Categories
a voice for men a woman is always to blame antifeminism crackpottery homophobia misogyny MRA oppressed men rape culture that's completely wrong

A Voice for Men UK: All Women Are Homophobic (If We Can Just Make Up Our Own Definitions for Words)

You keep using that word. I'm not even going to bother with the rest of this quote.
You keep using that word. I’m not even going to bother with the rest of this quote.

If you ever need proof that Men’s Rights Activists live in a world of their own, check out this, er, argument, found in a posting on A Voice for Men UK, the official British franchise of the American hate site we know so well :

All women are homophobic.

Whether the men being prejudiced against are gay or not is kind of beside the point – after all, ‘homo’ = man, ‘phobia’ = fear, therefore: ‘homophobia’ = Fear of Man – but, if you want to quibble over Greek & Latin etymology, perhaps we can at least agree on this: all women, to a greater or lesser extent, display the ‘symptoms’ we attribute to said condition: overt caution, fear &/or disdain of men.

Yep, that’s right. In order to find an excuse to call women “homophobic,” they’ve invented an entirely new definition for the word not based in any way on the actual etymology of the word “homophobia” (which is of course derived from “homosexual”) but on something they’ve just made up.

By this logic, the word “homosexual” would not mean “of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex” but rather “man sexual.” If we take this to mean “attracted to men,” this would suggest that all straight women with sex drives would therefore be homosexual as well. Brilliant, A Voice for Men UK.

The author of the post then uses this weird logic to make excuses for actual homophobia among straight men:

Female ‘homophobia’ is so normalized in our society that treating every man you meet like ‘Schrödinger’s Rapist’ is considered an ordinary, common sense fact of life – just so long as you are a woman. But if a man feels at all uncomfortable around another man sexually, he is presently branded an evil bigot for behaving the way all women do at all times.

A Voice for Men: they reject your reality, and substitute nonsensical unreality that allows them to say bad things about women.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

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

269 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Argenti Aertheri
7 years ago

The per annul rate, figured as an average of the lifetime rate, could easily be less than the 12 month data. It’d probably be fairly close, but if the last year was on the high side of the average it could happen without making me question wtf is wrong with the data (or the people reporting it)

Robert — read the transcript, it’s a laugh a minute.

Falconer
7 years ago

All those women UofL students oughta thank Tom Martin for getting comfy chairs into the library for ’em.

Falconer
7 years ago

I mean, I’m sure he’d appreciate that /snark

Marie
Marie
7 years ago

@kim

This is impossible! Does it mean that hard chairs, are not, in fact, misandry?

Argenti Aertheri
7 years ago

Kim — *dies* it’s science!

And that’s real.

——

FTR, I only said that rape via penetration may not be traumatic enough to recall long term because it’s the option that breaks the math the least. And even that doesn’t fully account for it since some none null amount of rapes via penetration are recalled long term and it really should add to more than the 12 month data unless it drops to 0% recall at some point (or, I suppose, very nearly zero soon enough after), which just doesn’t make logical sense. Like, if 0.1% of men recall it at 14 months, unless it drops to literally 0% (which is not a thing), then lifetime would have to mean about 7.25 years for it to remain under the 12 month data. Hell, if lifetime means, say, 60 years, and the 5% drop is anything resembling accurate, then recall would have to drop to ~0.001% fairly quickly for the lifetime data to be lower.

Theoretically possible, but so unlikely that I’m more likely to be killed by a meteor before hitting post.

Argenti Aertheri
7 years ago

To put this in perspective, for the lifetime data to actually be lower, between 12-24 months after being raped via penetration, only 1 in every million men raped that way would recall it.

Which is quite obviously nonsense.

katz
7 years ago

Argenti: Shouldn’t lifetime studies (or any studies) take recall rate into account?

kittehserf
7 years ago

Kim – SCIENCE IS MISANDRY!

Falconer
7 years ago

The spring that just worked its way through the edge of my mattress is misandry.

Also misbuttry, and misknee-ry.

Ow.

Argenti Aertheri
7 years ago

Katz — eh, sort of. It should probably be noted, if that wouldn’t turn it into an incomprehensible mess, but actually factoring it in? No, that very quickly turns into an extrapolation nightmare (which, btw, is why them saying that 40% of rapists are women is wrong about six times over)

The data on perpetrators is lifetime — iirc 97%~ of men who reported being forced to penetrate we’re forced by a woman (which makes a fair bit of logical sense). But the data that puts male and female rape victims at a 50/50~ split is the 12 month data, with all the weirdness surrounding how that particular bit of data can be higher for the past 12 months than lifetime data. Extrapolating lifetime perpetrator data to 12 month victim data is a bit iffy. If the 12 month data made more sense on face value — the way the female data does — then I’d be relatively okay with it, one stable trend does suggest related trends are also stable. But the forced to penetrate data does the exact opposite of suggest a stable trend.

Also, as, amazing, was pointed out on that thread, that 97%~ is the number of men who said they were made to penetrate by a woman, and not a man or man and woman (iirc, and I’ve seen that study way too much cuz trolls love doing the 12 month thing, those are separate categories making up the remaining 3%~). Which doesn’t account for repeat rapes in either sense — neither people ramped more than once, nor repeat offenders. So “40% of people reporting being raped in the last 12 months were probably raped by a woman, assuming the lifetime data on perpetrator gender is consistent with the gender of perpetrators over the last 12 months”…which is so far removed from “40% of rapists are women” as to be laughable.

Even by me, and I usually twitch at bad math. This has cycled back into “okay, you really have no clue at all do you?”

Argenti Aertheri
7 years ago

Kitteh — close. Math is misandry, particularly statistics. As are conditional clauses. Both of which are very much at play here.

kittehserf
7 years ago

Almost everything is misandry, one way and another.

Shadow
Shadow
7 years ago

Almost everything is misandry, one way and another.

Ahh, you’ve taken the red pill I see.

Also, whoever said that the commenting problem happens when you sign in on a previously opened window seems to be right.

kittehserf
7 years ago

LOL I’m taking so many pills at the moment that there may well be a red one in there somewhere. 😛

Howard Bannister
7 years ago

I’d really want to see the way that question is worded.

Because 40% of women have initiated sex with somebody impaired by alcohol? Or 40% of women have initiated sex with somebody who’s been drinking alcohol? There’s a significant difference in the wording there.

Howard Bannister
7 years ago

I mean, for comparison purposes, the actual number of male rapists in the population, who admit to rape?

Between 4-8%.

So if 40% of women are initiating sex with people too drink to consent, and we assume multiple partners, then the number of men victimized ought to be approaching 100%.

Basically, this math is way the fuck wrong, and the reasons why just keep piling up.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
7 years ago

I’m not much of a stats person but something seems a bit off to me too, given how poorly the 12 month data is matching up with the lifetime data. It’s not that that’s impossible, it’s that you’d expect there to be something specific that would explain why there was such a big gap, and so far I haven’t seen anything.

(Something that’s not related to either data collection methods or math issues, I mean – for the gap to be that big there should be some sort of social factors explaining why either straight women started raping a lot more, or straight men started feeling more comfortable about admitting they were raped, some time immediately before or during the 12 month period where the data changed.)

Mysterics
Mysterics
7 years ago

If your gonig to be exceedingly pedantic about the meaning of ‘homophobia’ then it literally means ‘fear of the same’ or ‘fear of your own species.’

‘homo’ literally means ‘the same’ as in ‘homogenic.’

‘homo’ when used to refer to people ,does not actually mean ‘man’, it means ‘the same kind as me’ which can be shortened into our words ‘fellow’ or ‘kin’.

Alex
7 years ago

Catching up on various threads here, so I’m not sure if this is the one where Ally linked the “feminist shaming tactics” thing, but I think the next MRA I argue with, I’m just going to use every one of those all in one comment, like so:

You’re irascible. You have anger management issues. Whatever negative emotions you have are unjustifiable. You’re bitter! You need to get over your anger at women. You are so negative!

You coward. You have an unjustifiable fear of interaction with women. You need to get over your fear. Step up and take a chance like a man! You’re afraid of a strong woman!

You hypersensitive crybaby. You’re hysterical and exaggerating the problems of men. You’re playing Chicken Little. Stop whining! Get over it! Suck it up like a man! You guys don’t have it nearly as bad as us women! You’re just afraid of losing your male privileges. Your fragile male ego gets enough coddling as it is. Wow! You guys need to get a grip!

You’re a puerile Peter Pan. Your immaturity and irresponsibility reflect badly on your status as an adult male. Grow up! You are so immature! Do you live with your mother? I’m not interested in boys; I’m interested in real men. Men are shirking their God-given responsibility to marry and bear [wtf?] children.

I feel that you endanger me. Your threats have elevated. You’re a menace. You guys are scary. You make me feel afraid.

You’re just rationalizing with sour grapes. You’re trying to explain away your own failures and dissatisfaction by blaming women for your problems. You’re just bitter because you can’t get laid.

You guys are fanatic Brown Shirts. You subscribe to an intolerant and extremist ideology and you’re devoted to an ignorant viewpoint. You’re one of those right-wing wackos. You’re an extremist. You sound like the KKK. You just want more anti-feminist zaniness.

You’re not virile. I call your sexual orientation and your masculinity into question. Are you gay? I need a real man, not a sissy. You’re such a wimp.

You overgeneralize. You’re making generalizations and supporting unwarranted stereotypes about women. I’m not like that! Stop generalizing! That’s a sexist stereotype!

You’re a misogynist. You display unwarranted malice to women in general. You misogynist creep! Why do you hate women? Do you love your mother? You are insensitive to the plight of women. You are mean-spirited. You view women as doormats. You want to roll back the rights of women!!

Women will withhold affection. Your viewpoints and behaviour will cause women to reject you as a mate. No woman will marry you with that attitude. Creeps like you will never get laid!

You’re unstable. [avoiding ableist charge here] Emotionally unstable. You’re unstable. You have issues. You need therapy [unsure about this one, because many MRAs I feel could benefit from therapy, but I certainly don’t mean to link needing therapy with being an asshole, as I’ve had therapy on several occasions]. Weirdo!

You’re selfish. That’s self-explanatory – it’s why you do not want to be bothered with romantic pursuits. You are so materialistic. You are so greedy.

You’re superficial. All-that-glitters-is-not-gold. You’re mating preferences are superficial. If you didn’t go after bimbos, then you wouldn’t have a gold-digger problem. How can you be so shallow and turn down a single mother?

You’re unattractive. Look at that ugly tan. You have no romantic potential as far as women are concerned. I bet you are fat and ugly. You can’t get laid! Creep! Loser! Have you thought about the problem being you?

You’re defeatist. Your negative and guarded attitude about this situation sucks. You’ve just resigned yourself. Stop being so negative. You are so cynical. If you refuse to have relationships with women, then you are admitting defeat. C’mon! Men are doers, not quitters.

I suspect it might make for a good madlib too. I love how so much of it is actually usually things that some men say to shame women. Much of it, in fact, contradicts feminist belief (all the “man up” bullshit), and is unlikely to be something a feminist would say. A lot of it does actually apply to most MRAs we argue with. Sorry if they think being called out on their shit is a shaming tactic.

1 4 5 6