So yesterday I had a strange conversation, of sorts, with blabby FeMRA videoblogger Karen Straughan, aka GirlWritesWhat, via private message on Reddit.
Given that, in the recent WoolyBumblebee controversy, she put herself in the position of defending Men Going Their Own Way against WBB’s mostly accurate attacks on them, I found myself wondering what she might think of my post yesterday on the MGTOWers who felt it was appropriate to let a four-year-old-girl drown because she might grow up to be the next Betty Friedan or even the next — gasp! — Amanda Marcotte.
I was especially interested in what she might have to say about MGTOW elder Zed, the friend and mentor of her A Voice for Men boss, Paul Elam; in the MGTOWforums discussion, you may recall, he was firmly in the “don’t rescue little girls” camp.
So I asked her about that, and asked why she was defending MGTOWers when so many of them don’t even think women should be part of the Men’s Rights movement at all.
Here’s some of what she wrote back:
You seem to be deliberately trying to evoke an outrage in me. First, Zed, “Paul E’s mentor and idol” would not save a child he doesn’t know. Then “MGTOWers…don’t actually think women should be part of the MR movement…”
Do you think I should be expected to die to save a boy I don’t know? Speaking as someone who almost died once to save my son and my nephew, why should I be expected to potentially leave my children orphans to save someone else’s kid? And the truth is, I wouldn’t be expected to do that. In reality, no one would have blamed me if I had chosen not to nearly drown to save my own kid and my sister’s kid. I like your quote mine: Men shouldn’t rescue 4 year old girls… Not what it actually is: Men shouldn’t sacrifice their lives or health to save 4 year old girls they don’t know or have reason to care about…
It’s an interesting way she’s chosen to, well, reframe the issue. Zed didn’t say he was only talking about situations where the rescuers life would be at risk. He said, simply and categorically:
When a female is in trouble, if I don’t know her, I don’t see her.
After demanding that I denounce a random radical feminist who said something terrible, she moved on to my second question, though not without accusing me of “needling” her by pointing out that MGTOWers hate women. Or, as she prefers to look at it, they don’t “trust” women.
Do I have to list every single psychological lever you’ve attempted to apply in this message? Do you really think I’m going to react like a typical woman? “OMG, those MGTOWs don’t trust women!!! And that means they don’t trust me! I am a herd animal! I am incapable of ignoring naysayers! I can’t stand the fact that perhaps somewhere, someone doesn’t appreciate me!!! How dare they express themselves if it will hurt a woman’s feelings???????”
Woah, there. I think that might have been a bit more revealing than you intended it to be.
So your definition of “typical woman” is “herd animal?” I’ll take “internalized misogyny” for $1000, Alex.
Instead of me asking, “Why would I need anyone’s permission to make videos and assist a movement I believe in? Why would I take it as a personal failing that a man would not risk his life to save my child when I would not potentially orphan my kids to save the kids of some random person? Why would David Futrelle think my outrage over what a handful of MGTOW say about women in the movement should outweigh my own principles?”
Uh, you don’t need anyone’s permission to make your videos. Jewish people don’t need anyone’s permission to start making videos glorifying Adolph Hitler. Black people don’t need anyone’s permission to make videos on behalf of the Klan.
The question is why do you want to? Not just: why are you willing to make videos on behalf of a Men’s Rights movement driven by misogyny. But why are you willing to defend and make excuses for MGTOWers who not only hate women in general but hate you personally?
Why are you willing to lie — apparently even to yourself — and pretend that they don’t really hate women — that, really, it’s just that they don’t “trust” women because some awful woman has hurt them, or because some mean feminist said something insulting about their favorite video game, or whatever the excuse is.
And if you have any doubt that most MGTOWers really and truly hate women — hate hate HATE them — I invite you to read through the archives here. I suggest you start with MGTOWer extraordinaire Christopher in Oregon, and then move on to the posts dealing with MGTOWers in general.
And if you doubt that MGTOWers hate you, you personally, just go down to MGTOWforums, the biggest MGTOW hangout around, and take a look at the threads devoted to AVFM. A lot of the guys there hate AVFM with a passion — and they hate it largely because Paul give a platform to you and other women.
For someone so obsessed with me, you sure don’t know a lot about me.
Huh, wouldn’t that sort of suggest that maybe I’m not actually that obsessed with you?
From what I do know about Straughan (not much) this seems to be a standard ploy she pulls whenever someone calls her on her shit — to try to throw them off-balance and put them on the defensive by declaring them “stalkers” or “obsessed,” as she did with spermjack_attack, a Redditor who’s done some amazing takedowns of GWW posts and videos in recent days, like this one.
I responded by pointing out that
I often write about MRAs. You’re a prominent MRA, so sometimes I write about you. I should probably write more, given that you’re kind of a big fish in your tiny pond, but your videos are so fucking tedious and slow I can’t bear to watch them.
Which is true. That’s why, despite all the attention she gets from her MRA fanboys, I’ve written only three posts about her — compared with seven about the comparatively less important but much more entertaining Christopher in Oregon, mentioned above. Well, this will make it four posts about her.
Anyway, I also called her out on her evasive answer about Zed, so she tried again, this time with a new evasion:
Zed said categorically, “When a female is in trouble, if I don’t know her, I don’t see her.” Let’s parse that. He would not intervene. Why should he be expected to? Do you have any idea how small the burden is on women to intervene? If a woman were being assaulted and a female witness didn’t intervene, would this be shameful? How about if a man were being assaulted?
That’s an odd way of “parsing” it, since in context it was abundantly clear that he wasn’t just talking about adult women being assaulted. He was specifically talking about little girls. The whole point of his argument, which he repeated several times, was that he didn’t want to help little girls because, as he put it, they might “grow … up to be another Amanda Marcunt, or Jessica Valenti, or Betty Friedan.”
Karen, you can pretend he was talking only about adult women, but he wasn’t.
You can pretend that MGTOWers don’t hate women, but they do.
You can pretend whatever you want about the movement you’ve attached yourself to, but guess what — everyone outside of that movement can see it for what it is.
Most of the rest of her comment was devoted to trying to prove how “obsessed” I am with her.
If you are curious about me and why I might involve myself in a movement you believe hates women, you might concede I’d be curious about you and why you involve yourself in a movement that I believe hates men (or masculinity, take your pick). And yet how many times have I initiated contact with you? How often do I devote entire blog posts or videos to you?
Perhaps I’m measuring you by my own yardstick. Because as curious as I am as to why you would ally yourself with a movement whose foundational ideology is hostile to men (no matter how mainstream or seemingly benign), as much as I might lie awake wondering what motivates you, I am simply not obsessed enough by the question to PM you and ask. Or to read your blog (even when you’re talking about me). Or to devote entire blog posts to you.
If I messaged you over anything regarding that, I would consider myself obsessed with the psychological dysfunction represented by you. So you messaging me indicates (to me) a level of obsession on par with that. If you are the type of person to initiate private contact with people you consider opponents on a regular basis, then I’ve misjudged you.
Yes, I confess, sometimes I ask questions of my ideological opponents, publicly or privately, in hopes of getting an interesting response. I certainly got some revealing answers, and even more revealing non-answers, from Straughan.
And it was definitely more interesting than watching one of her videos.
Oh, and for some reason, before she closed up the debate, she decided she wanted to talk about Mary Daly, of all people, whom she seems to think has never been criticized by any feminists ever except for one by the name of, uh … Dr. Mindbeam? No, that’s really what she thinks. Apparently, in GirlWritesWhat-land, it was one big feminist love-fest for Mary Daly up until Dr. Mindbeam came along in 2011 and wrote a blog post.
Mary Daly’s body was long cold before some random internet feminist named Dr Mindbeam finally excommunicated her on “no seriously, what about teh menz?” I haven’t seen any feminists who write under their real names do so.
Maybe you could educate me.
I mentioned Audre Lorde’s open letter to Daly calling her out for racism back in 1979. I suggested she Google “Mary Daly” and “transphobe” and read through some of the results. Might take a while, as there are 5000 of them.
But I’m not sure how one can “educate” someone like her, someone who has declared herself a “gender theorist” and who makes endless half-hour or even hour-long videos on feminism, without bothering to learn even the rudiments of feminist history first. (Lesson One: Feminists often disagree with each other.)
It would be like someone declaring themselves an astrophysics theorist, then declaring “the moon is a potato! I’ve seen no evidence indicating otherwise. If you think you know better, educate me!”
Her understanding of feminism seems stuck at the “moon is a potato” level, and I just don’t think there’s anything any of us can do about it.
Oh, was he in Buffy? I know the name Spike, but never watched the series and don’t know the actor at all. Last US fiction series I watched was ER, and I quit that the minute Alex Kingston left. British telly is my go-to and then only when it’s on the ABC (no ads), or Ken Burns’ latest on SBS.
Replying to several people in this one long wall of text. (Sorry for wall of text.)
@kittehserf and that’s a totally valid point re the housing commission. My point is that people should be ALLOWED to own property/housing.
I also agree with you that too many people with ugly prejudices would harm others with the way they allocated their tax dollars. I just don’t like coercion. Of anybody. At all ever. BUT I also understand that there are a bunch of people who just frankly do not care about other people. I just wish people in general were better. I also agree with those who have either stated outright or implied here that a lot of people who claim to be libertarian arent’ so much concerned with the morality of coercion as they are “people who don’t wish to share their toys”.
@Dvärghundspossen that’s a very good point also about how SOMEBODY owns your house besides you most of the time unless you have a lot of money. (re: banks)
@pecunium yes I realize it can’t work in real life (allocating tax funds). Again, just wish so many people weren’t such unrepentent shitheads. I’m not sure why it’s so hard to care about other people or why it’s necessary for people to seek to control each other in such harmful ways or at all. The problem with any system I think is that human beings run it. Human nature isn’t really that pretty, though I am happy there are so many people who DO care about others.
re: No tax dollars can be used to fund abortion… either many pro-lifers don’t know that, or they are flat out lying. Because I’ve talked with SO many of them who seem to think that they are having to pay for other people’s abortions. This is one of their major talking points. Of course they ALSO seem to think that women routinely sit around being pregnant until the last minute just so they can “kill a baby” that looks more like a baby. So clearly they don’t logic.
@Howard Bannister are you sure pro-lifers KNOW that “defunding Planned Parenthood” is NOW defunding birth control and healthcare? And that abortion has already been defunded? If so, what the hell is WRONG with these people? I was raised in a very conservative Christian home, and I can say that most evangelical Christians are basically nice people who are manipulated a LOT. The pro-life position plays on sentimentality and sensitivities to “babies”. Everything is a lot of lies and manipulation and I’m pretty sure they do not acknowledge that abortions have already been defunded. I’m not sure how your average fundamentalist who has been trained from birth not to ask questions is going to have the ability to seek out the information that will allow them to become better informed. They literally think that pro-choicers are a bunch of evil baby killers. Nuance is not part of their world.
@SittieKitty I also think that technically taxes are “stealing”, BUT I also would VOLUNTARILY pay taxes to support schools, roads, those in need, etc. The issue for me is an issue of consent. Things have an icky flavor to me when they are forced without consent. And saying “living in a country is consenting to everything they do to you” is completely untrue. But at the same time, there are so many backward and plain mean people that practically you can’t deal with people like that. IRL some amount of coercion is just about required for people not to be all dying and starving in the streets. It’s sad that on our own we are not that civilized.
Heh. Heh, heh. Owning property? That’s, like, what OTHER people do, right? Seriously, I can’t even afford a ROOM, owning a house is just absurd wish-fulfillment on par with owning a solid gold toilet.
You own IS, and trust me here, it’s far better “property” than most of the shit in this house.
My GODS! As I am sipping my father says you can’t fight the gov’n they have tanks, but when the natives get restless that’s no problem (knowing him, he doesn’t mean Native Americas but “those people” aka the people who’d check the black box on the r/mr survey question)
Whhhyyyyyy???
I’m going back to my data (as in upstairs, not away from y’all), it isn’t fucking bigoted.
@Argenti When you are talking about how to represent the data, what format are you thinking? Pivots?
I’m using infogr.am which is both pretty, and allows way more data in less space because of the ability to sort of layer data, here’s one of their current featured graphics, the men v women error chart is the layered sort that I mean.
http://infogr.am/1350496938-010506
Neat. Seems like an internet friendly pivot table. I… use them all the time at work, so much so that I probably tend to jam all sorts of data to pivots. (I am totally biased)
It seems like Venn Diagrams might be the easiest way to display some of your data.
Are you political? Are you religious? This is venn diagrammable for binary answers but I don’t know if it is supported. Also, I forgot this was a range of answers. oof.
Overlappling line chart for the raws, then another chart for correlations?
Also, you could put up some small levels of analysis and the anonymous data for continued improvement?
I am a bit more of a mechanic than a theorist in this. I might be relatively useless without seeing the data.
I’m not sure Venn diagrams will be much use because they tend to be very qualitative; you can show “there’s overlap” or “there’s no overlap” but the weird shapes make it hard to tell how much of something there is.
“Overlappling line chart for the raws, then another chart for correlations?”
Going to do line graphs, was debating on the correlation but it came out to .15~ so yeah, there isn’t one to speak of.
I can’t do Venn, but the little people widget thing has another option that’s size comparison circles. No overlap, but that same X is bigger than Y thing.
As for putting up the data, got a random number generator or a text book with the chart? Give me <100 and I'll stick it on google docs, will have to be a couple pages, it already yelled at me once about the number of columns and that was just the current religion header row!
You end up having to label them. So they can give you a quick qualitative feel for the data but have to read them anyway. (it’s not all that different from line graphs though.)
RE: opium4themasses
AUGH PIVOT TABLES. Must… repress… traumatic memories of work… gnyaaagh. (I’m joking. They weren’t so bad. My brain has apparently just dumped most of the tables and such I learned while there.)
Karalora:
Obviously, with proper Galtian self esteem they would say they jumped into orbit, so yeah, probably some self esteem problem there.
@LBT Pivot tables are soooooooo much nicer than crazy fucking massive and slow spreadsheets. Plus, I tend to put the data in a database and then use queries to call the data into a Pivot so that I can reduce file size.
At the age of 36 everything I’ve seen and experienced supports just about everything that Karen Straughan talks about… What is sooo cool is that I was such a loser that never got any attention in my youth.. an now I’m an old “creepy” man teehee Awesome. Very glad that instead of fretting over venn diagrams and charts, or diaper rash -I am preparing the flight plan, cg load of the flight for my 3 month vacation Yaayy!! :{)>
Thank you very much, I was looking for a site that might help me understand why I am some sort of cockroach. I would like be proud of being a good person but its seems like men cannot. Thank you for enlightening to me the qualities that make this site irrelevant. There is no reason to be proud of being a man apparently, you are only virtuous if you are a woman. Now I understand.
That one is actually a thing, not just from his biases–unlike the ‘tons of money available right now’ thing, which I’m pretty sure is his biases talking.
This is a cognitive bias–a little bit to do with the sunk-cost bias? I think? Not an expert, but people tend to undervalue anything they didn’t pay for, and over-value anything they paid even a nominal amount for.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-purchase_rationalization!
Argenti Aertheri, if I knew you IRL I’d send you a pie when you finished. But like a pie chart pie, with different flavors in different sections, for the sake of a cheesy pun.
bad puppy: re: No tax dollars can be used to fund abortion… either many pro-lifers don’t know that, or they are flat out lying. Because I’ve talked with SO many of them who seem to think that they are having to pay for other people’s abortions. This is one of their major talking points.
The answer is yes. Yes they are lying and yes they don’t know (because the ones who do know have lied to them).
@Howard Bannister are you sure pro-lifers KNOW that “defunding Planned Parenthood” is NOW defunding birth control and healthcare?
Yes. That’s what they want to do. Look at the, “moral principal” laws which are written so “religious” people can refuse to fill prescriptions for birth control meds.
argenti: Your father is wrong re gov’t (and tanks). It’s just the price to pay is steep (and very front loaded). There is a reason the AK family of rifles destabilised the colonial world.
Passive aggressive much? If you don’t care and we’re irrelevant, why are you commenting?
Men can be awesome, even just for being awesome men, just not men acting like assholes, like everyone documented on this site. hth.
RE: SittieKitty
No, you’ve got this guy all wrong! We men have been playing you for years. In actuality… WE ARE GIANT COCKROACHES, infiltrating from space! Hahaha, CHECKMATE FEMINISTS!
I’m not sure that applies so much in our case, since it’s a children’s program and therefore the participants aren’t the ones actually paying for it. And there are so many other factors that make it more complicated than “Pay and people will take it seriously,” such as:
-People who can’t afford even a nominal fee seem like they would take a free program very seriously, particularly if there aren’t many of them around.
-Expensive children’s programs aren’t necessarily taken seriously; rich people often enroll unwilling kids in such things for the prestige or so it’ll look good on their transcript.
-What’s nominal for one person is prohibitive for another; there’s no possible fee you can set that will allow everyone to participate but also encourage everyone to be serious.
Have you read this site? Do you understand the header?
What is up with the influx of pissy dudes who can’t read?
There’s also a significant know-but-think-it’s-not-real contingent who’s aware of the Hyde Amendment but think there’s some kind of loophole or something, like so.