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.
which is why youre engaging in your unhealthy obsession instead of doing those things, of course!
Excuse me, Vile Dude:
“I have seen far more anger from Boobzland than I have displayed, and at far less provocation.”
That’s funny, because I think it’s the opposite.
Steele: “All my girlfriends agree with me in e-mail!”
seriously dude, start rereading before you hit post.
or is quoting you slander?
Do you know what the elements of defamation of character are in a civil court? Bonus question: Are you aware that if this met them, the offense would most likely be libel?
Sorry, can’t hear you over your rant on whether ‘dude’ can be reclaimed XD
“Can I ask the mods to ban this vile slanderer?”
You just did ask…passive-aggressive Steele is even more annoying than aggressive Steele…
Sharculese — of course your girlfriend agrees with you, you’re annoying when people disagree with you
Steele — can we ban this vile slanderer?
What exactly was so slanderous about what Sharculese said?
Dunno if it counts as a movie, but just watched the film version of David Tennant and Catherine Tate in ‘Much Ado About Nothing,’ which very much passed the Bechdel test.
IANAL, but don’t you have to be speaking out loud for it to be slander?
i actually meant that if mikey behaves irl like he does on the internet, any woman would flee in terror after his first disagreement, but still
Steele, I won’t believe Ella exists until she starts posting here too.
Ah, I’ve been away. Missed much drama, evidently! (though probably not as much drama as trying to get my two year old nephew out of his new wagon… we may have to wait until he goes to sleep!)
@KathleenB
That is definitely on my ‘Need To Watch Desperately’ list.
I really don’t know what the vile, disgusting asshole Sharculese is implying, but I am in a very happy relationship with an excellent person, and I do believe Ella feels the same way. I do not believe there’s any evidence to the contrary. As I said, we spend time together, and also take care to spend time apart, because it’s important to have lives outside of each other. There is no “neglect” involved; she agrees with me on this count.
why come every time mikey doesnt like how i describe his behavior, he responds by doing that exact thing?
Sharculese — I was thinking more like “well duh anyone you disagree with isn’t going to agree to a second date” but yeah, either way, no shit his GF agrees with him. Opinions on how people react to him =/= slander or libel.
Sir Bodsworth — IANAL but afraik, yes. (Of course the nearly-a-lawyer best-friend is idle, damnit)
Amnesia: It’s BRILLIANT! The supporting cast is amazing, the set is… jaw dropping, and EVERYone is perfect and hilarious. Tennant and Tate are a great team.
that you’re an angry, unhinged person who responds poorly to disagreement, mostly by calling people things like ‘vile’ and ‘disgusting’
altho i didnt really imply so much as say it, so….
Who said anything about neglect? Also “vile, disgusting asshole” is really not helping your case any here.
im going to get internet lawsuited again, arent i.
that’s like twice in one week.
i am the fucking greatest.
Holy crap! A Tennant/Tate Much Ado About Nothing! Must see! Must see!
On the question of who it’s “hardwired” into to save people, and who they try to save, I suspect that it may be simpler than “men, save women” and “women, save kids”. The more basic human instinct may be “if you see someone who you perceive as smaller and weaker and more vulnerable than yourself in trouble, help them”. I know that I go into “must save and protect” mode mostly around children and elderly people. Rarely around adults of any gender because I’m 5ft2 and very few adults trigger the “must protect” feelings in me.
So yeah, it is sexism to a certain extent that men seem to be more likely to try to save women than the other way around, but not in the way that MRAs think (ie it’s about society perceiving women as weak and helpless by default, like children), and to a certain extent there may be something going on where all humans tend to go into protect mode around people physically smaller than themselves, which is probably more innate and less socialized. Hard to tell size differential by looking at photos of these couples.
And yeah, I wouldn’t call anyone a coward for running for their own life and leaving their able-bodied partner behind, but deliberately abandoning a small child (your own child, too) to save yourself? That guy deserves to be called out. I’d say the same thing about the mother if it had been her who abandoned the baby.
“Keep saying that to yourself, you may even convince yourself to believe that (and feel better), but don’t think you will convince me.”
This made me literally LOL. Look, kiddo, just because you’re so sex obsessed and/or deprived that you would (in your opinion) fuck anything with a pulse does not mean that all other men are as pathetically undiscriminating as you are. Also, did we mention that if this is true in your case it’s kinda pathetic?
@ Mikey
Chill out, dude. Have a margarita or something, smoke some weed. It can’t be good for you to interpret every single thing that any woman other than the possibly-mythical “Ella” says to you as “vile”.
why cant i stop upsetting dudes by telling them they sound upset.
why
why
I’m guessing Misandry?
that you’re an angry, unhinged person who responds poorly to disagreement, mostly by calling people things like ‘vile’ and ‘disgusting’
Excuse me? I am using apt descriptors for people who belittle a human rights movement, mock men’s pain, deny misandry, deny men’s issues, elevate men over women, think men’s pain is worth less and “less valid” than women’s, and believe men should pay for women’s livelihood. You get what you deserve.
Sharculese – be careful, you might get common law sued for a thousand ounces of gold!