So when I was poking around on Roosh’s Return of Kings blog the other day I ran across a guest post from someone calling himself Samseau accusing feminists of using racism to exploit men – that is, of expertly manipulating men of different races to fight one another instead of standing firm against the evil feminists and their evil agenda.
The post, while purporting to be somehow “above” the issue of race, is a muddled mess full of “white men have it worst” nonsense like this:
[R]acial infighting between American men wouldn’t be so bad if it weren’t for the political consequences.
Women, if you haven’t noticed, do not fight with each other over racial conflicts. They might get angry over the past, but they are able to resolve all issues by agreeing on a scapegoat: the white man. Colored women will gladly forgive their white sisters, since, after all, it was the white man who oppressed women and minorities.
White men are the big, bad, evil masters, and as such, all females of different colors can agree to put aside their differences in order to bring the white man down.
Yes, he did indeed use the term “colored women.” Oh, but there’s more.
The election results show that decades of brainwashing young American boys has been an unqualified success. Rather than have boys be loyal to their gender, boys have instead been trained to be loyal to their race.
Little non-white boys at the tender age of 9 years are fed lies about how white male oppressors created their poor living conditions, while white boys are taught that they need to correct the injustices of their forefathers lest they be guilty with the indelible sin of white privilege. Female teachers use the appropriate shaming tactics on these young minds to imprint the intended desire for conflict.
All according to plan.
And more:
Men are pawns in the race game. Thus while American women feed themselves government largesse, jobs, university degrees, their husband’s money, and child support money, American men fight each other over table scraps.
But my favorite thing about this article is the little graph that Mr. Samseau made up to illustrate the REAL issues men face today.
Yep. Race is the least important issue, while “getting laid” is number one.
It’s a pretty revealing little chart, huh?
The comment section for the article – wade into this swamp at your own peril – is (predictably enough) filled with angry racists trying to explain why race really does matter. Others, meanwhile, seem upset that all this racism is getting in the way of the regular woman-bashing. Still others suggest that men of all races needed to understand the “root cause” of all our “multicultural problems.” That being … teh Jews.
My favorite comment of the bunch, though, has to be this, from Caliente, combining an astounding ignorance of history with some half-digested evo psych:
Btw the reason why there are practically no racist women is simple.
Males of mammals are territorial.
They naturally base they identity from bottom up: family,tribe,nation,race.And naturally react negative to males of different “tribe”.
Females at the same time are receptive to have sex with any males as long as they are alpha enough.
In 19 century whites fucked all the black women because they were alpha and they had recourses,just look at Brasil.Nowadays a feminist will be cheating on her white beta herbling with some black fitness coach because that is how her brain assumes alphaness.
Wow.
Glad we got that all settled!
They see me rollin’
They hatin’
Patrollin’
They tryin to catch me posting nerdy
Dagrabbit’s comment is indeed great. *applause*
@Falconer
http://youtu.be/N9qYF9DZPdw
Nthing the applause for Dagrabbit. The comment rocked.
I’ll take manboobs to task myself. Do you think that we don’t notice the derogatory way you refer to white men? Tut tut ladies. We’re not stupid. You may say one thing, but the subtext says something entirely different. And we react accordingly to your contempt. You’ll never recruit any substantial number of white men because white men are your villains, whether you’ll admit it or no. That’s the difference between 2nd and 3rd wave feminism. 2nd wave feminism hated men. 3rd wavers are a little bit more savvy, realized they needed more voices to have any success. So they narrowed their focus, put only white men in their evil category. However ladies, you’re not so smart, because this still poses something of a problem, because white men are still one of the biggest demographics in the country. Tsk tsk, there are a lot of us ladies, we’re not the 1% here. We’re like the 40%. With the white men as villains, you’re going to have a real problem whipping the public into a frenzy like Occupy did, because white men are a big chunk of the public… not like the 1% rich, who are a small minority. Tut tut ladies. Your strategy needs work.
OMG Myoo did I seriously never notice that your gravatar is a kitty MODOK?
Maybe I didn’t deserve that nerd card in the first place.
Regarding Dagrabbits comment, I don’t blame him for wanting black women to stand with black men and reject feminism as a “rich white girl thang”. And is it such a shock that many chicanas feel the same way?
The 2nd wave of feminism tried to divide minority groups, particularly black Americans, by trying to recruit women of color into the womens lib movement; which would result in them turning against men of color making said men even more oppressed.
Black men are treated worse by most white people than black women. And this effect is amplified 1000 times when it comes to the way autistic men are treated(compared to autistic women).
You see, I am not a men’s rights activist, but I sure as bloody hell am an autism rights activist(I have it). And I’m outraged to see so many autistic women being recruited and brainwashed by neurotypical feminists and then ganging up with everyone else on autistic men. Especially since autistics are not a protected class so it’s okay to make fun of them and discriminate against them. This needs to stop! Autistic women need to realize that they have more in common and stand more to benefit from standing with autistic men against societies bigotry towards us than thinking it’s better to side with feminists simply because the latter has more political and legal clout.
Om nom for sure.
Got a stat for that, Om Nom?
So it is Om Nom. Did David ban him or did he go away on his own the last time?
“Regarding Dagrabbits comment, I don’t blame him for wanting black women”
Dagrabbit is a woman. You didn’t even bother to read that much.
Now you expect autistic women to side with autistic men because of the one thing they have in common? Funny, before it was you and ALL THE DUDES regardless of race, because women, ewww. Seems like it’s really all about you expecting everyone to support whatever white dudes want, regardless of any other issues.
I’m pretty sure Om Nom was shown the door.
I think he did get banned, though it was before my time.
@Myoo: I so need to buy Alpocalypse.
Banned him twice, as it happens. Once for posting a video that was one long rape joke. Then he left long enough that most people forgot he was banned and thought he was just on permanent moderation, so he snuck back in for a while. Then he posted another extremely offensive video (forget what it was about) and was re-banned.
Wow, pause to listen to one video and the troll flames out.
Oh yes, please do educate me on how male and female brains are different and don’t necessarily match genitalia. I’m sure you are full of fascinating facts that I, as a person whose apparent sex does not match their cognitive gender, will certainly be ignorant of.
Demarq: This is not a zero-sum game. You don’t reduce oppression and marginalisation for people with autism by oppressing and marginalising other people more. Every time someone is made aware of their own privilege that helps everyone. It is great to focus on your own thing – every cause needs its champions – but dumping all over everyone else’s causes (and your potential allies) is wasting your own time and energy to the benefit of the people who are oppressing you! Do you not see how ridiculous that is??
It’s called intersectionality. I know it’s a big word, but try reading up on it.
Or do you conflate “men with autism” with “creepy guys women complain about” and assume feminists are oppressing men with autism?
DING DING! WINNER, WINNER, CHICKEN DINNER!
And why does he conflate those things? Because he is an autistic man who is also a creepy guy who women complain about! He likes to tell himself that the latter is purely a result of the former, because if he admitted that that wasn’t the case he might have to stop being an asshole.
Anyone read Sheelzebub’s article on Feministe about this very thing?
In related news, I’m about to start volunteering at a place that assists people with disabilities. My blue card (necessary for working with children) arrived the other day so I’m going in today to talk about how I can get involved. I’m really looking forward to it.
Dagrabbit — that comment wins ALL THE INTERNETS, and, if you don’t mind, I have a question. Do you know when this changed, my google-fu is failing me —
“Colonial laws regarding statutory rape were not applied to Blacks and Indians. Indians and Blacks, as well as their children, were prohibited by law from defending themselves against abuse, sexual and otherwise, at the hands of Whites. A slave who defended herself against the attack of a White person was subject to cruel beatings by either the master or mistress. Liaisons between Whites and Blacks or Indians were illegal. The females of color received the harshest punishment if discovered in a liaison with a White male. Females of color, regardless of their young age, were viewed as seducers of White men. Pregnancy became the evidence of the illegal liaison. A mulatto baby the indicator of the race of the father – White male. The child, by statute took the status of the mother and is thus born into slavery. The full benefit of the relationship and the off-spring enured to the White male. Under English precedent, the status of children was determined by the father. The colonists changed the law to increase the wealth and domination of the White master who had eliminated certain costs of purchasing human labor by becoming “a breeder of slaves.” The Black female, woman or child, was forced into sexual relationships for the White slave master’s pleasure and profit.”
My father likes to go on about how honorable it was that his great grandfather married the Native American woman he impregnanted and I’d kind of like some historical proof that this is actually quite fucked up. But I can never figure out when those laws changed, and you probably don’t know either, so just ignore me and take your internets.
That was an amazing troll takedown, please have some internets, pull up a (misandrist and thus hard) chair, enjoy a SCENTED MOTHERFUCKING CANDLE and have some cookies! (Glad to have you around in other words! 🙂 )
Going back to the Weird Al video, the Carl Sagan t-shirt is still available: http://www.zazzle.co.nz/carl_sagan_is_my_homeboy_tee_shirt-235363795090137941
Although given my spirituality, this would be more accurate for me: http://www.amazon.com/CEILING-CAT-My-Homeboy-CafePress/dp/B009R08KNI
Kim – congratulations! 🙂