The Man Boobz Pledge Drive continues. See here for more details, or click below to donate.
And now back to our regularly scheduled post:
Someone posted this picture in the Men’s Rights subreddit yesterday with the title “Equality.”
[Trigger Warning: Depiction of violence against women.]
.
.
.
.
.
Yep, that’s right, equality is all about hitting women. (Click the image for a larger version.)
The punchy superhero in question, Booster Gold, is from the future, and “in the future he is from there is actual equality, or at least enough of it for the “you wouldn’t hit a girl” thing to not be any kind of issue,” as one Men’s Rightser explained in the comments,
Yep, in MRA-land, men hitting women – sorry, girls — is considered “progress.”
And a critical men’s rights issue. Responding to a Redditor who thought the picture was “fantastic” but wondered if it should be in the Men’s Rights subreddit, BlueOak offered this explanation:
Making it socially acceptable for men to hit women, evidently a key plank on the Men’s Rights platform.
Wouldn’t it make a little more sense to work towards a world in which, you know, neither men nor women were getting punched on a regular basis?
Is it just me (I skimmed the article) or is this bloke going down the “how dare you call them entitled whiny creeps who think kindness coins should get sex” path? He seemed fucking clueless in his oh-so-measured article.
“is that he is so loyal and loving to his older and not as hot wife.”
Heh, noblesse oblige.
Interesting article pillow, esp the comment about why we focus on the nice guy behaviours rather than the sense of entitlement.
Yes Kitteh, I got that too. Along with the subtle shift towards blaming women because obviously we want the goods without paying for them.
I’m strongly tempted to email the author with a link to Heartless Bitches International. Those women had some very pointy things to say about nice guys, and good advice on how to spot them, and especially…what to do with them.
Lets remember that Psychology Today is the online home of Satoshi Kanazawa. It’s not like this is the first time they’ve put a sexist slant on things.
Tyrians the best, the books suck by the way. I pillowed through many thousand pages but whenever you like a character he kills them off. Kitteh, I also didn’t finish the article, mea culpa, blaming slowww end of month downloads, but could be total laziness.
Psychology Today is the Daily Mail of science magazines.
Cassandra, the blog is filled to the brim with PUAs, MRAs, wannabes and the tradcon women who are “speaking on behalf of men”. Its also rife with relationship advice to women on how to hurry up and get the man crap.
There are a whopping two outright feminist women. And its not unusual for them to defend themselves. There’s also a feminist guy who also posts for the Good Men Project, and holy shit does he reek of protective paternalism.
I can’t believe I’m saying this, but that’s an insult to the Daily Mail. At least they don’t pretend to have anything intelligent to say.
You pillowed your way through thousands of pages?
No wonder I’m always so tired.
Gakkkk! Warning enough.
What’s the bet that the guy writing the article is a NiceGuy™. He sure spends enough time weaseling around to get out of using the term that way to distinguish it from a genuinely nice guy.
Yoyo – I feel for you about the downloads! I just had to upgrade ‘cos I was getting the Telstra Crawl every damn month.
DAVID IT IS ALL YOUR FAULT WHY YOU MAKE SUCH GOOD BLOG
melody: I don’t care if folks say it is a satire it isn’t funny. It is screwed up.
I looked at more of his site.
It’s not satire. It might have elements of tongue in cheek, but at core he’s deadly serious.
Marie: *inches away slowly from voxday*
The only reason one has to not move quickly from the presence of Theodore Beale (sometimes going under the name VoxDay) is that one is about to slug him.
I say this as someone who thinks violence is, as a rule, a bad thing. I cannot, honestly, say I eschew it entirely, as I made a living in the profession of arms. Of the people I have encountered in this life, he is one of the few for whom initiating violence seems to me to be not indefensible.
nopestories: Don’t forget the super hero comics where the ladies all like “you wouldn’t hit a woman would you?” and super man is all like “YOUR NOT A WOMAN” and punches her.
I think that trope is, “you wouldn’t hit a LADY”. As such it’s a comment on the moral character, not the sex, of the woman in question.
Pillow , I’d ont know hoe I ended up with that, I meant I struggled through… Brain glitch I hope. I’ve been a bit vacant since hospital yesterday. Is there a word for being so angry you could explode but you are not allowed to because someone is worse off than you?
Pecunium, every week or so I look at Theodore’s site in absolute horror but I never comment there because he’s so aggressive and disgusting. It amazes me that anyone would public ally hold those attitudes.
Kitteh, Optus is no damn better arghh!
I wouldn’t touch Optus, for sure! Telstra are the only ones who seem to have *cough* coverage *cough* in my area. We have Optus at work and the boss calls them ‘Opeless.
Maybe you were thinking of “ploughed through” when you wrote “pillowed through”? Sort of works for heavy reading while in bed, though. 😀
I think ploughed through was right kitteh, thanks. Mind you just the other day I had a debate with someone about Plow vs plough.. My life is full of excitement ;-(
Ha, I was tossing up which way to spell it when I typed it here.
… long lost sister?
Here’s the tip-off in that piece:
In my opinion, its when he mentions “womens discrepencies”. The simple fact that a) men present a more unified viewpoint and b) that women don’t universally agree with the mens viewpoint has always been the jumping point for viewing women with suspicion or contempt. The other is the word “discrepency”. A pretty word to use when you want to accuse someone of lying while covering ones own ass by appearing to give the benefit of the doubt.
The author is deliberately using weasel words to subtley shift the readers viewpoint. But the author is sloppy towards the end, and becomes transparent.
The poor menz! Women abusing their power. All women know when a guy is being nice in order to get something and when a guy is being nice just to be nice.
This article is very women blaming. Women know when guys wants things and take advantage. I’m sorry, but my nice guy experience involves me trying to stay as far away from the creep who pretended to be my friend and once rejected started calling me on the phone while masturbating. I now won’t talk to him.
Damn you blockquotes.
I also note this: Jesse Marczyk, M.A., is a post-doc at New Mexico State University;
He is an MA (psych, SUNY Albany), who is also a Post-Doc, and a Ph. D candidate.
Poking about (googling his name and publications) there is no mention of his getting a Ph.D; and I can’t find any peer-reviewed writing.
His other writing has some interesting quirks:
He also fails at self-awareness: I have a completely reasonable, accurate, and unbiased high opinion of myself and my abilities. I’m just waiting for the rest of the world to catch up.
Wow! Science ” granted that interpretation takes a little reading between the lines”. The mans a god damn genius. I just read a piece of research that said cigarettes are bad for you, BUT if I read between the lines they’re only bad because of the wommenz . Wow all solved.
“Discrepancies” attacks women two ways. It can read as discrepancies from the men’s viewpoint – ie. male = default, anything else = odd, different, wrong. Or it can read simply as a man who’s unable to see women as individuals with individual reactions.
Given the guy’s looking more misogynistic every moment, it’s probably both.