Our old nemesis The Pigman — the MRA blogger and one half of the cartooning team responsible for atrocities like this — has some thoughts on the Aurora shootings, specifically on the men who lost their lives to protect their girlfriends from gunfire. Their heroism makes him angry, much like the fellows on The Spearhead we looked at the other day. Here’s his complaint:
How’s that for inequity? How’s that for disposability? These guys appear to have sacrificed themselves for these people primarily because of their sex.
Well, no, I think they sacrificed themselves for their girlfriends because they loved their girlfriends.
After all, where are the guys who jumped in front of their best mate, or their dad or brother? And above all, where are the women who died saving their boyfriends?
There were many heroes in the Aurora shooting. Jonathan Blunk, Matt McQuinn, and Alex Teves died protecting their girlfriends. Stephanie Davies risked her life to keep a friend shot in the neck from bleeding to death. Other acts of heroism had less storybook endings: Marcus Weaver tried to shield a female friend. He was wounded but lived; she died. Jennifer Seeger tried to drag a wounded victim to safety, but fled when the shooter returned.
But the Pigman is interested in none of this:
This isn’t heroism, this is male disposability at its worst and by praising it society is encouraging it.Cheering these men’s actions is as reprehensible as it is stupid and discriminatory.
The heroes in Aurora acted quickly, and on instinct; they didn’t have time to stop to think. Is it possible that, in the cases of those men who tried to shield the women with them, gender socialization had something to do with what their instincts told them to do? Almost certainly.
But “male disposability” has nothing to do with it. We live in a society in which heroism, as an idea and as a cultural ideal, has been gendered male for thousands of years. In the stories we tell ourselves, the video games we play, the movies we watch (including The Dark Knight Rises) , the “hero with a thousand faces” is almost always male, and the damsel in distress is, well, almost always a damsel.
The Pigman ignores all this, instead attacking the three dead men as
foolish enough and unfortunate enough to fall for a lifetime of anti-male propaganda telling them to die for the nearest woman whenever the shit hits the fan.
I have no doubt that many are concerned with the feelings of the dead men’s survivors and wish I would just shut up.
But then he barrels ahead anyway:
But this is a simple case of “What you praise, you encourage,” and I for one think calling out those who encourage men to waste their lives for people worth no more than themselves is more important than being “sensitive”. Die for a child if you must, die for some guy on the verge of finding a cure for cancer if you must – die for someone no better than you simply because you have been taught to and you are a fool.
Had these men died protecting male buddies, would The Pigman have applied this calculus of worthiness to the beneficiaries of their heroism? Would he have suggested that the dead men thought they were worth less than their friends? Of course not.
The three men didn’t do what they did because they thought they were worthless or disposable. They did what they did because they wanted to protect those they loved. Others in the theater, like Stephanie Davies, risked their lives for friends, or people they didn’t even know. There’s nothing foolish or “wasteful” about putting yourself on the line to protect others. In every major disaster, whether natural, or like this one man-made, ordinary people emerge as heroes precisely because they are willing to put the lives and safety of other people ahead of their own.
Do these real-life stories of heroism play out in gendered ways? Often times they do. Men may be more willing to risk their lives to protect their wives or girlfriends; mothers may be more willing to risk their lives to protect their children.
In real life crises, it’s hardly surprising that people sometimes act like characters in these stories we tell ourselves. If you want to change how people act, you need to change these stories.
MRAs like to pretend that men are the “disposable sex” but in their hearts they know that’s not true. They’re well aware, as are we all, that our cultural narratives of heroism privilege and glorify men and put them at the center of almost every story. MRAs like The Pigman aren’t interested in expan ding our cultural narratives of heroism to include female heroes — nor are they willing to even acknowledge that there are such things as female heroes in the real world. They certainly don’t want more stories, more games, more films featuring female protagonists.
Instead they’d rather wrap themselves in the mantle of victimhood, and attack real heroes like Jonathan Blunk, Matt McQuinn, and Alex Teves as “white knights” or “fools.”
How people react in a crises reveals a lot about them. How MRAs like The Pigman, and like the Spearhead commenters I quoted the other day reacted to the Aurora shootings has certainly revealed a lot about them, none of it good.
Unfortunately, attitudes like theirs aren’t confined to the fringe that is the manosphere.
After hearing the stories of Blunk, McQuinn, and Teves, the Wall Street Journal’s James Taranto tweeted “I hope the girls whose boyfriends died to save them were worthy of the sacrifice.”
After numerous readers responded to his remarks with outrage, Taranto offered an apology of sorts, along with an explanation that suggested he really didn’t understand why people were angry in the first place. When someone does something noble and heroic out of love, it’s not up to you to second guess their actions or their love. Taranto’s words not only dishonored “the the girls whose boyfriends died to save them;” it dishonored the heroes as well.
Like The Pigman, like the Spearhead commenters, Taranto has failed this test of his humanity.
Whooo! I’m just gonna open a window and get some fresh air, if no one minds. The stench of dudes shit-lording all over this thread is heavy. 🙂
I’m STILL waiting for nine other movies like Bridesmaids, Steele.
DO ITTTT!!!! After all, we live in a misandrist society.
in a tiny fragment of the populace
It is quite a large segment of the population; and furthermore, one that I suspect most of Boobzland belongs to.
I am on fire tonight!
I am 43 with two children. Also Steele is dumber than a box of rocks.
*chipping in more
Jump in a pool?
the-sky-is-falling is the only way mikey knows how to describe things
yet he somehow still believes he sounds calm and rational. it’s one of the funniest things about him
Ignore logic, ignore reasoning, ignore critical thinking, ignore facts, ignore common sense or decency, use the word vile every third sentence, arbitrarily declare myself the winner.
HAHAHAHAHAHAA!!! Oh mikey, never change
“We see the vile, disgusting, hypocritical, vile attitudes behind closed doors.”
Redundant much? Get a thesaurus, there are other words that mean the same thing as vile (disgusting is one of them, excellent start)
i also love when he gives himself these creepy little self-high-fives
You mean like when someone countered your claim that the artistic merits of straight white men are ignored by society by helpfully bolding every white male author in a list of authors recognized for their work?
Yeah, typical M-feminists, focusing on the inconsequential things you proceed to ignore.
Incidentally, I really like M-feminists as a term. It reminds me of M-Theory.
The patriarchy is an n-dimensional membrane!
No, that’t just your brain overheating.
So were you going to substantiate any part of this?
Or you know, address the facts behind the wage gap?
Pssst, I know this answer XD XD XD
All this talk about dudes is making me miss Lost.
That’s what you call two people that sorta say that because women end up paying more for much other stuff and because women tend to have lower wages, they can sorta understand the men chipping more?
Excuse me? Even if you were right- which you aren’t- there are many other things that people are aside from gender; it seems to me that even if on average men made more, we look at the individuals involved. And regardless, I do believe that going dutch is just better; it doesn’t create feelings of “debt” or dependency.
And again, your one leg is knocked out from under you in light of the fact that the Gap doesn’t exist.
Steele, is it just me, or does that article overtly state that the reversal of the wage gap is only happening for a small segment of the yuppie demographic while overtly stating that the wage gap not only exists but *gasp* still affects primarily women? Please bring forth some evidence that doesn’t defeat your argument entirely.
Seriously, Steele, name ten movies in the last three years that don’t pass the reverse Bechdel test and I will (1) never mention the Bechdel Test again and (2) name the reverse after you.
1. Bridesmaids.
2.
Eh, not as good as “I’ve messaged the leaders of the movement about Tom Martin”… XD
lol
Ok now I’m caught up, I see laughing at vile…vile only makes Steele think we hate him, and the he doesn’t understand that teh is a typo, “vile…vile” is frothing wih such rage as not to notice he used the same word twice.
Also, all those tiny turtles!!
“Excuse me?”
Do a shot every time he says that.
@aworldanonymous
Actually, despite what lying reality may tell you, most of America is composed of urban professionals. This article is just the result of people trying to get the information across to the public without angering M-feminists. After all, we live in a misandrist society,
My girlfriend Ella, in fact, agrees with me; regardless of my personal proclivities, she actively prefers to pay for her own meals. The fact that we agree is merely a happy coincidence.