I sometimes say that the only “activism” that the Men’s Rights Movement is any good at is harassing individual women. But perhaps I’m being a bit too stingy here: following on the heels of the Father’s Rights activists who dress up like superheroes and climb up buildings and bridges to show that, well, I’m not sure what they’re trying to show, Men’s Rightsers seem to be developing a knack for poorly conceived media stunts that make them look like idiots.
The latest incredibly poorly conceived Men’s Rights media stunt come from Men’s Rights Edmonton, the A Voice for Men sister brother group famous for, among other things, chasing women down the street in the middle of the night and claiming that the women they chased were the bullies.
Anyway, the loudest and most obnoxious dude in the group, Nick Reading (a.k.a. “Eric Duckman”) has decided to run for Edmonton City Council on — get this! — the Patriarchy Party ticket! Oh no he didn’t!
Oh, yes he did. I suppose that the Patriarchy Party’s supposed platform — including a pledge “to end antiquated laws regarding women’s sexual consent” and provisions to instruct teachers “to snatch things like toy trucks out of the hands of little girls and replace them with dolls or tea sets” — probably inspired a chuckle or two amongst the folks at A Voice for Men, but the trollery here is really too inane to offend.
Whetever, dudes. You can find their badly designed pamphlet, with traced-photo “artwork” presumably by the noted FeMRA artist TyphonBlue, here.
I’m really not that sorry. If it offends feminism’s religious sensibilities, I smile.
Someone is failing to grasp the basic premise of satire — you have to not believe the things you are saying. If you believe it, it isn’t satire.
Since it’d take all of 2 minutes of searching to see that MRAs do believe this shit, and similar hatred, it isn’t satire.
This really isn’t difficult.
You have reappropriated the word “hatred” to mean whatever feminism demands it means to suit any particularly disagreeable issue.
What it is you think I believe (what, I don’t like religion or cultic group-think? Terrible.) is unbeknownst to me, other than the crumbs you think you’ve picked up, you little psychoanalyst, you.
My stepdad had a tank with a puffer and several other different kinds of fish. Is it because the fish you have are much smaller than the puffer that zie is by zirself or is that type of puffer not get along with anybody?
neuroticbeagle — it’s because my little ball of cute is a GSP — http://greenspottedpuffers.blogspot.com/2012/05/4-reasons-why-tankmates-are-bad-idea.html
Monos and scats both get way too big too.
And they’re impossible to sex, so I’ve decided to call this one a boy since the 55g has my gorgeous girls in it (and apparently at least one fertile male!)
Yeah “fits it his mouth” includes fins and tails — they’ve been known to mortally wound much larger fish by taking a chunk out of a vital part. I had African dwarf puffers in Pittsburgh, never had much luck keeping them alive, but they were in my loach tank with the congo tetras and glass cats with no issue. This little ball of carnivore would be more than happy to eat congo tetra fin and take a chunk out of the middle of a glass cat.
Watching him hunt snails is awesome, but rather indicative of how he’d behave around tank mates.
ah. my stepdad had a dog-faced yellow belly puffer.
Ah, ok, google is putting them as the nocturnal not particularly aggressive sort. And full saltwater which certainly expands the options for tankmates. GSPs are high end brackish which is a fairly small set of potential tankmates in the first place.
Just to make it fun, they need more salt as they age. My little ball of cute is getting acclimated to it currently. Cuz tiny doses, can’t just jump it all at once (obvious thing is obvious?)
He’s adorable though, half the time I’m looking for him the reason I can’t spot him is because he’s hovering against the glass at the tip of my nose!
I’m not sure Puffy was nocturnal- but he did follow people from one end of the tank to the other.
@Kittehs:
I don’t think so. Pell makes up a bunch of shit about how he’s the smartest person ever and supplies ridiculous credentials in support of it, but it’s part of the joke. I’m pretty sure Dub thinks he really is the smartest, most logical, most enlightened person that’s ever blessed this blog with their presence; and I think he’s getting a little peeved that we don’t seem to recognize how brilliant the insights are that are coming from his superior mind.
@Dub, I’mamofo, is that you?
Who is this Dub and why is it necroing a thread? Can we get its crap out of the carpet?
Pell also wasn’t really into raising old threads, FWIW.
Great, so you’re an asshole. Got it. Now off you fuck.
It’s nice to see that the guy thinks women don’t exist.
(He is an atheist so from his point of view blasphemy is a victimless crime and the religious uproar over it is hilarious. Now he also thinks feminists being offended by misogyny is hilarious too and compares the two. For this to make sense women need to be imaginary beings in his world. Or at least not human. :/ )
Well, Malitia, you could think that, but my female friends would beg to differ. Blasphemy is a victimless crime, and so is miogyny. I neither harass nor stalk women, and neither do I need to. I get plenty of attention from them (and I don’t necessarily mean sexual. I am not a PUA.).
Bina: why yes, I am, thank you. Off I will not fuck. With you, I will. Sorry about the complex.
auggziliary: that’s a nice set of baseless assertions. I do not pretend to be the smartest or most enlightened, but then, you didn’t really think otherwise, you master-baiter. I am merely smarter than most feminists and religious fundies, and that is what matters. Sorry you feel slighted. It’s easy for feminists to feel slighted. Anything I do or say will be construed by feminists as “hatred” or homophobia, so I will not dispute these baseless claims, either. I do not take offense at poorly fabricated libel.
Viscaria: peeved, no. But you do have my pity. While religion is NOT merely anything I don’t like, as fun an notion as that is, I maintain that both the MRM and feminism do both exhibit traits usually associated with “real” religions, and are therefore cultic in nature. Your baseless assertions about my character as a person are one of those traits. Thank you for helping to set the example.
So, thus far, I am creepy, I am a homophobe, and I “hate” women, and all for what? Because I strongly disagree with feminism. Got it. Taking notes here. I’m being enlightened by the feminist holiest of holies, you noble souls.
you master-baiter.
Oho, we have a clever boots in the house, folks!
And enh, feminism allows me to vote. Pardon me for considering someone against the philosophy that allowed me to vote as someone to be side-eyed.
You’re pardoned. But then, it was neither “feminism” at the time suffrage rights were an issue, nor was it only women who could vote, but these are conveniently negligible facts in the feminist conscience. Only women matter.
it was neither “feminism” at the time suffrage rights were an issue, nor was it only women who could vote,
I honestly can not tell what you’re trying to say here. Are you saying suffrage rights wasn’t feminism, or are you referencing the old abolitionist/women’s suffrage racist shit, or what?
auggziliary, show me anywhere in the literature where suffrage rights activism is labeled Feminism, and also show me how most men of the period were better off by their also not being able to vote, along with women.
It’s a nice set of opinions you have there, but they are tender for nothing substantial. Facts will have to suffice. An atheist who is not a feminist is now an MRAtheist? That’s an interesting conclusion to which you have jumped, too. Right, expand the list: hateful, homophobic, creep, and MRA. What else can you add?
What else can you add?
Really fucking hard to understand. So, even though suffrage rights were fighting for the rights of women to vote, and are considered the first wave of feminism, which is about equality for women… it’s not actually feminism? Can you please explain your reasoning to me?
“You aren’t funny. Gross.”
Uh-oh. Someone’s taken a figurative expression literally. Feminist sensibilities offended.
Bring in the thought police! Looks like I’ve fucked with someone else, too.
Bring in the thought police!
Uh oh. Someone’s making a hyperbolic statement that is totally silly! Bring in the popcorn!
Feminism is for equality, but while fighting for the right to vote for women, whatever did the suffragettes do for men who couldn’t vote? Nothing, of course, they were a women’s movement, not an equality movement. A movement for white women, at that.
“Uh oh. Someone’s making a hyperbolic statement that is totally silly! Bring in the popcorn!”
One step ahead of you. I will probably continue to offend feminist sensibilities, and to take insulting labels, so take your seat and enjoy……..or get offended. Whichever you prefer.