I think I have a new favorite MRA. Sorry, this one’s an MHRA, because he spends all his time hanging out on A Voice for Human Men. (Oh, it’s still just A Voice for Men? Then Why did they put that H for “Human” in that other acronym?)
Anyway, his name is Victor Zen. And according to Victor’s MHRA Resume — and yes he really does have one — he is quite an awesome MHRA, I mean, just consider these accomplishments:
AVFM Forum Moderator (4/7/2013-7/1/2013)
- Enforced AVFM policy in the AVFM forums
- Maintained unity in MHRA community
- Encouraged peaceful online activism
I mean, it totally sounds like he was one kickass AVFM policy-enforcing, MHRA-unity-maintaining, peaceful online activism encouraging moderator for nearly three months!
If I were hiring any MHRAs, I would definitely put Victor Zen’s MHResume (see what I did there) at the top of the virtual pile.
Oh, but that’s not all! Since then, Victor has been doing a bang-up job as AVFM Backup System Administrator, which I assume means he system administrates the hell out of AVFM whenever it backs itself into a corner, which it sort of does pretty much all of the time. (I think. I’m not really up on these sorts of technical things.)
But that’s not the part of Victor’s MHResume I want to celebrate today. For if you scroll down to the bottom you will find a list of his real accomplishments:
- First day as MHRA: December 5th, 2012
- Posters designed: 8
- Videos produced: 38
- Cartoons drawn: 18
- Articles written: 27
- YT Subscribers: 120+
Woah, woah, what’s that about cartoons?
That’s right, he drew EIGHTEEN MOTHERFUCKING CARTOONS. Not eight. Not eighty. EIGHTEEN.
That cartoon at the top of this post. That’s just a taste of just ONE of these EIGHTEEN cartoons.
You can can see the loving craftmanship — sorry, craftsMANship — he brings to the task.
Let’s take a look at the rest of them, which have been helpfully posted for us in a bunch of AVFM forum threads and on his own site. Be prepared for some violence and maybe a teensy bit of hate, because the TRUTH IS NOT PRETTY. Also, neither is his terrible drawing style.
Also, one of the cartoons features a talking vagina.
Here you can see the ironic conclusion to the story started in the two frames above, as well as an assortment of other cartoons posted under the heading Victor.Zen On Absurdity via Inequality.
And here is Victor.Zen On the MHRA’s Enemy.
And Victor.Zen On the Screech of Feminism.
And wait there’s more!
Victor has posted some of his favorites on his own site as well. (He starts with the vagina one; apparently he’s quite proud of his passing familiarity with that sexual organ.)
He’s got posters, too.
As well as an explanation for why the word “mangina” is totally not misogynistic, just like a simple descriptive term with no misogynistic overtones that means a dude who’s, you know, a “philogynic misandrist.”
A Phil a who now?
My stick-figure ninjas do not fistbump! They only kill!
Ahh, death by a thousand paper cuts. Your mastery shames me
@daintydougal:
That may be the case, but if so they’re still not using it right. We say a man is “thinking with his dick” when he pursues sexual gratification in circumstances where he probably shouldn’t – having extramarital affairs, heaping (non-sexual) favors on a good-looking woman who couldn’t care less about him, etc. MRAs use “‘gina tinglezzzzzzz” to denigrate women who pursue sexual gratification at all. All those foolish women who, um, have sex with men whom they, uh…find sexually attractive?
@LsdySunami
A lot of MRA thinking includes the belief that feminism is mainstream, or even dominant in Western culture, or that all women are feminists (the latter being a convenient way to hate all women while claiming to only hate feminism). When they see something wrong in our culture (like shipping thousands of young people, mainly men, off to die in wars), they assume that feminism/women are to blame. Their entire reality is filtered through the lens of anti-feminism.
@Lowquacks (et al)
To be accurate, that’s not a vagina, it’s a vulva. Drawing a vagina would be tough.
It’s so weird. It’s like me going, well, I really hate the religious right, so they must be responsible for the overuse of Photoshop in advertising! Since they control the world and all.
….did the Nice Guy stick figure have an orgasm after watching the jerky manly man pick up the mean lady? I can’t think of any other interpretation for that facial expression.
Ack, I made the same mistake, and I KNOW THIS. ::sentences self to write “a vulva is not a vagina” on the chalkboard 100 times::
It always makes me laugh when a celeb has a clothing malfunction getting out of a limo and people are all “you could see her vagina!”. Um, how? I mean I know it’s easy to zoom in and enlarge high-quality photos, but…
I realized yesterday that according to MRA standards, Rush Limbaugh is a feminist.
It’s ironic, MRAs constantly complain that you can’t criticize feminism because its goals are so vague (Not All Feminists Are Like That), so in response they managed to come up with a definition that I think pretty much all feminists would agree is wrong. I’ll never forget seeing Phyllis Schlafly described as a feminist. Uh. We don’t like her and she doesn’t like us.
For cloudiah.
Kitty is judging you.
http://imgur.com/FaFSbZq
Thanks Serrana, now I won’t have to breath in that terrible chalk dust.
And thank you, AIT, for reminding us that you are pro-sexual assault.
“When they see something wrong in our culture (like shipping thousands of young people, mainly men, off to die in wars), they assume that feminism/women are to blame. Their entire reality is filtered through the lens of anti-feminism.”
This reminds me of watching some MRAs criticize an article that was pro-chivalry, calling its author a feminist. It’s quite telling when their definition of “feminism” includes things that are specifically antithetical to feminism.
Who the heck ever described Phyllis Schlafly as a feminist?
Oh good someone chimed in with the VULVA correction before I could!
dlouwe, this isn’t directed at you so much as musing aloud, so don’t take it personally ok?
I’m not really comfortable calling war antithetical to feminism, or saying that all feminists are against it. While I’d love to see an end to war, all war, and think the US’s various wars are, well, a shame on my country, I think war, as a concept, is still a necessary evil. What the Syrian gov’n is doing may constitute war crimes, but only if it’s part of a war? Point there is that violent revolution looks an awful lot like war, and there’s a world of difference between, and plenty in between, that and pre-emotive strikes.
Which leaves me with — women should be allowed in the same positions, for the same pay and benefits, as men (as should trans* people, and us non-binaries can get legal recognition and work from there)
It’s not the to die part that bothers me so much as the to kill part, and I that topic, I’m stealing a quote pecunium found years ago —
Not going to bother with the link on “saw this” as the original source is long dead, that’s from 2004, but applies. (Pecunium — 9/24/2004 if you’re curious, I don’t want to link as you’ve got your full name on there)
Formatting fail. The first couple lines is pecunium, the rest is Gaiman quoting Fry.
I’m quoting a quote of a quote of a quote. Meta.
Er, one less “of a quote”. And I will now stop spamming the thread.
It’s because in their heads, “feminism” is anything that, in their perception, advantages women (and therefore disadvantages men, because they see the world as a zero-sum game). A man who holds a door or pulls out a chair for a woman is doing (a trivial amount of) extra work so that a woman can do that much less, and therefore that’s “feminism.”
Once you realize this, you understand why they are so adamant that feminists never care about the suffering of men. As soon as someone starts to care about men, MRAs cease to see this person as feminist. It’s a neat bit of circular reasoning.
Oh look, comments even suggesting that there is another side to the issue/is dissent are being completely removed/hidden while those who have no desire to confront said people proceed to complain and make false claims about MRAs.
Yay for political censorship!
Feminism for MRAs is women as anything other than slaves – literally, as in property. They may not say it straight out (apart from Gor-brained characters like Meller) but that’s what it comes down to.
@GrumpyCatIsAGirl: some MRA On reddit. She was against the ERA, hence she was fighting for female privilege hence she is a feminist. QED.
Being against the ERA makes her a feminist?
::head asplodes::
I think extreme MRAs would prefer women as property, but I think most of them are just selfish jags. I don’t know if anyone else here read ‘The Joy Luck Club’: one of the (fictional) women described had a completely “fair” marriage, where she and her husband paid exactly for what each of them used. For things they shared, they split down the middle, which was totally fair, except that she worked for her husband, and earned a fraction of what he did. I actually knew a couple who did that back in the day. She was neurotically giving, and he would have agreed with all the MRA stuff if he’d known about it. He didn’t complain about how hard it was to be a man, though. He liked being a man just fine. He just didn’t think women as a whole deserved very much.
A couple of years reading about MRAs here makes me disinclined to give them any benefit of the doubt. If all women were enslaved tomorrow I don’t believe for a moment any of them would say “Hey, that’s a bit much.” They’d be whining at not being issued an HB10 virgin who knew every sexual trick in the book and cater to their every whim.