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!
AFLAC, your biases were going to be reinforced no matter what by coming here, so stop whining. Your fellows in the MRM do more gender policing than feminism does.
Frankly, I think you’re lying about everything.
The video game industry would be just fine without damsels in distress and female characters with obnoxiously large breasts. And good for Anita for raising $130,000. More power to her.
@Cliff:
“The “bumbling father, long-suffering mother” trope always said to me: “men should be loved and tolerated no matter what irresponsible nonsense they get up to. It’s women’s job to clean up after them.”
Because the full trope is always “bumbling but beloved father,” and not a lot of bumbling mothers get extended that forgiveness.”
THIS. SO. MUCH.
I REALLY have a problem with those Simpson episodes where the big MORAL of the ep is that Marge has such a great love for Homer that she’ll love him no matter what and their marriage is therefore so beautiful etc. SHE SHOULD FUCKING DIVORCE HIM! You’re NOT a saint for putting up with a completely useless idiot husband who treats you like a doormat!
I actually have less of a problem with Family Guy, since that show doesn’t take itself seriously at all, while the Simpsons seem to believe that they have some beautiful lessons to teach the audience together with the laughs.
I love American Dad, but that isn’t quite the bumbling father trope in the same way as the others. The big joke with Stan is that he’s conservative, not that he’s stupid. Plus Francine has been allowed to completely freak out a few times. (Wait, I just realized as I’m typing this that Haley is explicitly a feminist AND the least messed-up person in the family – that proves it! Feminists DO run these shows!)
I love how ACLAF has morphed into AFLAC 🙂
@Shaenon
“In what ways does feminism discourage men from being “masculin, manly, powerful, strong, smart, fast etc.”?
Feminism discourages men from being overtly masculine by ridiculing the position of men in society, especially powerful men, and replacing men with government. For example, in Canada it’s pretty much impossible to obtain what’s known as an authorization to carry, and this is largely by feminist design. The Liberal Women’s Caucus, that’s Liberal Party of Canada, made gun control into a “women’s issue” in -I believe, 1992, and Jean Chretien was subsequently swept to power with three back-to-back majority governments. Men, and also women, have had the singular tool which can be used to defeat an attack removed, in an attempt to force Canadians to rely on the government for their protection. The protection of the person, the home, and the family has historically been incorporated into the male identity, and feminists have fought tooth and nail to criminalize self-protection in Canada. Firearms here are synonymous with a “woman’s issue,” yet the overwhelming majority of the firearm owning population is male. Feminists have therefore discouraged a traditionally male activity associated with strength, power, intellect etc. Hunting, shooting, and self-defense are extremely difficult to do, and it’s largely thanks to feminism.
Furthermore, by ridiculing firearms owners as “gun-totting toothless rednecks,” feminists have created a negative association with an overtly masculine hobby and sport. Young boys are socialized to see people who engage in shooting as primitive, backwards, and uneducated. When they start to try to date women, they’ve already internalized this message, and are likely to also engage in ridiculing these activities because they mistakenly believe that this is what women want to hear. My own experience is that women generally like men who engage in this “barbaric,” and “primitive” activities, and this goes completely against what feminists say. That is to say that women in general tend to like, appreciate and prefer overtly masculine men, the same men that I see feminists ridicule, mock and deride.
“Can women be powerful, strong, smart or fast? If they are these things, are they capable of being good women?”
Yes, of course women are capable. But, pushing these tropes without showing a man say, who is capable of matching a woman in these areas, necessarily erodes the male gender. And I totally realize that’s blatantly unfair. Sad, but true. Take “How to train your Dragon” a movie I really like, what can I say, I’m a sucker for Toothless… The protagonist, Hiccup is definitely un-masculine, hell, he’s downright effeminate, and contrast with Astrid, who embodies all the girl-power tropes. I watched the movie as an adult of course, but a little boy would internalize the message that he was never going to be able to match Astrid’s, or substitute an alternative love-interest’s, ANY GIRL’s physical prowess, so he shouldn’t bother even trying, and therefore the way to win her affections was through the use of his mind. There’s nothing inherently wrong with this, except of course that women tend to like physically attractive men, which usually means establishing some level of physical fitness. A boy who resolves to “be like Hiccup” is setting himself up for future failure. Do you see how that works? And Stoic’s overt masculinity is always portrayed as backward and primitive, next to Hiccup’s clever, and progressive inventions.
I see absolutely nothing wrong with female preference in physically desirable males. I see something wrong with lying to little boys about what women usually want in a man. It’s not that Astrid is a bad woman, but she makes Hiccup into a bad man.
“You know, you don’t need to feel personally attacked by anti-rape campaigns unless you yourself have committed rape. Do you feel personally attacked by anti-crime campaigns? Anti-drug-abuse campaigns?”
I’ve not committed rape, but I still feel squarely targeted by anti-rape campaigns, especially since an accused man has the odds stacked so squarely against him. I always feel like I’m being blamed, like masculinity its self is the problem. I identify strongly with masculinity, with “maleness.” I don’t see anything wrong with being male, but what I feel from society is that there is something wrong with being male. I’ve always felt that I value and appreciate women, and so accusations of misogyny tend to sting pretty badly. I don’t want to be a revolutionary so to speak, but I remember keenly being pressured to become one in high school. We were told, “if you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem,” and that never sat well with me at all.
Maybe it’s irrational, and I guess I can live with that. But, I don’t see how that should result in feminism being freed from criticism…
Oh, and as a gun-owner, a Canadian one, I get REALLY nervous whenever the police talk about guns. I have every reason to feel targeted in that regard.
AFLAC, is tiring building those huge strawfeminists?
^is it tiring
Though all your pompous blathering the one thing that keeps coming through loud and clear is that these “effeminate” guys you keep mentioning are not, in your estimation, properly qualified to considered men.
To which I say; fuck you pal.
When they start to try to date women, they’ve already internalized this message, and are likely to also engage in ridiculing these activities because they mistakenly believe that this is what women want to hear.
Sure, if they’re hanging around anti-gun sites, which not many teenage boys are. And since you’re so influenced by movies (and apparently think that no one can think for themselves), have you noticed how violent big summer (gotta get that teen money) are? There’s guns and shit blowing up everywhere, FYI. Not exactly an anti-violence stance, if you catch my drift.
Oh, blockquotes.
AFLAC: My gun-owning American friend says you’re a dumbass. Yes, pro-gun-control liberals who own guns themselves do exist.
Blockquote fails strike again? I’m still wondering why WordPress doesn’t have a preview function, or at the very least an edit button. 😛
@A Canadian Lossless Audio Format, a few comments in no particular order
Weren’t strong men being reviled by the feminist majority just a page or so ago?
That was horribly phrased, but at least you’re better there than one of old regulars. As a hint, though, women aren’t a monolith, and not all of them are into men.
You see things saying “don’t rape people” and feel that masculinity is being attacked, then. Could that say something about your concept of what is masculine, or about society’s concept of same?
[citation needed]
This probably isn’t a great place for you to be misogynistic then. Try The Spearhead, they’d love you.
Yes, ACLAF, many women like buff men. But! Many other women, different women, like skinny men. Or pudgy men. Or gangly men. Or stocky men. Or roly-poly babyfaced men. And there are also women who are relatively indifferent to what a man looks like, concentrating instead on his intelligence or personality or interests or money or dancing ability or sense of personal style or career achievements…in short, women’s tastes in men are as varied as the women themselves are.
So kindly leave your gender essentialist bullshit at the door, kthxbai.
Tangent: That last is one reason why “That thing you just said is misogynistic” may be a strategically more useful thing to say than “you are a misogynist,” as you can focus on the behaviour and maybe get people to change it.
(Arguments as to why I’m wrong will be read and considered!)
Meant to add: And some women aren’t attracted to men at all.
By that last, I mean the “accusations of misogyny” part.
Adding to ShadetheDruid’s point: do you drive a car? Would you like it if everyone was able to drive a car, regardless of whether they had a license or not? I mean, if there’s some sort of feminist uprising/cull, how would people escape if not by car? I can’t imagine Canadian wilderness is particularly hospitable.
AFLAC, given that you’re a libertarian, I invite you to write and produce your own TV shows that present men the way you wish they were presented, and if you don’t, I’ll kindly suggest that it’s your own damn fault that there’s nothing on TV that you like.
Things I’ve learned from AFLAC today:
AFLAC only ever watched three TV shows.
AFLAC married a woman who liked something about men that he was not.
When feminists campaign for gun control and deconstruct gender roles, they’re actually being anti-man.
What a productive day.
@Tulgey
You forgot “shooting, hunting, and self-defence are hard because of feminism” (almost a direct quote. Evidently everyone knew how to hunt and use weaponry perfectly until sometime around the women’s suffrage movement.
Yeah, that’s the main thing that usually comes up when I talk gun control with him, that you have to go through all these lessons, tests, have insurance and things (most importantly they want to check you know what the fuck you’re doing) to be allowed to drive a car. But to own a gun? Apparently not, which is messed up.
“Sexual harassment laws give women freedom to dress slutty and still have the nerve to complain when men sneak a peek.”
Guys probably look at my boobs alot, because they’re nice 😀 But 99% of the time I wouldn’t NOTICE, unless the guy was super creepy and obvious about it. If I check out a guy’s ass he wouldn’t know it. Why must they keep misframing this issue as being about ‘sneaking a peek’ rather than leering at or harassing women.
A car is a device which if used for something other than its intended purpose, can severely injure people.
A gun’s intended purpose is to severely injure people (and animals).
Yeah…
I mean, I’m kinda hungry right now. If it weren’t for feminism, I’m sure I, an uncoordinated untrained skinny suburban boy with no outdoors or weapons experience, could grab myself a crossbow and have lunch ready in no time. It’s only all these women having rights and being thought of as people around me stopping me.