertaining mental image.
“…although you do now have me picturing NWO muttering to himself about “nasty tricksy womenses, we hates them, yes, precious,” which is rather an entertaining mental image.”
Yeah I was mostly thinking that — you’re right that Gollum’s too important for that analogy though (and that the role Gandalf thought he might yet have was kind of an important one).
“I dunno, I actually feel sorry for Gollum.”
…I kind of feel sorry for NWO, though he’s going to scream about that. Anyone that hate filled has to be fairly miserable though.
I feel sorry for NWO. Dude doesn’t seem to have even a theoretical understanding of friendship or affection or any kind of positive interaction between people. I think that’s more or less a lifestyle decision on his part, but still, it’s pretty pitiful.
Okay, I guess I just feel more sorry for Gollum.
Really, if NWO reminds me of any LOTR character, it’s got to be Bill Ferny. You know, the mean-spirited asshole who was reporting to the Nazgul?
I think MRAs view feminism the same way Chick tracts view Catholicism. That is, anything the MRAs don’t like, even if it something feminists actively oppose, is somehow still the fault of the secret conspiracy. Like Catholics invented Islam/LDS/Masonry/Jehovah’s Witnesses/the KKK/the Holocaust/Hinduism/abortion/JFK and Lincoln’s assassinations, feminists are behind traditional marriage/stereotypical gender roles/prison rape/male suicide, etc.
My introduction to hardcore misogyny was cartoonist and cocaine burnout Dave Sim’s giant he-man-woman-hating tract “Reads,” wherein we learn that feminists are responsible for, among other things, the animal rights movement, the assassination of Martin Luther King, kissing dogs on the mouth, and enjoying “Peanuts” the wrong way (men enjoy it the right way).
I never enjoyed the Peanuts. It’s even more depressing than Garfield, but less artsy and surreal than Kafka’s short stories.
i was actually gonna say bill ferny. nasty and self-important, but cowed by something so little as flying apple because in the end he’s all talk.
I don’t know that Gollum is the hero, but he’s essential in some ways. He’s pivotal, in that his acquisition of the Ring keeps it from getting back to Sauron, but he’s not got anything, “heroic” in his nature.
He’s certainly not the protagonist in any of the story. What he does do is show the divergence between the powers of good, and the powers of evil (Sauron would kill him in a heartbeat, Frodo and Sam won’t).
It’s not clear what would have happened in Mt. Doom without him, but I’m not sure that makes him the hero.
but then’s who’s bill the pony?
“It’s not clear what would have happened in Mt. Doom without him, but I’m not sure that makes him the hero.”
Yeah that’s not suddenly heroic of him, but I suspect what would’ve happened was exactly what had happened last time the ring was that close to being destroyed — Frodo’ed have walked off with it (and probably straight into Sauron’s hands). So I’ll go with “important”.
Sharculese — this is going to be a bit of a stretch, but planned parenthood? Always has supplies at hand? (idfk in other words)
NWO as Ferny is a good one though, both think they’re way more important than they actually are.
…did I cause another LoTR derail? Shit, sorry guys!
I agree, I can’t speak for other people and their intent. I can only testify to how the comment reads to me. Someone saying that to me tells me that it’s ok to use that term in reference to a certain type of black person, which may lead a white person to believe that they are also justified in using it so long as the person they’re using it against “qualifies.” And if we’re using it so subjectively, then it becomes like the word slut, where 12 year olds who kiss a boy or grow boobs too soon and get called slut. Suddenly you have to be a perfect person in order to avoid being called that, because even the smallest infraction justifies the term. If that makes any sense. Whatever the actual intent and reason, I think it sends the wrong message personally. Obviously I have no place to police the way people want to talk about themselves, just saying that this is how it gets interpretted, do with that what you will.
I personally choose not to use the word slut anymore as an insult because of how it has affected me and other women, and how it has been used against us in order to dehumanize us, victimize us, and police our behavior. I would never say, “There are women and then there are sluts,” because that sends the message to men that it’s ok to view us like that and classifies some of us as less deserving of respect. I mean, I know why I used the word slut against women in the past, to differentiate and elevate myself above them, because I was insecure with my own sexual behavior and sense of self worth. This is why I read into the phrase the way that I do, but again, I can’t speak for anyone else. If someone wants to defend the use of this statement though, by all means.
I hope this doesn’t make me sound horrible, I just really can’t comprehend how that sentence can be looked at positively.