So apparently I’m way off base with this “misogyny” thing. For example, I have been under the impression that I have been finding misogynistic stuff in the Men’s Rights subreddit, like, all the time. With upvotes, and everything. But evidently I’m wrong.
Because now ignatiusloyola, one of the subreddit mods, has done a very scientific study that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that, well, whatever misogyny is there is officially not a big damn deal.
Ig explains his protocol:
I did a quick scan of the first 400 comments on the list (100/page, 4 pages in). I scanned for words like “cunt” and “whore”, and read the context of these. I looked for the words “woman” and “women”, and read the context of these. I looked for “suffrage” and “vote” also.
I found two comments that used the word “cunt”, one of them was used to describe men, the other to describe a specific woman. The only instances of “whore” were “attention whore”.
There were two comments involving the word “woman” that generalized women with negative stereotypes.
“Suffrage” and “vote” instances did not involve any context that suggested that women did not deserve the right to vote.
How a person defines “hatred of women”, either loosely (suggestive from context, rather than explicit) or strictly (explicit statements), it is pretty clear that out of 400 comments, very few are misogynistic.
Does misogyny exist? Yes. But it does not seem to be a significant contribution to r/MensRights. At best, people are seeing a few comments and focusing on their existence while ignoring the rest.
It’s a lot like that time Michael Richards did that standup routine, and everyone focused on that one word he said, totally ignoring all the other words he used that were totally not racist slurs. I mean, yeah, he said that word a bunch of times, but it still made up a very small percentage of all the words he used that evening.
So that’s that, then. Misogyny, officially not a problem!
Or that would have been that, had Ig not actually posted about his experiment to the subreddit he had just proved was, like, totally non-misogynistic:
Because it turned out that a couple of the fellas had an issue with Ig’s methodology. In particular, that stuff about female suffrage. Because, apparently, you can totally be against women having the right to vote and still not be a misogynist. As zyk0s put it (garnering upvotes in the process):
[T]here’s the matter of female suffrage. I really don’t see how suggesting women should not have been granted the right to vote is misogyny. It might be motivated by it, but not necessarily so, and treating it as such is akin to criminalizing holocaust denial: it’s censorship, pure and simple, and if [1] /r/MR wants to keep calling itself an open space where ideas are not silenced, that attitude has to change.
Our friend Demonspawn went even further(and got a few upvotes himself):
Suggesting that the government works better without the women’s vote is not misogyny. It’s an analysis of the facts and the consequences of allowing women’s suffrage.
Suggesting that women retain the right to vote without the corresponding responsibilities that men face is misandry.
So there you have it. The Men’s Rights subreddit doesn’t have a misogyny problem; if anything, it’s a hotbed of misandry.
I’m wondering if Wetherby will show up soon, and if so if his journalistic “this person could be used as a whip to hurt vulnerable people with” senses will be tingling the same way mine are. I can see how it might read differently to non-Brits – if you’re familiar with the British media and how it works it’s unfortunately very easy to see how Tom has tailored his approach to that audience and how it might actually work.
If nothing else he’s reminding me of exactly why I dislike a certain kind of British man, and why I’m happy I don’t run into very many of them in the US.*
*Though a friend of mine dated one for a while…that was unpleasant, and I’m glad she got away with nothing more than a few emotional bruises.
Anathema – thinks ex-communication the key.
Cassie: At least for me, Tom Martin’s presence in the threads managed to turn him, in my mind, from “mreh, extremist, but maybe some good points” to “OH HOLY SHIT NO.” The best thing we can do is ask him about his opinions enough that he has some rope to hang himself with.
@ cassandra- Look, this media trend of writing up the opinion of random sensational misogynists with the right accent and educational background is going to continue with or without me. Let me have my little chat.
@ ozy
But if anyone were to ask him about those interactions he’d just lie, and without the slightest trace of conscience. And elements of the British media will collude with him.
Hey, you can chat with him if you want. I’m entitled to my opinion that it’s not helping.
I think Tom has hung himself several times over by now. Dude has more lives than a cat. 😉
@ Cassandra- Oh, it never helps- you can’t reason with crazy. Fun to try, though.
End the draft and selective service. Or include women. Done.
Is there a default retirement age in the UK that is 5 years younger for women? That doesn’t seem fair. But referring to women as “whorez” is not going to convince the makers of public policy to sympathize with you.
All circumcision should be banned, imo.
Parental leave should be for fathers, too. Some countries offer it.
There, not so bad, eh?
That’s not really what I meant – clearly reasoning with trolls is pointless. What’s bothering me is that that particular kind of sneering, bullying misogyny is common enough in the UK that I think that if the MRM is going to achieve anything there, that will be the approach that works best for them.
I think any response or statement made by a woman can be construed as a shaming tactic by MRAs. The only exceptions are “Can I suck your d!ck?” and “Here are your clean underpants.”
manboobzers repeatedly losing the argument, so discussing plan B?
(rather than discussing how to effectively incorporate proper considerations of misandry in their gender discourse).
How very lame.
I don’t think it’s healthy for women to see manboobzers mascerading as feminists deliberately shooting their arguments in the foot to hobble gender-developmental progress.
Very lame.
Even the “here are your clean underpants” response isn’t entirely safe – remember the rant about skidmarks? A woman must be careful not to mention those even if she’s obediently cleaned them off. Because expecting grown men to know how to wipe their own asses is also misandry.
@ Tom
wut?
@Cassandra
Yes, but a good woman will clean them so well that every trace of skidmark will be gone. It’s all about the bleach. (When my husband left skidmarks, ONCE, he was very embarrassed, and we just threw the undies away.)
Fembot, on the subject of sucking dick, some more win/win news for women:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2186710/Could-oral-sex-pregnant-womans-best-defense-morning-sickness.html?ITO=1490
But what if she ever accidentally alluded to the existence of the skidmarks? That would presumably be Code Brown.
Tom, for the millionth time, we’re not including misandry in the discourse, because it’s made up. May as well ask us to incorporate the Easter Bunny.
Okay, that is ableist as fuck. Tom is full of shit because he’s a fraud. His mental health status has nothing to do with it.
The sneering just sounds so silly, though. If people read it and take it seriously, there is just no hope.
Code Brown. LOL.
You know, I understand to a point not being super uptight about skidmarks and other bodily functions. People get sick, they have accidents. But if it is a regular occurence, you have to stop and ask yourself “why the fuck is my ass so dirty?” But my husband is a soldier, and sometimes he goes weeks without a shower, so I would never laugh at him about that stuff.
“Horrible”, “sexist”, and “bully” are not DSM classification.
@ Tom- Oh, wow, you know you got completely tuned in these little arguments, right? I thought that was why you weren’t talking as much anymore.
BTW, for anyone who missed it the first time, here’s the video about how women are evil bitches for looking upon men who frequently have skidmarks in a negative way.
Expecting your male partner to know how to wipe his own ass = expecting men to be perfect.
What is the DSM?