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.
@Rutee Katreya
“Even the fucking CONSAD report found a 16ish% wage gap after going out of their way to erase it”
Silly girl child. Any company that could increase it’s profits by that much would hire only women. Normally, silly girl children like yourself usually parade out the 76 cent on a dollar stat. If any company could increase it’s profits by whatever stupid number you pull out of your ass, they would. In business, the mighty profit rules all. A classic example of the intelligence level of feminists.
Off Topic: Hey, David, can we have a post on sunshinemary’s blog (http://thewomanandthedragon.wordpress.com/)? The misogyny is strong.
Sharculese, you are the greatest. I doff my vile hat to you.
“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.”
Best Steele typo so far. Oopsie?
It’s Shakespeare insult time, as I am quite sick of Steele insulting everyone here and being called nothing worse than angry and unhinged.
More of your conversation would infect my brain.
Coriolanus (2.1.91)
There is no more mercy in him than there is milk in a male tiger.
Coriolanus (5.4.30)
I scorn you, scurvy companion.
2 Henry IV (2.4.115)
Away, you mouldy rogue, away!
2 Henry IV (2.4.117)
You are strangely troublesome.
Henry VIII (5.3.112)
And that’s just through the end of H. (quote source)
Steele — scurvy there? It’s another way of saying vile.
I frankly could give a rip if Boobzland believed Ella to be fictional; she is not.
It is not “women” whom I consider vile, it is M-feminists, many of whom are male- including the Boobz King himself. For example, Ella is an excellent person.
I hope we will soon get what we deserve over on your blog. ‘Cos that would be awesome.
a creepy dude ranting at me?
The irony gods are very much appeased by your tribute.
I won’t believe it then either, tbh. Steelepole is kind of a demonstrated liar XD
And yeah, you have to speak out loud to engage in slander in nearly every, if not every, meriken jurisdiction. I thought this was already known, hence the mockery. The printed word, including the internet, counts as ‘libel’.
Except, to do steelepole’s homework for him, one of the elements of libel in the US is that you have to be able to prove those words caused harm to your reputation (Which is nearly impossible except in financial terms, at the end of the day), and that they were untrue. And considering he openly speculated… XD XD XD
Says- That was indeed a typo, though not a Freudian one. Merely a typo.
Dude, you should really work on that whole “reading comprehension” thing if you ever want to overcome misandry and be a writer.
i think internet lawsuits can only be for those gross e-dollar things the libertarians are into. which i have none of, so more bad luck for mikey.
I won’t believe it then either, tbh. Steelepole is kind of a demonstrated liar XD
Well, as I said, I could give a rip if an M-feminist like you believed me; however, for the record, I have never once lied at Boobzland.
Sir Bodsworth Rugglesby III: Download or digital rental: http://www.digitaltheatre.com/production/details/much-ado-about-nothing-tennant-tate
Tennant and Tate singing ‘Sigh No More’: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsZMz_9ggg0
Tennant and Tate singing ‘We Go Together’ (not in the show, but fun and funny): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KrIKIq9Kntw
Steele, this comment is behind closed doors, so don’t you dare read it:
[Rutee, just between the two of us, I am hoping we’ll soon meet another of Steele’s socks, the one called “Ella Mantastic” or something like that.]
Whataboutthemoonz,
Then they both should have worked to save each other, not to have the boyfriend use himself as a bullet shield.
in all fairness making mikey flip out isnt that hard
The only one fooled by your lies is you.
I’m off to fix dinner. If this comment thread hasn’t passed 750 by the time I’m back, I will be very disappointed in you vile, slandering m-feminists!
“…and that they were untrue.”
IANAL, but I think the person saying it has to know it isn’t true (or at least have reason to know? Why is nearly-a-laywer busy currently?!) And I can’t imagine a suit over something like “you’re an asshole” ever getting anywhere, assholery is just too subjective an accusation. Which should really thrill Steele considering he keeps calling everyone vile.
a creepy dude ranting at me?
Shaming misandrist-feminist language is misandrist and shaming, what else is new.
…this from the dude who claimed racism was overblown, huh? This is some fucking nutritious irony right here. XD
CHOMP CHOMP CHOMP CHOMP CHOMP XD XD XD
Seriously XD XD XD
…I said I don’t care that dudes pay for dates, because they get paid more on average, and spend less preparing for the date. What kind of dates do you go on that count as ‘your partner’s livelihood’? XD
which is why you have to keep telling us how little you care over and over. because apparently that’s something you care about?