Over on The Spearhead, W.F. Price celebrates the harassment directed at Anita Sarkeesian’s Tropes Against Women video project as a sign of a powerful new backlash against the evils of feminism, a backlash he’s proud to be a part of. Dudes being obnoxious to a woman on the internet: Men’s Rights at its finest.
Oh, sure, Price acknowledges, some of the attacks on her were “juvenile” – and thus not as effective as they might otherwise have been — and the controversy did enable Sarkeesian to raise more than $130,000 for her project, but Price even sees this as a victory of sorts:
As for Sarkeesian’s success, we should be happy about it, because I can’t think of a more worthless way to spend over a hundred thousand dollars than in finger-wagging over video games. For one thing, it’s sure to piss even more guys off, and the game industry is very competitive, so her documentary (now expanded to 12 parts!) will likely have zero effect on production and consumption of this form of entertainment. The feminists are simply pissing all the money away, and that’s fine, because this time they’re paying for it themselves.
No question about it: those grapes were definitely sour.
Naturally, the Spearhead regulars were overjoyed by these new signs of, er, progress. Here are some highlights from the discussion that followed; lest I be accused once again of cherry-picking outliers, each and every one of the comments I quote below got literally dozens of net upvotes. This is what these guys really think.
Mojo offers a sort of backlash manifesto:
Feminists will never understand that it is -they- who are the oppressors. They cling to their delusion that they are the ‘underdog’ against the system, even as they control the system.
Revolution requires an enemy class to attack … this is seen as justified when the enemy class controls the system. But feminism is perpetual revolution. So what happens when they gain control over the system? They continue to attack the enemy class, i.e. men, thinking they are striking the next blow against the patriarchy, when what they are doing is more like a pogrom.
Yep, he went there.
Now -they- are the system, they are able and more than willing to intimidate, humiliate, expropriate. It will get indefinitely worse if they have their way. Liberal feminism leads -necessarily- to radical feminism.
Still, we don’t need feminists to ‘understand’ that they are the persecutors (I imagine some of them know this full well and are just misandrist sadists, little Eichmanns). It doesn’t matter what they think or know or understand. What matters is what -we- think, know and understand, and how we are going to act on it.
So … like the swivel-eyed feminist lunatics progressing from attempted assassinations to laying the foundations for institutional and legal abuse … I ask you – what are we going to DO with this knowledge and awareness beyond changing online discourse? …
Thinking like a leftist, though: why not attach ourselves to the GOP in order to subvert its gender politics and radicalize it in the MRA direction? That kind of approach has worked wonders for leftists and their infiltrations into public institutions …
Huh. Reactionary anti-feminists attaching themselves to the Republican Party? No one’s ever thought of that before.
Keyster offers some equally, er, innovative thinking:
Feminism has failed because women as a group adopted the notion of “equality” with men, while stubbornly clinging to their sexual/reproductive power over men. Had feminism truly helped women “realize their greatness”, there’d be far more great women. Instead there’s just more feminists. It’s run it’s course over 3 generations and it’s out of time to prove itself righteous.
The original “male chauvanist pigs” of the early 70′s, were right all along. Women are biologically and chemically ill-equipped to be men. If the Creator had meant women to be more like men, he wouldn’t have given them the ability to bring forth life from their bodies.
Ryu not only embraces the backlash, but seems perfectly fine with the notion that the Men’s Rights movement is a hate movement:
Good. Hatred and anger are power. Whenever you hear someone say “stop the hate”, it is a call to throw down your greatest weapons.
Young Guy purports to speak for all young guys (manginas presumably excepted):
If feminists think men, especially young men, are angry, they don’t know the half of it. As a 26 year-old male, I have seen this society bend over backwards to accommodate women all the time.
The school curriculums are geared toward female success. Schools have countless women’s programs. Female teachers can be as hateful as they want towards male students without facing consequences. People cheer when girls succeed in school, but jeer when boys succeed in school. Even though females have every advantage in the education system, they somehow still have the audacity to complain. They take fluff majors but don’t realize anyone with less than half a brain could pass classes in the humanities and social sciences.
What makes so many MRAs such proud yahoos?.
Oh, and just look at the workplace. Sexual harassment laws give women freedom to dress slutty and still have the nerve to complain when men sneak a peek. If you are a man who has a female co-worker, you have to walk on eggshells everyday or else you can get fired because the twat in the other room got her panties in a bunch over something minor you said. You can be a man who has busted his ass everyday to succeed in your chosen profession, only to see it mean nothing because some woman who was nothing more than an affirmative action hire. If this isn’t bad enough, you get these useless women who are subpar, yet they still never shut up about breaking through the mythical glass-ceiling that they didn’t break and didn’t exist in the first place.
Working men, forever cursed by subpar women.
Also, I have really had enough of women dragging this country down with their dead-weight. Female soldiers, police officers, and firefighters are liabilities. No, all you ladies in these jobs, you aren’t heroes. I am going to go insane if I hear one more female soldier, police officer, or firefighter cry about not getting the respect she thinks she deserves. She doesn’t get respect because she doesn’t deserve respect. The military, law enforcement, and firefighters would be A LOT better off if women stopped lowering the bar to astronomical proportions.
“Lowering the bar to astronomical proportions?” Young Guy here has clearly not yet mastered the fine art of metaphor.
He blabs on a bit longer before wrapping up with:
The backlash is not only real, but it is well-deserved. Apologies won’t erase the damage which has been done. Acting like what happened because of feminism either didn’t happen or was minor is a slap in the face. Saying women have suffered from feminism just as much as men is like spitting in the faces of all the men who have suffered ten lifetimes of pain because of feminism.
Not one, not two, not five, but ten lifetimes of pain? MRAs really are the world’s greatest drama kings.
Andrew S., meanwhile, seems a little confused as to what feminists would like to see happening in the video game industry:
It will be interesting to see if feminists can ruin the gaming industry like they ruin pretty much everything else. There is a lot of money being made off “gamers,” and even guys like me who play the occasional game but aren’t hardcore contribute a lot of money to the industry.
I doubt there are a lot of young guys and men out there who are going to want to play games that involve a bunch of screaming feminists, and where the object of the game is to destroy the “evil patriarchy.” The truth is guys who play games want their female characters to be either hot, large breasted, ass kicking types, or sexy non-feminist types that you save. If the gaming industry changes this dynamic to much due to Feminist/liberal pressure they will destroy a cash cow. And feminism will have yet another “victory.”
Unrestricted and uncriticized access to giant tittied video game ladies: a sacred men’s right!
Kevin evidently speaks for many when he says he wants video games to remain a boys club:
Video games are pretty much the only place that feminism can’t invade unless the principle consumers of them want it. You don’t have to play with girls, or listen to girls, or do other pansy shit. You probably can’t leave a football team and join a different one that has no women, you sure as hell can do that online. Don’t like all the teamwork talk? Play by yourself.
Feminists don’t like video games because; they can’t make them, they can’t force you to buy them or play them even if they did, they couldn’t ruin the experience for you unless you wanted them to.
You can do anything feminists don’t want you to do, and best of all you’re rewarded for it.
Anonymous Age 70 doesn’t even play video games, but he was pleased to learn that you can shoot ladies in them:
Speaking of video games, I am reminded of my son 8 or 10 years ago. I visited him, and he had some kind of shoot-em-up video game. He was partnered with a dearie, and the instant the game started, he always put a bullet in the middle of her forehead. Then, he’d laugh as if it were the funniest thing ever.
I told him he was a sick man, but I was also laughing as if it were the funniest thing ever.
Seriously, he told me he performed better with her dead than needing to be protected.
A great analogy for marriage 2.0, yes?
Women, can’t live them, can’t shoot them in the head. Except in video games!
Criticizing video games is misandry!
Okay, between the sinus pressure keeping me awake and the cold meds trying to make me fall asleep I’m giving up on this thread due to lack of brain function. Thanks for keeping me distracted from my cold the past couple hours.
The implication that this is the only kind of knife you’re allowed to carry is also a lie; another Canadian upthread said you can carry a knife from your fingertips to your elbow, which is about a yard long. You. Are. A. LIAR.
@Argenti Aertheri – So, because they’re opinions, they can’t be factual?
But never mind. Are Wendy Cukier and Heidi Rathjen feminists? Because if not, DAMN, I got fooled… Somehow, I don’t think so.
Well, not a yard, but pretty long. We’re talking machetes here.
Solomon Friedman explains: http://www.edelsonlaw.ca/news/show/42/0/0000/1
Well fuck, you finally managed a citation that’s actually a citation and says what you claim! Sort of…no mention of feminists, or even liberals for that matter. But hey, making a point without resorting to blame games is a good start — argumentium ad youtube really isn’t though.
Could someone who isn’t an insurance duck remind me why we’re debating gun control on a post about gaming?
I like to carry a walking stick when I go out walking at night. Mostly in case I run into a rabid coyote or something, but also in case of other attackers. Not that it’s super dangerous where I live, but still.
“The implication that this is the only kind of knife you’re allowed to carry is also a lie; another Canadian upthread said you can carry a knife from your fingertips to your elbow, which is about a yard long. You. Are. A. LIAR.”
Excuse me? First of all, my comment is made in the sense that I desire to carry a gun over a knife, regardless of length. Do NOT presume to lecture me on Canadian law thanks.
Asshole.
Wow!
Hey man-attracted individuals here, I’ve found the most attractive outfit ever!
re: kubotan — my FWB got arrested for something asinine while carrying one, CT decided it was a prohibited weapon. I still like the things, but you should probably check with local cops (it wasn’t on CT’s extensive weapon list, and yet…)
“So, because they’re opinions, they can’t be factual?”
An opinion could manage to be correct, but is not de facto correct, that’s wtf makes it an opinion. I mean, I think you’re a really annoying poopyhead, is this factual? (Seriously, you’re making me want to get back to b*gbr*nn*n’s stupidity, and wow does she take the cake [asterisks because she google’s herself and is way too annoying to have show up here])
You’ll still be stupid but at least you’ll have a firearm.
That’s America’s motto!
If “all women” liked the same thing, then wouldn’t there only be one guy in the world who had “all the women” and no other (cis? is that the right term?) men would have a partner. Seriously?
MRAs call that “hypergamy.” Yes, they will seriously argue that there are like five attractive guys on the planet, and all the women in the world want to join their harems. And if we say otherwise we’re lying.
To us lying feminists, it may look like the streets are full of couples, and the men in those couples are pretty normal-looking guys, but who are you going to believe, MRAs or your lying eyes?
Except dirtyhippiefeet already did, assclown. Or maybe you didn’t read it, you cracked out piece of survivalist rage? Here, I’ll copypaste it for you, so you don’t strain yourself or something.
@Argenti Aertheri – Damn, you really are ignorant.
Solomon Friedman, a criminal defense lawyer, was presenting that as part of his testimony to the Senate standing committee who were debating C-19, an Act to End the Long Gun Registry. I watched it live on ParlVU.
And it is purely his OPINION. And it was not posted with the intent of describing how feminists crafted Canada’s gun control laws. Rather, it was posted because of Solomon’s reference to the “sledgehammer” that is the criminal law power in Canada, and opinion, that is relatively uncontroversial, and not too far from the truth.
@ACLAF- Here in California, the gun laws are similarly frustrating and complicated. But I don’t blame that on any group of people other than the law-makers who basically get paid to write up the bullshit. Seriously. These are douchebags who don’t even read the crap they’re supporting and then pass laws because it’s their jobs and make things harder and harder for the average citizen to be a good citizen.
This is why I am in favor of empirical rationalism in government. Only laws that are written thoroughly well, easily understood, with clear implications and proven results should be fully made into law, and should be subjected to rigorous testing and trials before being made official. There is so much efficiency that we could achieve as a culture or even as a species, if we were only willing to shift the way we do legislation. Some of this current system of corruption is being lauded by liberals and others by conservatives, but the bottom line is that sloppy governing, corruption and stupid politician bullshit is what is causing convoluted laws that trap citizens in Catch-22’s- and I wholeheartedly support concentrated efforts to fight the corruption and abuse of power in these areas.
I do not, however, think that it is constructive to start pointing fingers at “all feminists” and find it patently useless to make such accusations in the first place, as that won’t change the situation at all. The people with the power to change it feel like they can get away with anything, and laugh as you pour all your misplaced rage into the feminist “hivemind.”
Meanwhile, they pass idiotic laws by the second thinking they’ve gotten away scott-free.
I suppose that’s the question- are we really looking for solutions to bad governing and bad laws or are we looking for a scapegoat to grumble about to assuage our egos at feeling powerless?
PS: it is true that the criminal might have a weapon, but three people with guns > one person with a gun. If they want something from you, giving it to them and getting out of there is often a better tactic than simply trying to “High Noon” it. The strategies change based on your intended goal. Do you need to protect someone who is with you? Do you need to give them your wallet and continue on your way to be safe? Do you need to shoot them with a gun and hope their friends don’t mark you as a dead man or heaven-forbid target your family for a drive-by?
All of these things can be options. There is no more honorable option in a time of crisis. There is only the most optimal situation- being safe and unharmed as possible.
lowquacks — omgs he looks like some sort of head on a stick or something, that suit is so badly sized it’s uncanny valley bad! (and reminds me a bit of the knights who say NE!)
“Solomon Friedman, a criminal defense lawyer, was presenting that as part of his testimony to the Senate standing committee who were debating C-19, an Act to End the Long Gun Registry. I watched it live on ParlVU. ”
Yes and I already said that that was the closest you’ve managed to a citation, an opinion can be a citation depending on context — the formal context of his opinion gives it more weight that some random person blogging.
And don’t call me ignorant, it really doesn’t look good on you.
Nanasha — “I suppose that’s the question- are we really looking for solutions to bad governing and bad laws or are we looking for a scapegoat to grumble about to assuage our egos at feeling powerless?”
The latter. Hence how he thinks my only accepting the in court opinion as a citation is ignorant >.<
Does anyone remember the ’80s? You know… when women wore shoulder pads.
Does this mean women at ’80s nights are more attractive to other women… or something…
@ Shaenon, and it took me to 5pm today to do my misandry act: put cat treats in the cat treat ball for my male cat who is intrigued by that toy. He rolled that ball around for ages. 🙂 Heh, I made him work for those treats!
See, I’m such a feminist I even take it out on my male cats!
“Except dirtyhippiefeet already did, assclown. Or maybe you didn’t read it, you cracked out piece of survivalist rage? Here, I’ll copypaste it for you, so you don’t strain yourself or something.”
Oh really? Well, first of all, dirtyhippiefeet MAY have gotten their firearms license as part of their high school curriculum. But then again, I don’t know dirtyhippiefeet’s age. They didn’t specify that particular fact.
They may well be ignorant of just how much times have changed in this country. I can assure you, that no highschool in my particular city offers the Canadian Firearms Safety course as part of its regular curriculum.
In point of fact, HERE is the actual license application forms from the RCMP: http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/form-formulaire/pdfs/5592EW.pdf
Dirtyhippiefeet may ALSO be an aboriginal person – i don’t know. If they are, then guess what chucklefuck? They’re subject to special dispensation! I won’t bother telling you who’s responsible for that little gem of injustice. For those who are not aboriginal, well, guess what asshole? No special dispensation for you!
So without more facts, it’s a real dick-move to accuse me of lying.
And it makes YOU look like a god-damned idiot when I can cite chapter and verse that getting a firearms license can be pretty-god damned difficult. You know, how you have to track down your previous sexual partners and basically ask their permission for you to have a gun? What section of the form is that? Oh yeah, it’s right here in sections D, E, and F.
How about your mental health and job history? Why that would be section C.
How about your character references? Mm.. Section H.
@Argenti- that sucks about your friend and the kubotan- It’s not prohibited here in CA, and my coworker (who I mentioned above) is actually the director of my department and she takes it to Board meetings with Sheriffs present and they don’t make a peep about it (she does get some looks, though). And if the item is not considered a weapon, your friend could not technically be charged with anything unless they were using it as an offensive weapon (as anything can technically be used as an offensive weapon and you can get arrested for assaulting people in that case).
Did your friend get charged or simply arrested? If the police had nothing on your friend, chances are that your friend was being profiled incorrectly and they needed an excuse. In any case with the police, I always say, it’s best to be compliant, silent and cordial. If you don’t say anything, except for base responses, you can’t have your words twisted. If you are cordial and compliant, you will not be attacked for “resisting.” And you can also ask if you are being charged with anything. If the police do not have any legal reason to hold you, they are legally required to let you go or suffer legal action for being unfairly imprisoned against your will. If you find yourself arrested, immediately ask if you will need a lawyer and if so, invoke your right to counsel.
I have found that, most of the time, cops are really decent and generally looking to do the right thing. But when you get stuck in a bad situation with a cop who seems iffy, it’s best to play it safe.
@Argenti
That’s David Byrne of the band Talking Heads in his Big Suit, which he wore in concert in the ’80s because… reasons, I guess. Something about corporate soullessness probably.
So women were fooled? My grandmothers were traditional women, but they could see what was happening and explained it. My grandmother that married well to do went to college to do so because women went to college to get their MRS. She chose nursing as a major to hang with the doctors, married a dentist. She doesn’t tell me this in a sing song voice, she tells me as if she’s narrating a feminist documentary. You could be a teacher or a nurse.
I’m sure that’s an over simplification, but that was it.
When I was growing up Phil Donahue covered feminist topics, and typically, they would have a caller that was an older mom say, “but what if I want to stay home…” things along those lines, and Phil would ask the one question…. the ONE he asked to redirect, saw it many times,
“Do you want the same life for your daughters that you had?”
Long dramatic pauses… and then finally a small,
“…no…”
Every time.
Stop arguing for a world where alimony makes sense, because taking an entire gender and saying ‘you do this because you have a vagina, period, we don’t care how smart you are, and how qualified you are’ and setting this group up for sacrifice and dependency makes alimony MANDATORY for when these chattle get cheated on and tossed aside for a younger model later.
That was such a rampant dynamic when Steinem started her yapping that basically, she just solidified for many women what they already knew, she gave it a concrete model and a voice. Still, many women were scared of being rejected by men, and gave feminists shit themselves, but many of these young feminist women in the 70’s spent time living with, listening to and understanding where people like my grandmother were coming from.
If you were sitting on a park bench reading a news paper and a man came and sat down, it was expected that you surrender the paper to him, keeping the lifestyle section for yourself if you must. Job ads were separated, male and female, (because BTW women have ALWAYS worked you dumb pile of shit), if you had an office job you were also the maid and personal servant of any man in the office regardless of your position.
Prepare to train any incoming man to take a position above you, and then go pick up his clothes from the cleaners, because again women have ALWAYS worked you dumb pile of puss. Steinem got her degree in journalism, there were plenty of jobs she could do related to women’s magazines and sections for women that included recipes and fashion tips, whatever. That did not interest her, she applied for writing jobs at papers and was told, “we need a writer, not a woman”.
You mrm shit bags don’t even have an accurate view of history, there has always been a pink ghetto. It’s relative affluence that afforded a stay at home woman style, and that was wrought with problems for many reasons. Staying at home in modern times is no where NEAR the slavery it was when people said exactly what it was. When Steinem named the family dynamic for what it was, she was naming the family dynamic for what.it.was.
Working Girl used to mean prostitute. Not because women didn’t work, but because they were invisible and men were sexist shit bags. So there’s a profession I forgot, you could be a nurse, a teacher, or a “working girl” but we know the disdain the last category has always gotten in hyper-hypocritical patriarchy.
I could rant for hours, just stopping because this is long, etc.
@TheCatFromOuterSpace
Additionally, men in highly-structure English suits should be more attractive than men in loose-shouldered Italian suits, unless the nipped-in waist makes them more femme somehow, and men in Italian suits should be more attractive than men in American sack suits.
Except actually it’s all personal preference and what suits the man in question, so…
Are you fucking kidding me? When I went to bed, there was 71 comments, now there’s 344.. o.o Could be here a while.
@ShadetheDruid
Yeah, we’ve got a live one. Canadian who isn’t much into gun control and thinks women are a monolith, except when they’re not.
Because that’s Insurance Duck’s pet issue, and trolls never give a fuck about derailing, because their shit is always more important.