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.
I’m not a lesbian separatist, but this is a gross misrepresentation of lesbian separatism (I presume this is what you’re talking about). Lesbian separatism, as I understand its history, originated from the disillusionment towards the male-dominated US left wing. Leftist who claimed to be allies of leftist women violated a lot of women’s trust by erasing gender analysis from anti-capitalist critique, silencing women, talking over women, and overall being shitty to women who they were supposed to support and side with. In light of those troubles, some leftist lesbian women decided to formulate the ideology of lesbian separatism in order to address their own issues and live on their own without the interference of leftist male douchebags. It also extended, for many of these lesbians, to them deliberately avoiding men in general as a means of trying to avoid misogynist men, aware of their male privilege or otherwise. In short, they rejected male allies because too many of them were assholes. (There have been some exceptions, but that’s besides the point.)
I stress that I don’t completely understand the history of separatism in feminist/womanist thought, but I do know for a fact that your description of it is completely false. Maybe you should read some history of radical feminism and womanism before taking a peek of an Andrea Dworkin book and going all “OH NO SHE SAID ALL SEX IS RAPE!!”
That’s because MGTOW ideologies are inherently misogynistic. They all rely on misogynistic notions of women’s so-called biologically-hardwired behavior and sexual preferences. Just because it rests on scientific justifications (which in turn are complete bullshit). MGTOWs don’t stay away (or claim to stay away) from women because of a need for their own space and well-being; they stay away from women because they’re misogynistic assholes. No man is obligated to be around women, but men can do that without tacitly/openly accepting patriarchy in the process.
Don’t appropriate the word “rape” to describe something unpleasant, you creepy shithead. The fact that you specified the type of rape makes you even creepier. You’re not only trivializing the rape of non-men, but you’re also trivializing the rape of men. Fuck off.
MGTOW ignore one more vital fact: nobody wants to marry or live with them.
This is how pretty much all conversations between MGTOW and women go.
MGTOW – I quit!
Women – Didn’t we fire you last year?
MGTOW – Yeah, but you can’t fire me, because I quit! Bet you wish I’d come back now, huh?
Women – Actually we’ve already filled your former position. Also, how did you get back into the lobby? You were supposed to hand over your keys when we fired you. A year ago.
MGTOW – Fucking bitches trying to key-jack men all the time. See, this is why I quit!
Women – Security? Can you deal with this? He just keeps coming back.
How is protesting “females” not misogynistic?
How do you even protest a gender? Does Sid want me to stop identifying as female or something?
Okay, sure. That’s a bad term. I don’t think one can compare, side by side, getting sexually assualted / raped with getting one’s children torn out of their lives. Both are terrible things done by horribly wicked people.
@Ally S:
“That’s because MGTOW ideologies are inherently misogynistic. They all rely on misogynistic notions of women’s so-called biologically-hardwired behavior and sexual preferences.”
I said my sole reason for not wanting live-in female partners was marriage/common law politics, finances, materialism, debt tolerance, spending habits… these things are not only NOT misogynistic and could preclude friendship / social status with men or women, in groups or as individuals. A man or a woman could be a silly entitled spender. Yes, I can call a woman entitled without being a misogynist. My contrarian views on North American “bling” culture are very unpopular. Especially with secretaries with $2000 purses and men who work in mail-rooms paying $1000/month on a car lease and not having enough money for rent. I think most North Americans like to blame corporations for the financial collapse, but hey – 0 percent down / high-ratio mortgage, then get a HELOC so you can get his/hers Mercedes SUVs? Middle class people (too many of them) have an entitlement to too high of a living standard, sold to us by media, hollywoods, and the movie stars and singers we idolize. They are, don’t forget, millionaires so I don’t get why middle class working people (in my socio-economic demographic) would think they are entltied to this kind of lifestyle. Maybe calling my very specific reasons for avoiding specific types of relationships scenarios “MGTOW” is a stretch.
“Don’t appropriate the word “rape” to describe something unpleasant, you creepy shithead. ”
Okay, I’ll give it to you that – it’s usage in that conext is a derogatory term. But, like I said about, getting children torn out of your life is not a small deal. People will cry at movies when they see children being torn from parents during the Holocaust, yet it goes on every day in courts in North America and most people have a “meh” attitude about it. Sort of like their “meh” attitude about drunk driving until they are the ones putting flowers and candles on a curb somewhere to help deal with the loss of a loved one. It’s easy to “meh” when you’re not in the situation. Ironically, my ex-wife (the spendy girl) was repeatedly raped as a child, so I know about the effects of rape. I was the one who would wake up to a screaming half-asleep person punching me in the face and then would have to go console our crying children at 3:00AM. So, call me creepy all you want, people who know me know my stance on rape and child sex abuse. I also do things to make life difficult for sex abusers in my community (I won’t go into detail but it’s legal but kind of frowned upon stuff that might get me in trouble if the creep has the right lawyer). I’m a contrarian and a bit of a social activist and I get on people’s bad sides ALL the time. Old hat.
Just a note on the word “creepy”. People now use the word creepy to describe everything they encounter in their daily lives, and the word loses it’s meaning.
Example:
Guy uses your parking pass hanging on your mirror to figure out where you park. Very Creepy.
Guy leers are you every day from his table in the lunchroom but never talks to you. Creepy.
Guy asks you out for coffee but he’s nervous and not quite in your league. Not very creepy.
Guy doesn’t appeal to you so you call him creepy. Not at all creepy.
Yeah, creepy loses it’s meaning fast when it describes anything that makes a person uptight. And a lot of people I talk to about these subjects (feminism, relationships, humanities, etc.) seem to be uptight before their feet hit the floor in the morning.
But I love it. Especially when people combine “Creepy” into valley-girl vernacular.
Yeah, like… CREEPY. Yeah, totally. Like, totally CREEPY. (wow, just wow.) hahahhaa. Funny.
Maybe we could go to places where women are known to gather, like nail salons and boy band concerts, and walk around with incomprehensible yet offensive signs, like Westboro Baptist?
Nope, it’s still perfect for guys like you. Don’t like it? Quit being creepy, asshole.
And off is the direction in which you should be fucking with your dog-whistle bullshit about “bling” culture.
@Cassandra kitty. Women didn’t fire me. You can ASSUME that I’ve been rejected by half of the human population (females) but that’s just a fantasy that was borne of a construct inside of your head. I have all kinds of relationships with females. None romantic right now. And going forward, I don’t want to live with a woman again, because I can’t seem to find one that isn’t up to her eyeballs in debt looking for a guy to subsidize her lifestyle. Now, that’s just my personal experience in the “mating arena” with my set of looks, income, social skills, personality, etc. and of course, we all know NAWALT always applies right? I also know couples where the guy is the spendy fool and the female is cutting coupons. I think North American SOCIETY has gone stupid when it comes to debt tolerance and spending. But, as a man who was looking for a life-long life-partner deal, I was only looking at females spending habits because, well, I don’t plan to live with a guy, and if I did, he would not expect me to pay for his $100 worth of salon products or a $1000 LV handbag. And why they make those for men, I’ll never know…
@treehugger. I am not sure that I did that. I think what I did was say that most if not all women I’ve met are too spendy for me, and spend a disproportionate amount of income to what they bring to the table. I also stated (somewhere online) that my “rank” in the mating arena typically mean that I would be bringing home more of the bacon (typically). I do believe women are GENERALLY hypergamous and expect a man to bring home more bacon. I don’t really even have an issue with that. I do have an issue with her making half as much and spending ALL of the ‘discretionary spending money’ on herself, plus money that should be set aside for contingency and home maintenance. I guess I am trying to find a woman as frugal as me, but I don’t think this exists. Too bad for me. Materialism, overspending, excessive debt tolerance, exceeding ones means, these are North American societal traits – men are no better. And not all people get sucked into this. As a guy who was in a pair-bond relationship (Marriage) with a woman, the spending habits of other men didn’t impact me, and when I speak of looking for a partner, I speak of trends in spending habits of women, becuase I am not looking for a man to live with. I’ve lived with other men in platonic room-mate situations and nobody was expected to pay for the other person’s stuff. My brother and his wife have separate bank accounts and use “their own” money for discretionary spending after mortgage and bills are split. Some say “why be married” and I say it’s fantastic. The “why be married” people who condone putting the household income into one account are asking for trouble if one person spends more than the other, or the disagree on what things are priorities.
The only dude who can use “female” without putting my hackles up is Phil Lynott in “Jailbreak,” and he’s dead.
@hellkell. Hey. glad to be part of the sand in your internet vaseline today. I’m sure if it wasn’t me, anyone would do. If you can’t discuss things like an adult without ad hominem attack, I don’t consider you mature enough to talk to. But f*ck off yourself. The way you veiled saying that was kind of lame to. If you want to tell me to f*ck off, say it. It’s only online. It’s not like it’s in person or anything.
Dude, you were fired right here the very first time you showed up, and yet here you are, still pestering us. I’m not sure what sort of validation it is that you’re seeking, but you’re not going to find it here, or on any other feminist blog. I see your future, and it involves being made fun of a lot.
I know many people like you are the “language police” and “thought police” and the fact people have other ideas and opinions than you really gets your blood pressure up, but I consider that to be an issue individual people need to work on, and it’s not my problem.
Sid, honey, that was no ad hominem, so get your shit straight before you come at me with your weak misogynist “women be uptight” fuckery.
Troll is ringing all of the sexist, racist, homophobic, classist/libertarian alarm bells.
Yeah, I can’t imagine why you’re having trouble finding someone to date.
I’m the “scare quotes” police. I run around in a “sexy” uniform smacking people in the head with my “truncheon” when they “do this” because they’re “dumb and annoying”.
Can I be on the “scare quote” police force?
@Insidious_Sid
I don’t care about arguing that you are as misogynistic as all other MGTOWs. It will go nowhere since you refuse to fully analyze your own views. In any case, the vast majority of MGTOWs are misogynistic assholes. Even if you just happen to not be sexist, that won’t change the fact the most men under that label are.
[CN: rape, sexual harassment]
From my perspective, I wasn’t misusing the word “creepy”. I have a history of being sexually harassed, and many of those incidents happened in my early teenage years. Those forms of harassment include but are not limited to the following: graphic rape jokes about me being raped while drugged out, a likely pedophile describing to me – when I was a 12-year-old girl – how he’d imagine my first sexual experience, and men pressuring me to lose my virginity under their threats of misogynistic emotional abuse. So yeah, when I hear people use the term rape as a metaphor for misfortune, it creeps me the fuck out. It reminds me of the assholes in my life – men (and one woman) so frightening that I’ve had panic attacks thinking about them. That kind of history makes me pretty fucking sensitive to shit like talking about someone being described as having been figuratively “raped” by some supposedly oppressive system. I genuinely find such things triggering very often.
I’m not a fool. I can decide what is creepy and what isn’t. Don’t talk over me. Hopefully the fact that you claim to be an anti-rape activist means that you’ll take time to actually listen to what I said.
I’m just going to leave this here.
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lpsmymCgCJ1qgu8xqo7_500.gif
Why is Insidious Sod still here? Why won’t he take his here of teal deer and goes his own way?
That’s all I ask. If you’re going to go your own way, and then go out of your way to announce that on an old thread on a feminist mockery site where no-one really cares anyway, then why keep coming back with long spiels? Why not just go?
We here at the scare quotes “police” force are always happy to interview talented applicants. Please note that “talented” as a concept excludes anyone too stupid to realize when they’re being mocked.
I’ll send in my “application.”
You can call an individual woman who happens to be entitled that without being misogynistic.
When you generalize that to all women, you are a misogynist.
Yes you did
Maybe the reason you can’t find an independent woman who doesn’t expect men to earn all the money and shower her with gifts is because those women are feminists. Since you hate feminists, they are unlikely to find you attractive.
@Ally – I don’t think the troll meant lesbian separatists when he said feminists. I think he really meant to imply that all feminists are evil man-haters who spend hours trying to talk ‘right thinking’ females into abandoning their honeys.
http://www.harkavagrant.com/index.php?id=341
@all. If I am a troll, don’t feed me. Don’t reply. If you want to reply, debate fine. I’m not new to discussing hot topics with people on sensitive subjects.
@treehugger. I don’t hate feminists. Those are your words. Every couple in my circle of friends, the male makes more than the female. That’s my personal experience, and it’s valid. Hypergamy is a dirty word, but it exists. Women do “marry up” and societally they were expected to under the “old patriarchal society” but because it benefits them financially, it’s a dated cultural norm, and they can do it, well, they do it. I don’t have an issue with my rank in the sex-market and the fact most women I encounter that would consider me for a mate will probably make 1/2 to 2/3rd of my (six figure) income. No problem. The problem I have is when she spends more than our combined household income can allow.
I won’t agree that because a woman is a feminist she is fiscally responsible. I can imagine you think “feminists do all good” and “non-feminists do all bad” but that’s a distortion in your perception that you have to live with, not me.
I don’t think how spendy a person is is related to feminism at all, so if my desire to go my own way and exclude myself from living with women, because I feel it’s a bad financial deal for me (and traditionally it has been) then I simply won’t. And that has as much to do with feminism or misogyny as the color of socks I am wearing today.
Much like the rest of your life, you don’t get to set the tone here. You will be roubdly mocked, sir.