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?
Just looking at the comic, (and slightly missing the point, I know) I’m really struck by how unnecessary that last blow is regardless of sex. I mean, she’d lost and she knew it, that weak joke was negotiating for less violence!
I guess if she’d said “I surrender” instead he’d still have hit her, because it amounts to the same thing. Clearly this guy doesn’t believe in minimum force.
@Podkayne Sorry I brought that into your life. It is pretty awful.
I think it is funny he only reads a few definitions and is like these are the only ones. Frankly, if you are ignoring merriam webster definitions (which is a popular dictionary) you probably are purposefully ignoring things.
This is so well worded, Sometimes I try to say something like this a stumble over my words.
It is the truth. My best friend does me favors because she is my friend. I treat her to lunch or a drink and help her move because she is my friend. However, if a guy friend buys me lunch or helps me move I am being cruel by not putting out. Or at least just using him.
The thing about survivor meaning hardship and trauma:
A) the rapist or people who support rapists do not suffer the trauma ergo it doesn’t exist
B) those who have survived rape often work very hard to hide the trauma and/or “get back to a normal life”. Often because survivors are pushed to do this.
C) the discomfort and suffering of those percieved as weaker is simply ignored as irrelavant. In fact, being low enough on the social pecking order will see most of your life experience deemed irrelavant.
D). When rape survivors do showthe effects of trauma, any negative behaviour on their part is judged as a moral deficiency, hormonal imbalance, or just some typical craziness due to some secondary trait not related to the traumatizing experience.
Ergo, there’s no suffering because there’s no trauma to the rape victim or the rapist and therefore nothing to survive.
And yes, this kind of thinking really does make me sick.
Pecunium, good luck on getting tougher sentencing. I think the lock em in asylum thing was just a bone thrown to society for the especially brutal rapists. I have to wonder who been commited this way (and I will lay good money that most of em aint white) and what particularly pointed the judicial system to take that route.
On the other hand, perhaps this ruling will also remove the slavering beast theory from societal thinking.
The other key point about removing the mental illness label is that they can be held 100% accountable for their actions, because at all times mens rea applied. Their actions cannot be excused, they have no “out”. I would call that a success, and it is hopefully one more step along the way of stopping the bloody tropes associated with people with actual mental disabilities.
pillow in hell: Yeah, I know. Want to know what I’d like to see… reductions on the ways mandatory sentencing is required. There are all sorts of problems with the punitive model of punishment, and having huge upper bounds causes its own problems (The Hanging Tree: Execution and the English People 1770-1868, by VAC Gatrell discusses this; in that huge numbers of people were sentenced to death; with the expectation most would be commuted, thus showing both the power and majesty of the law; balanced against the mercy of the courts), but I am leery of granting the ability to take any crime, and give it a small punishment, with the ability of anonymous persons to just lock people up indefinitely when the sentence is over.
So I’d like judges to have the ability to judge the crimes, and the apparent threat to society, and then respond to them, in public ways, with the condemnation that comes of it.
But I’m an idealist.
I think I have the comic book where the above event takes place… at least I’ve read it in context. And it mostly comes off as… weird. It’s a) very un-super-hero-like to punch someone who just stands there talking to you after the actual fight is already over, and b) contrary to what the dialogue suggests it’s NOT un-super-hero-like to punch a woman per se. Mixed-gender fights occur all the time, and it’s not like male super heroes are in the habit of just standing there taking it when female super villains attack them.
I think there IS a problematic double standard (talking about real life now, not super hero comics) when it comes to violence, but the problem isn’t that there’s too much of a taboo against men hitting women. Rather, the problem is that women hitting men is taken too lightly. There IS a fairly widespread idea according to which woman-on-man violence doesn’t really count, since women are weak and men are strong, so a woman couldn’t possibly hurt a man, and therefore woman-on-man violence is not real violence but pretty okay or even funny. That double standard has got to go. (And btw, I’m a feminist saying this, and I know lots of feminists agree with me.) But the solution isn’t to start making light of man-on-woman-violence, but to deem ALL violence (except in self-defence or when it’s necessary to defend another) unacceptable.
Booster Gold isn’t exactly your average boyscout superhero though. He’s actually pretty awful.
Manifold; With the caveat that I’m not a Booster Gold expert; isn’t the thing with BG that he’s fond of fame and fortune, while standard super heroes are indifferent to these things? Not that he has a thing for punching down people after the actual fight is over? If so, the above strip is still a bit weirdly out of character.
In this thread I agree with 2 other posters. Hmm, thats rare, but thank you to pecunium for saying extrajudicial punishments are bad, and Dvar for pointing out that initiating violence is bad and should be addressed. Kudos. Seriously.
Melody, if you have a male friend who takes you out, wines and dines you, and hints at a desire for a romantic relationship, and you ignore his signals, then yes, you are taking advantage of him.
I did it once. A club leader in student gov’t would volunteer projects with me, give me hugs, and come over to my place to study. I eventually realized she liked me, and after that still let her drive me around town, and make me dinner. I feel guilty about it now.
Where are the hints of wanting a romantic relationship in this, Diogenes? Melody and Podkayne were talking about the exact same acts (going to lunch, doing things for a friend because they’re a friend) being seen as “friendship” between people of the same gender, but “she is required to pay with sex” when done by a man for a woman. I don’t really think the discussion was about someone making romantic overtures. Besides, more importantly, people aren’t mind-readers. If someone (like the club leader you mentioned) wants a romantic relationship, they need to say so. The onus is on them, not on the person they’re interested in. sure, you feel bad about having (as you felt) taken advantage of it after you realised, but again, I don’t think that’s what’s under discussion.
When has he ever cared about that?
Very true.
The Kitteh
Melody didn’t mention one. But the girl that was into me? She was probably too shy to say anything. It would have been cruel to string her along after I figured it out. Its a shame maturity doesn’t come to us all at once.
Shut up, Diogenes. Cool story, bro.
hellkell
“shut up” “cool story”
I don’t miss being 5.
Dude, why are you here?
It’s hard to miss things that you never actually left behind.
Were you stringing her along, though? Were you offering any hints of being interested in a romantic relationship? Were you acting any differently from before you thought she was interested, or were you simply doing things together that friends would do? Fact remains that it was up to her to speak up. Sure, she could have been too shy to do so, or whatever, but that still doesn’t put the onus on anyone else to read her mind.
The other point is that with the situation reversed, would anyone be saying that you owed it to her to put out because she’d done stuff for you or had an interest in you? I very much doubt it. It’s a prevailing sexist attitude that women are required to do just that, and that when we don’t, we’re somehow wronging men. You might have had “hur hur hur, you missed the chance there bro” comments thrown your way, but it’s not the same blame game that some men play – which is what’s being discussed.
I’ll give Diogenes this much – he’s a good example of not getting it with the attitude being talked about.
Actually I think his comment in the other thread wins today’s prize, for trying to mansplain fashion to a man.
(Badly)
hellkell, I’m grinding my ax.
What are you doing here?
Cassandra, so you don’t miss it?
Oh, look. he’s trying to play the I know you are but what am I game again. How fresh and innovative.
BHAHAHAHA, his axe. Dude, the only Axe you have is the shower.
Go away, sweetie, the women are talking.
No, he means his axe as in guitar. It goes with the blazer and slacks that he’s rocking.
(This dude is in his 20s? So sad.)
Diogenes needs a nice quiet hobby. May I suggest applique quilts? Its certainly far more relaxing and far less grating then cnstantly being tld to fuck off Diogenes.