Categories
a woman is always to blame all about the menz awesome feminism funny imaginary oppression incoherent rage men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misandry misogyny MRA nice guys video

Funny Men’s Rights Video Time!

Don’t worry, it’s not a video BY an MRA. It’s a video ABOUT MRAs. A little cartoon, to be specific, by Scott Benson, who has this to say about it on his Vimeo page:

A quick editorial cartoon about the intersection of self-pity, entitlement, rape, territoriality, misogyny and fear of women. You see it all over the place online in the form of Men’s Rights Activists (of whom there are a few reasonable non-misogynists), Men Going Their Own Way, Pick Up Artists, and dudes touting the “Red Pill”, because The Matrix is a good movie. Look any of these up if you have the stomach for it. These are extreme examples, but watered-down forms of these ideas are everywhere.

In lurking their blogs and youtube channels for a while, I’ve noticed that beyond the standard patriarchal chauvinism there is this deep fear of women – what they will do to me, how they will reject me, how they will use me, how they are changing society in a way that does not favor me, how they are making men into something I don’t like, how they are making themselves into something I don’t like, that they won’t give me what I want, and that they won’t give me what I think is rightfully mine. This goes beyond fear of feminism- this is fear of women at its purest. And that, to quote a puppet, leads to anger and hate. It’s sad.

Naturally, Benson had to close the comments to the video because of, you know, too much MRA.

He wrote more about it all on his Tumblr.

I was alerted to the video by various people, including Cloudiah, which reminds me to remind you all to go look at Cloudiah’s excellent Artistry for Feminism And Kittens blog.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

270 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
greendaywantsavatars
7 years ago

Section 5 has been used to arrest and/or prosecute (for example) religious campaigners against homosexuality, a British National Party member who displayed anti-Islamic posters in his window and people who have sworn at the police.

Okay, the only one I disagree with here is the arresting people who swear at the police (though like Kitteh’s said I’m 99 percent sure they could would arrest you if you swore at them without the law, too.

I mean, as far as I’m concerned, hate speech fuels hate crime. If everyone campaigns against homosexuality and then someone, fueled by a bunch of other people, goes out and murders a gay person, it’s not like it happened in a vaccuum. It happened in a homophobic world, where homophobic slurs were protected under the guise of free speech.

Kittehserf
7 years ago

It’s terrible how men’s inherent, inalienable right to tell sexist, racist, ableist jokes where and when they want is being undermined by ALL THE LAWS.

greendaywantsavatars
7 years ago

which commenting policy was this?

/either forgot or didn’t read original comment

I mean, it can’t be manboobz because practically the only thing will get you banned here is being a disgusting, vile turd who attacks people or pumps rape apologia/abuse apologia

unless I misremembered.

gelar
gelar
7 years ago

If you fart in public here, you are executed.

At least we have the Dealt-It Act, for legal recourse.

greendaywantsavatars
7 years ago

It’s terrible how men’s inherent, inalienable right to tell sexist, racist, ableist jokes where and when they want is being undermined by ALL THE LAWS.

Exactly why the founding fathers didn’t want women voting!

/sarcasm. also I think I stole this joke from somewhere, but I can’t remember where

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
7 years ago

Jill from Feministe and Melissa from Shakesville run the world, and they will impose their horrible “try to avoid saying things that might hurt someone’s feelings” comments policy on men like lensy via their army of government-funded cat assassins! You can’t blame him for being scared, poor thing.

greendaywantsavatars
7 years ago

Ah. :facepalm:

Kittehserf
7 years ago

“If you fart in public here, you are executed.”

Memo to self: don’t visit Canada. Make sure Fribbie never visits, either.

“army of government-funded cat assassins! ”

I want to see this. I also want to know why Dave hasn’t confessed to having a similar army. Have the Furluminati sworn him to secrecy?

Aaliyah
7 years ago

Jill from Feministe and Melissa from Shakesville run the world, and they will impose their horrible “try to avoid saying things that might hurt someone’s feelings” comments policy on men like lensy via their army of government-funded cat assassins! You can’t blame him for being scared, poor thing.

Next thing you know, they’ll be asking people to gain clear consent from people.

The world will turn to ashes.

katz
7 years ago

Just once I want one of these clueless people who show up asking a bunch of obnoxious questions to actually go “oh, that makes a lot of sense. You guys are totally right! Thanks!” and go away or hang around being reasonable.

Never. Happens.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
7 years ago

If you talk the cat assassins parachute into wherever you are and kill you. They’re like the SAS, but fuzzier.

Aaliyah
7 years ago

Oh dear, I just scrolled up and saw that shit lensman is saying.

I wish I had seen that sooner. X_X

Kittehserf
7 years ago

I used to work with an ex-Northern Ireland SAS major … and I can imagine a feline version of him!

Kittehserf
7 years ago

Okay, I’m off. Catch you later, all!

Aaliyah
7 years ago

Later, Kitteh!

Binjabreel
Binjabreel
7 years ago

@Aaliyah: hey! I’m in San Jose too! Lol, *and* I got my degree from uc Santa Cruz. Goddamn it, it was hot today in Cupertino.

lensman
lensman
7 years ago

I’m aware of the campaign to reform Section Five. I even bought the shirts. I am very glad that this law is finally being reformed in the UK. But at the same time, in countries such as mine those kinds of laws not only persist, but they are being expanded to include ideologies such as anarchism as potentially insulting and dangerous. So, yeah, it’s kind of personal.

The entire wall of text that was posted before was essentially a case about why those types of laws are totalitarian and dangerous, and I was immediately labeled as a sort of sexual insult apologist.

Somebody, anybody, please tell me where exactly in a what I wrote above did I say that women should be insulted or objectified. Please tell me where I specifically stated that a man is justified in objectifying and insulting a woman.

Let’s make things perfectly clear: women should be respected, women should not be judged on appearance and clothing, women should feel safe. They should not be objectified, or deliberately insulted and extra effort should be made to make them comfortable in environments that are male dominated.

Racial and sexist jokes or slurs are not OK, especially when you are in a place where you get to meet other people for the first time. It’s a really bad idea to behave like a pompous sexist asshole in front of people you hardly know and who can potentially affect your professional future. It’s also a really bad idea to be overly open and confide personal beliefs to relative strangers. That’s basic common sense.

At the same time, you might say something that you don’t feel is particularly offensive which can be, under certain circumstances be received as insulting by the other party. Maybe they are from a particular religious background or maybe they just had a bad day. Maybe it’s a slip of the tongue. There are times when you don’t intend to be offensive or insulting but, for some reason, you appear this way.

What do you do at a time like this? OK, so the Ada Initiative’s Code of Conduct has a reporting guideline which allows people to settle their differences before taking drastic action, but other “Zero Tolerance to Offence Offence” policies don’t have such niceties and immediately go for the nuclear option.

The point is this: making offence punishable in law and policy even when it’s made abundantly clear that it’s not intended opens a whole can of ugly worms since not only what people find offensive is highly subjective, but also creates a system that can be potentially abused by the powers that be.

Bee
Bee
7 years ago

Lensman, other people may have responses for you, but I’m just going to talk past you at this point. The US has a constitutional freedom of speech, where even assholes like the Westboro Baptist Church get to shout hateful things at soldiers’ funerals. I think it’s great that everyone here legally has the right to protest, and at the same time I think it’s awful that there are so many communities around me where it’s totally cool and expected for bros to say misogynistic and triggering things and then act like it’s women’s fault that we’re not laughing along with them. (And for straight people to say hateful things about gay people in front of gay people … etc. etc.)

So that’s what I care about. If what you care about is being thrown in jail because you blaspheme in the newspaper article you write, then we are talking about two very different things, and in fact you are now talking about something very very different than those DUI jokes you were talking about earlier.

And if you’re specifically upset about the potential harm of any zero tolerance policy, I’m just not sure how common it is that such a policy exists in a context where (1) one would not be clear on which jokes are unsuitable going into it, and (2) the topic of the joke would be such that the person would be harmed if they couldn’t address it. I mean seriously: How hard is it to hold off on the dick jokes for the period of one conference?

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
7 years ago

Troll decides to shoehorn pet issue into whatever conversation he can. Continues doing so after being called on it.

These guys need to start their own blogs.

Kittehserf
7 years ago

Lensman, you whined about blogs – Shakesville in particular, I think – having their own rules about what comments are permitted. You whined about not being able to make so-called lighthearted or well intentioned jokes. Blogs are PRIVATE spaces. The owners call the shots on what is and isn’t allowed. And on social justice blogs, it’s a fair bet that unacceptable comments are going to be sexist, racist or ableist. What you think is fine may not be in the perception of the people the jokes are about, or the owners of the blog. It’s their call, not yours, and protesting afterward doesn’t help.

And this has jack shit to do with government, so why did you leap to “but do you support laws like these, blah blah”? Oh yeah, because your first complaint was baseless, and it was time to move the goalposts.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
7 years ago

Poor thing, he was really hoping that he could shift from “rules at Shakesville” to “rules in society as a whole THEREFORE government censorship THEREFORE civil rights nightmare” and nobody would notice.

Jessay (@jessay)
7 years ago

Been taking a mental health week from the misandryfiles and came to check if this had been posted. Manboobz never lets me down.

Viscaria
Viscaria
7 years ago

I found some blogs you might be interested in, lensman:

The Beginning of History: European addiction with the extremes, Foreign Policy Association blog.

The Free Speech Blog.

I found these mostly at random and have no idea if they’re good sources but I’m just trying to get you started. I’m sure if you google “Section Five UK sucks” or “Greece hates freedom” you’ll find some even better ones. Anyway, go talk about your pet issue there, where it will be on topic.

Viscaria
Viscaria
7 years ago

Wow, what did I even do with the HTML there? The two links I intended to include work. The bit that is a borked link (“Foreign Policy Association blog) wasn’t even supposed to be a link at all.

Fibinachi
Fibinachi
7 years ago

http://xkcd.com/386/

It’s perfectly understandable to ban offensive language and jokes in special places where victims of offensive behaviour and sexual trauma congregate. You shouldn’t be making sexist and sexual jokes in feminist places for pretty much the same reason that you shouldn’t be making DUI jokes at a MADD meeting: it’s highly likely that those jokes will trigger painful memories and cause excruciating emotional pain to some very good people (in fact you shouldn’t be making any kind of joke there, period) . That’s basic human decency and common sense.

The problem arises when you actually want to codify this in law and public policy for all types of social interaction.

Let’s just say for the sake of argument that you and some friends go to a bar for and few drinks. You’ve had a few beers, you are getting buzzed and you decide to share a really funny joke about a drunk driver that you’ve read on the Internet in order to have a good laugh.

Right next to you, a person “X” is standing in line to order a drink. “X” recently lost a son in a “Drunk driving” incident about a month ago and is, understandably quite sensitive about it. Being behind you in line “X” can’t help but overhear the joke which triggers the crippling pain of loss inside and a breakdown occurs.

The management is called to deal with the situation. While you’re trying to calm “X” down, you’re informed that the bar follows a “Zero Tolerance to Offence” policy and you’re summarily thrown out, along with your friends.

Stop

It was was a statement unsaid by the Auditor present.

This inference relies on a non functional logical pathway. The conclusion reached is incompatible with reality

This is not a voice and we are not speaking.

Relying on the premise of telepathy to argue your premise is unfortunately not in order.

It took its anti-meglomania pills and fell away from omniscience…

… Sexist jokes and class jokes and race jokes and ableist jokes and up jokes and down jokes and bad jokes and good jokes and silly jokes and serious jokes and negative jokes are all well and good in the right environment. At that point, you have reached a good conclusion.

However, making jokes about drunk driving does is not necessarily a bad thing. It may be a little crass, but it doesn’t rely on the intrinsic characteristic of the person you are joking about, or the point of the joke really, being that someone else is weird and alien. Merely that they are drunk.

But that can be so much semantics.

Your premise falls about for this reason:

It is impossible to know what other people are thinking, or have experience, without asking them, or without in some way being informed. This person X, suffering this breakdown, is not in the right to demand to have you banned. In no part of this example did person X take a moment to state “My son was recently lost in a drunk driving accident, and any jokes about them causes me incredible pain”.

You are not responsible for the internal mental state of person X, and you are allowed to make the jokes you wish to make. This is, indeed, what we call free speech. Further, the establishment has “Zero Tolerance to Offence” rules, but you were not actively trying to offend. You were having a conversation about something unrelated to your companions, about no one present in the room, engaged in a subject matter where you were talking about something that really has no malice or ill intent leveraged against anyone. A good litmus test is: “Could this subject have been “potted plants”?”

Again, you are not responsible for the internal mental state of other people, but you are responsible for not causing them undue harm, or consciously trying to mess with that state. I happen to have traumatic memories associated with latex swords, but I don’t scream at any roleplayer I meet in the street. And I don’t demand them banned, because I know my personal life doesn’t reflect theirs – it’s not all about you, basically.

In this situation, Person X is supposed to tell the management: “I am crying because I recently lost my son, and person Y told a joke that reminded me of this”. If the breakdown is so severe that that is impossible, then everyone waits and tries to get that person help.

Your responsibility in this situation is to go “I did not know, I apologize, and me and my mates will obviously not repeat, or make any of these jokes again, with you present”.

The management, furthermore, cannot kick you out because they took offense if you were not trying to be offensive, not because you *were not*, because you were, but you were offensive unconscionably, with no deliberate malice, and no intention and being so, and the moment you found out, you sat the fuck down and told person X how sorry you were and you did not repeat the damn joke or any variation of it.

Now try again. You are standing in line, and up ahead is person X, a redhead. You tell your mates that you would totally slip that nice ass a roofie. She hears you, and is quite upset, because just recently, someone did in fact slip her a roofie and the consequences of that are best explored in raunchy paper novels.

You tell me here, what’s the difference?
What parameter of your interaction has suddenly changed?

To sum:

Your intentions are nice, but one cannot play dice
by assuming that one thing is the same as any other
it’s quite a bother
when you equate rape and drunk driving
as there were no scant different
and that nuances were as impossible as compromising

lensman (@l3nsman)
7 years ago

Just to be perfectly clear, what sort of laws and policies I am opposing here, because I want to believe that this huge mess is a case of me not making my position understandable…

Under Paragraph 1 or Article 353 of the Greek State Law anyone who commits something that can be conceived as an indecent act and causes public upheaval is subject to a prison sentence up to 2 years.

Paragraph 2 is even worse: Anyone who does anything that insults the sensitivities of somebody else and which can be conceived as offensive is subject to a fine and a prison sentence of up to six months.

The laws don’t specify what can be offensive. Basically anything that insults you and can be conceived as an offense, no matter how miniscule is punishable.

These laws are the main reason why up until recently no Gay Pride Parades happened in Greece, why the Greek Association of Women couldn’t stage protests, and why Greek politicians can bully independent anarchist news sources such as Anarchist Webpage Indymedia and the Unfollow magazine.

greendaywantsavatars
7 years ago

@Lensman

okay, so those laws aren’t good unless I”m misunderstanding. That doesn’t mean there can’t be laws against hate speech without things turning into 1984 or w/e…

What I’m talking about: Hate. Speech. not offense.

titianblue
titianblue
7 years ago

and @Lensman, possibly the reason you are getting a bit of a negative response to your posts is that this is not a blog about free speech or hate speech lasw. Here, we mock misogyny.

Viscaria
Viscaria
7 years ago

I want to know why lensman refuses to help me find a Boerboel. I knew it! You support anti-Boeboel legislation, don’t you??! *Flails dramatically*

Myoo
Myoo
7 years ago

@lensman

It’s a really bad idea to behave like a pompous sexist asshole in front of people you hardly know and who can potentially affect your professional future.

It’s a really bad idea to behave like a pompous sexist asshole, period. (oh no, I said period, the Feminoverlords are going to get me)

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
7 years ago

I WANT TO TALK ABOUT MY PET TOPIC! WHY WON’T ANYONE TALK ABOUT IT WITH ME NO MATTER HOW MANY DIFFERENT COMMENT THREADS I TRY TO SHOEHORN IT INTO? YOU ALL WANT TO LIVE IN A FASCIST DYSTOPIA!

hellkell
hellkell
7 years ago

lenstroll: we understand you fine. You’re just an asshole.

Falconer
7 years ago

Is this where we talk about pet topics? Because I really want to see if what my cat does is normal.

Falconer
7 years ago

On a joyful note, Beloved says one of our cats paid attention to one of our babies yesterday, by rubbing and sniffing, at least until her food bowl was filled.

pecunium
7 years ago

lensman: Are you actually OK with laws that give the police extra power to arrest people on a whim based on something that was said or allegedly said?

How do you come up with this shit?

Falconer
7 years ago

It’s that much-ballyhooed reading comprehension everyone says we need to work on, I reckon.

Argenti Aertheri
7 years ago

Falconer — your house is just an offensive den of cute currently huh? I find this very offensive as I only have a cat next to me, no twins! (And she’s eating wet dog food and omgs the smell is honestly offensive)

I’m joking of course (except about the wet dog food, this shit is vile)

katz
7 years ago

Lensman, I just want you to know that you’re allowed to post about hate speech laws on anti-anti-manboobz, this blog’s evil knockoff, anytime you like.

Chances of contracting an accidental demon possession and/or opening a portal to Hell are low.

Kittehserf
7 years ago

Pictures, Falconer! Pictures of kitties and babies!

Argenti, I’d keep the cat away from dog food. Dogs are safe eating cat food, but not vice versa.

lensman (@l3nsman)
7 years ago

@viscaria

You misunderstand me! I am not anti-boerboel! I just don’t support legislation that says they should be euthanized for barking too loud at night!

@fibinachi

Hey! I love this cartoon as I get into this sort of mentality loads of times.

Personally, I prefer this version:

http://shimmie.katawa-shoujo.com/post/view/2570

(Warning! While this page and image is SFW, the rest of the Shimmie is not!)

Your point is perfectly clear. You are right and I am wrong; the reason the Ada Initiative’s Code of Conduct works is because it provides a sort of leeway for people to talk things out when something offends somebody else. The reason why laws like “Section Five” and “Article 353” don’t is because they directly fine you and send you straight to jail.

I support things like the Ada Initiative’s Code of Conduct, I don’t support laws like “Article 353”. Again this is a point I should have made that clear from the start, and for this I apologize to everyone.

The thing is, while I can see the AICC working in places like PyCon and SkepCon, I frankly can’t see it being applicable in places like ComiCon, and AnimeCon due to the fact that sexualization of women (fanservice, skimpy outfits, sexy cosplay etc) and men (burly muscular heroes, bishounen heroes, fujoshi comic books etc) is an integral part of the culture there, and there is a far bigger percentage of sexually impressionable teenagers attending. I can definitely see it being adopted, I just can’t see it actually working well at least as well as it’s working in places like PyCon and SkepCon.

Furthermore, while I can definitely see why banning sexual insults and jokes is essential in places like the workplace, PyCon, Skep-Con, the Manboobz forums, and Shakesville, I don’t know if AICC types of policies can be applied everywhere. The AICC requires some sort of authority to report and settle things in case of offense and searching for it is not always possible or practical (not to mention you will waste a significant part of your valuable time).

Ulrika Jonsson, a famous English attractive female comedian once recalled a story about how she was passing by a construction site and the builders started cheering and making suggestive comments. One of the workers shouted “OI! COME AND SIT ON MY FACE!”, to which Ulrika shouted back “WHY? IS YOUR NOSE BIGGER THAN YOUR WILLY?”. At which point the rest of the workers got their attention off Ulrika and started laughing hard at their co-worker, who actually had to remove himself from the construction site, due to shame.

Seriously, that was empoweringly awesome!

I realise that what Ulrika did is not always possible. It’s not possible for a woman to answer back when it’s her boss making suggestive comments and it’s not possible for a black man to answer back when it’s his employer that makes racial jokes – which is why it’s so important to have clear and strict sexual/racial harassment laws in the workplace. I also realise that the vast majority of women are not willing to directly confront and publicly shame their harasses in the same way that Ulrika did. Not every woman is a comedian.

But… What if more women actually start to answer back this way? What if a webpage existed that catalogued the sexual suggestive comments, lines, and jokes women are subject to and people collaborated to create effective counter-insults for them? In short, what would happen if every woman was a comedian?

Again, to make myself perfectly clear: I am not opposing something like the Ada Initiative’s Code of Conduct, I am just suggesting that while feminism is pushing for these kinds of things, it should also work on teaching women how to effectively verbally defend themselves when something like the AICC is not present or applicable.

*Such a site probably already exists, but googling “stock answers to sexual insults” gave nothing of the sort. Still, if it doesn’t, I am perfectly willing to put my money where my mouth is and work on such a project if any one of you nice people is willing to give me a hand.

Kittehserf
7 years ago

You’d have to undo all the conditioning that women must be nice, must not answer back, that inhibits a lot of us. You’d have to assume everyone is capable of witty repartee in the first place. You’d have to undo the reality that when we do answer back, we’re putting ourselves at risk, whether of verbal harassment turning abusive or actual physical harm.

Argenti Aertheri
7 years ago

First, what kitteh said. Second, it’s just plain different when it’s a construction site in broad daylight — oh sure they’re assholes, and women are conditioned to just deal with it, but the risks of yelling back are minimal, dude isn’t likely to escalate past more verbal harassment with his peers looking on. But yeah, even there, you could easily end up facing a whole bunch of them doing the “what a bitch” routine (I swear assholes have a script, ignore them or yell back and they get all “BIIIITCH!!!!!”)

…and let’s just not touch the potentionally consequences of a genderqueer person or trans* woman having the situation escalate to assault a la groping. *shudders at what that sort would do if they discovered the dangly bits weren’t what they expected*

So yeah, the risks vary wildly. You might get his peers to laugh at him, or you might end up another murdered trans* person when his groping finds genitals he wasn’t expecting (and I’m relatively safe here, even with my best attempts at androgynous what you’d find in my nether regions is what you’d expect [annoying, but safer, I’m not even going to pretend I don’t have a level of privilege that trans* women of color don’t])

But I’m nesting my parantheticals and no one wants to sit through another rant about the murder rate of trans* women of color…TRIGGER WARNING, the answer to that stat is below

It’s something around 10x the general murder rate. /off topic rant

Kittehserf
7 years ago

There’s also the question of why it should be on the victim of harassment to turn it aside with repartee or whatever. Is it really so difficult to think the harassment shouldn’t happen in the first place, and that the people doing it are the ones who need to be taught to change their behaviour? What sort of douchebag “needs” to be doing this in the first place?

Besides, this is setting up yet more victim-blaming. Didn’t use the stock lines to respond to harassment? It’s your own fault, then. Didn’t deliver them in just the right way, and found the harassment escalating? Your fault.

If you don’t think this is what would happen, you’re kidding yourself. It already happens. “Why didn’t you do this? Why didn’t you say that? I’d have told him what he could do with himself!” is something victims of harassment and worse hear all the goddamn time, not to mention the message women get all the time that “it’s a compliment!” or “you shouldn’t go out dressed like that!” or “stuck-up bitch!” and so on and so on.

Kittehserf
7 years ago

Ninjaed by Argenti! And I was totally stuck in cis woman’s perspective, too. 🙁

Argenti Aertheri
7 years ago

Oh and lensman, for the sake of clarity, can you set both your emails to use the same pic? Just a request, but it’d make it easier to follow conversation with you, my brain keeps going “wait…who’s replying to what?”

I’m rubbish without the gravatars! Hell, I’m still trying to get used to lowquacks’s new bird!

Argenti Aertheri
7 years ago

Speaking of lowquacks, sex related jokes (not sexist, sex related) totally happen here. Kitteh and I both probably made it weird when he described his typical wardrobe.

Sorry lowquacks, didn’t mean to make it weird!

lensman (@l3nsman)
7 years ago

@Kittehserf

This is why I put the word “while” in italics.

I am not suggesting that something like the Ada Initiative’s Code of Conduct should be side-stepped or abandoned.

What I am suggesting is that we create a webpage which can give women a resource to learn witty repartees and verbally fight back at sexual insults whenever it’s safe and possible.

Kittehserf
7 years ago

You mean that time a few months back (I think) when we both slunk off to the Weird Person’s Corner of Shame?

I remember that with mixed embarassed-for-my-potential-weird-creepiness and pleasure for the image of style!

lensman (@l3nsman)
7 years ago

@Argenti and Kittehserf

Sorry, couldn’t read while posting.

Points taken

…Still… It’s a cool idea for a website…

shuthismouth.com would have been awesome…