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.
you’re right. it’s not like that at all.
RHW on Monday: MRAs display a high number of indicators of mental illness. They deserve to be pitied and condescended to because they can’t help themselves from being giant tools.
RHW on Thursday: MRAs are totally right that people who sacrifice themselves for others are huge suckers who are being mind controlled by the media. Also having a fat girlfriend is bad; no one would ever save them.
How do you feel about the women who saved men in Aurora, and didn’t get a lot of press? Were they also being mind controlled by male hero narratives?
garvan, do you know the names of all the men who, during the Aurora shooting, did NOT shield their girlfriends with their bodies? I don’t. Because nobody is condemning those men or taking away their right to be men or any other fucking thing.
Now, they’re not being treated like heroes in the way the actual heroes are, but you kind of have to sacrifice something before you can be honoured for your sacrifice.
Why is it that MRAs are so invested in the idea that it’s impossible for men to be good people?
I can’t imagine anything more “misandric” than saying that it is more likely that a man died trying to have more sex than to save those he cares about. Why all the man hatred?
Wow…
Really? Really?!
So, you’re copping to the robot thing, right?
Why is it that MRAs are so invested in the idea that it’s impossible for men to be good people?
It’s male nature to be a terrible human being, and it’s feminist oppression to expect them to be anything else.
I was thinking about this and I realised that that’s why they believe feminists are so almighty powerful, and the extreme cases believe that feminists run the world. Because even people as completely disconnected from reality as MRAs must notice now and then that actually there are many men who are not terrible human beings like they are. The explanation? Those other men are scared of the feminist oppressors! Otherwise they’d talk and act just like MRAs do! Damn, those feminists control everything.
Ugh and Sharculese, you are vewy pwecious, but I think we all know this isn’t really a debate site. And Shar doesn’t debate so much as snipe inanely anyway.
I only suggest that Feminism’s own paradigm would suggest this privilege isn’t much of a privilege at all. However, Feminism is not a good-faith ideology – it serves sectional interests, the clue is ultimately in the name.
In my own opinion the guys are indeed noble in their heroism, but, uh, not quite “privileged” by their heroism. Unless the peace of the grave is a privilege.
No, I didn’t say MRAs should be condescended to, no I didn’t say the media is controlling people’s minds, no I didn’t even actually say having a fat girlfriend is bad and absolutely no-one would save them. Most of that has been your own random neural flare-ups that reading me seems to cause you to have. 🙂
Ninja-ed by Sharculese.
To be fair, that’s about as much seriousness as your comments generally deserve.
Care to address the contradiction between you on Monday, complaining that MRAs need to be handled gently because they’re likely to be mentally ill, and you today, spouting MRA talking points?
So all you were saying was that YOU, personally, wouldn’t value a fat girlfriend enough to save?
I love how “neural flareups” = critical thinking. That actually explains a lot about the MRM.
HAHAHAHA and what kind of interests does the “Men’s Rights Movement” serve? Hint: the clue is in the name.
Re: Privilege. Being told you’re better than half the human race is having certain expectations put upon you to act above and beyond. Why, it’s almost as if patriarchy and gender roles hurts men too! Now who could have ever said something like that?
MrB proposed to me after about three weeks of dating. And we’ve been married eleven years. So true love after a few weeks does happen.
@Ugh
Evopsych and biotruth, I’ve found that a lot of these people are of the opinion that everything is horrible, and therefore everything must back up the fact that everything is horrible. They simply can’t fathom the idea that something good exists.
It’s true! You said the mentally ill should be condescended to. And that many MRAs are mentally ill. It’s different! In a… worse, kind of way. Yay?
@RHW
Also, do you care to comment on the virulent hatred of men in Nikan’s comments? You say that feminists are a special interest group, but, strangely, we seem a lot faster than you to call out people on saying that men are immoral sex-seeking robots.
“Most of that has been your own random neural flare-ups that reading me seems to cause you to have.”
Clue stick: If someone can read blogs and be okay, and read comments and be okay, but YOUR comments are an issue, then you’re probably not communicating clearly.
Because I have yet to meet an MRA for whom the M in the acronym shouldn’t be replaced with “ME ME ME ME ME.” They’ve never cared about any men who aren’t them, and they especially hate any men who prove that it is entirely possible not to be a whiny, self-absorbed asshole, which is why they’re so angry about men doing something selfless and heroic but don’t really have a problem with men murdering people. If they actually cared about men, they’d be doing their best to support the families and loved ones of the heroes of Aurora, since it’s patently obvious that that’s what those men would want, but they’d prefer to sulk about how men being awesome people makes “real” men (you know, the ones like them, who spend their lives whining on the internet about how women are bitches) look bad.
I am so disgusted with this shit.
Or maybe he had great health insurance, or maybe he was you know, A GOOD PERSON.
Good lord you are a smeghead.
You’ve already been cited for poor grammar.
But I call you out on the whole ‘not a symbiotic organism’ thing. PROVE IT.
@Ugh:
I don’t know. I’m not an MRA, do you want to hear my own reasons?
Well, maybe because there are some hints that suggest that? Also, it wouldn’t be the first time that a man risks his life for sex, so why is that explanation so unreasonable?
Yup. Or it could be that he just liked her a lot, and that was enough. Or it could be that he was the sort of truly awesome person who would have done exactly the same thing for anyone he happened to be next to in that moment. All of these options seem a lot more likely than either “he was just trying to get laid” or “he felt that as a man, he was worthless and disposable.” And it offends me so damn much that people who claim to speak for “men” are trying to make an awesome, heroic man out to be a douchebag in order to assuage their own egos.
“Also, it wouldn’t be the first time that a man risks his life for sex, so why is that explanation so unreasonable?”
That it has happened before does not make it unreasonable.
Viscaria,
Haha, I said they shouldn’t be exposed to antagonistic ridicule. Apparently that means you’re condescending to them? OoooOOOookay. This honestly just gets funnier.
Ugh,
the MRM serves men! Yeah that’s right. Clue for the clueless: I’m not MRM, and I’m not Feminist either.
As far as MRAs being mentally ill and me taking up one of their talking points goes, well, ugh, I happen to agree with them it’s not much of a privilege to increase the likelhood of your early death.
Pretty straaange thing to agree with them on! But you know, if a lunatic said the grass is green, I’m not going to say it’s purple just to avoid agreeing with him.
I guess It isn’t so much fat chicks are bad as it is they don’t press the chivalry button for me somehow, so I just default to self preservation mode. Sorry fatties!
What are the hints? All I see is wild speculation.
Lets flip this around for a second.
From the perspective of an equal rights feminist, wouldn’t the fact that 3 guys died protecting women be a bad thing?
After all, why would the women need saving, and why weren’t there women sacrificing their lives for their boyfriends?
I suspect that to an extent, its biologically hardwired into our brains, but you can’t deny that socially, men are expected to show “courage under fire.”
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/an-awkward-engagement-woman-agrees-to-marry-man-after-he-ditched-her-in-aurora-theater/
People are calling that guy a coward for running out of the theater alone.
@PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
Smeghead…I like that, I’m going to add it to my insult vocabulary now.