I don’t know how I missed it, but a couple of weeks back Vice posted a short video about that EARTH-SHATTERINGLY HISTORIC Men’s Rights rally in Toronto that captured the attention of the world a tiny fraction of a percentage of people in the world (including the people at it and readers of this blog) a little over a month ago.
Alas, WordPress won’t let me embed the video here, but you all need to go look at it. Not only does it capture pretty well what a dinky event it was, but it also contains a bunch of mini-interviews with some A Voice for Men folks that are rather revealing.
The most revealing one of the bunch starts about 2:40 into the video, when AVFM’s Suzanne McCarley explains that
Men, as a class, have never ever oppressed women, as a class. Men have always protected and provided for women. And protected them from oppression from others.
From others? What kind of others? Like, space aliens?
Women have never objected to this, and in fact have always been grateful because it’s how they survived. It is only in the last few hundred years when women of privileged class who don’t even know what they’re being protected from feel disadvantaged because they’re not comfortable with the level of protection they have.
Wow. A few hundred years? Sometimes people accuse MRAs of wanting to take us back to the 1950s. McCarley apparently wants to take us back to the 1750s.
They don’t even understand what they’re being protected from.
Wolves? Sharks? Dishpan hands? Space aliens?
They have no concept how dangerous the world is for them but gosh they’re just not happy because, you know, the males in the family tell them what to do and make all the decisions for them and control all the money. That’s not oppression. That’s protection.
Wow. So I guess slaves and prisoners are the most protected classes of all.
It’s what kept our species alive and what built … [she gestures at the park and the buildings around it] this beautiful city.
Wait. I thought Jefferson Starship built this city. On rock ‘n’ roll.
Anyway, there’s also some footage of a speech about the evil oppression of white men given by an unknown speaker at the rally. He also complains that men working for the government are men who’ve had “their things cut off and are toeing the politically correct line.” (Hopefully after the bleeding has stopped.)
There’s an interview with Paul Elam, who for some reason looks like he’s wearing mascara (which I’m pretty sure he isn’t). He delivers this puzzling pronouncement:
Looking at men in government and saying they have all the power is like looking at women in grocery stores and saying they have all the food.
Not only is this way more revealing about gender inequality than Elam may realize, but it’s also a tad ironic, because Elam not that long ago used (unreliable) data about how women “control” most consumer spending — that is, they do most of the shopping — in order to argue (twice!) that women were the ones primarily responsible for destroying the environment.
There are assorted other bits of misinformation and ignorance and just plain old bigotry from the MRAs.
There’s also some commentary from the counterprotesters that made me wince. No, MRAs aren’t all Marc Lepines waiting to happen. They’re shitty enough people as it is; you don’t have to compare them all to a misogynist mass murderer to make your point. And in fact, you undercut yourself with that kind of rhetoric. Focus on what they actually say and do. It’s bad enough.
And the “racist, sexist, anti-gay” chant? Drop that. MRAs are, for the most part, driven by misogyny — not by other bigotries. Yes, some are racist, including one of the speakers featured on this very video, but that’s not the driving force for most of them. Some are homophobic, but that’s not the driving force for most of them. Some are transphobic — including Elam himself — but that’s not a central issue for most of them.
It’s worth pointing out these other bigotries, but to make these issues the centerpiece of your counterprotest is to miss the point — it would be a bit like attacking the Ku Klux Klan as “sexist and racist.” I’m sure plenty of KKKers are sexist as hell, but with the Klan racism really is the main thing; with MRAs, misogyny is.
And in this case it gave AVFM’s Karen Straughan the opportunity to appear (at least for a moment) like a reasonable person by pointing out that she in fact is not straight.
Anyway, watch the video. It’s amazing.
I dunno, the wish to not support actual born children is just the Republican stance writ small, and they don’t seem to have done too badly among sections of the US.
Even Republicans have some sentimental attachment to the idea that people should in theory care about their own kids, though. It’s specifically the MRA insistence that it should be acceptable to write off kids who you have a relationship with because their mother isn’t fucking you and cooking you dinner any more that I can’t see playing well with most people.
@kitteh
Yeah, they say a lot of weird things around here, but the reason they bring up gay people existing is because they consider it a sign that a civilization is declining; because as they say “Rome fell because of rampant homosexuality and paganism.” If you try to explain to them that Rome had been Christianized when it fell, and the collapse of the empire was more to do with classism and a refusal to acknowledge debts than who was sleeping with who, they’ll flat out call you a liar. Because who needs facts when you have willful ignorance.
Λυνα is Luna written in Greek.
Hey, there was that preacher who thought that Katrina hit New Orleans because there were too many gay people there, it’s not like that particular variety of stupid is uncommon.
Oh strewth, that bit about Rome sounds like the dreaded g0ys LBT told us about – isn’t that one of their hangups?
Not that the people handing out those stupid pamphlets would do anything but have a huge hissy fit about the g0ys. Be kind of fun to put them together, in a way.
@Cassandra
Couldn’t agree more. I wish Elam & Co. a long, healthy reign of incompetence
It’s 4 here, and I’m drunk as a skunk, so I reluctantly pass on the opportunity to reminisce on bizarre comments made by preachers/religious figures/republicans this decade 😛
Nite all!! I shall see y’all on the morrow.
The g0ys are actually a counterargument to the idea that it’s possible to turn people away from a harmful ideology by saying “you realize that the people you’re supporting hate you too, right?”.
I keep reading g0y as goi, and I’m pretty sure I’m not supposed to.
http://g0ys.org/initialize.htm
That site is like the timecube of male homosexuality.
And I’ve got an associated and even better one for you.
http://man2manalliance.org/crw/sg.html
So NSFW, but there’s treasure trove of timecubian oddity to explore.
“Timecube of male homosexuality” LOL! So true.
I always read it as goys, too (goi, goy, same word). It adds a layer of weirdness, and it’s not like those guys need added weirdness.
That site’s also NSF anyone who doesn’t want their eyes bleeding from the sheer horror of the *cough* design *cough*
Correction, both those sites.
::dabs eyes::
I think my favorite part of the cockrub warriors site is the illustrations. They’re like Mad Max meets Adam Ant at a Halloween party for professional wrestlers.
aaah why did they use the next gen font? My trek! It’s ruined!
No sorry, Dave, calling them a bunch of Lepines waiting to happen is righ on target. Go read that post you made a while ago where reddit users were talking about their fantasies of killing women.
I can’t take the unrelenting hatred & vilification for men who call themselves gay, are effeminate, are over 30, interested in non-bro culture, and engage in (gasp) anal sex. They can really fuck off with being thrilled by bad gays getting STDs, particularly HIV.
A false analogy inspired by fags being British slang for cigarettes really spins out of control.
Seriously, this guy needed to be prosecuted for extreme analogy abuse.
I get that they hate anal sex and men who admit that they’re gay, but what did the word “fuck” ever do to them to make them think it deserves to be spelled “phuck”?
Which I keep wanting to read as “puck”. I’ll never watch a hockey game in the same way again.
Oh typical, Mr I Hate Analogies also hates etymology and the strain of even looking something up on good ol’ Wikipedia, to wit:
In other words, the century-old Americanism has naff all to do with the British word for cigarettes. That fag comes from fag end, the worn-out end of something, originally in the sense of a frayed end of rope.
… which makes me wonder if this is what some fag-end cigarettes tasted like.
What. A. Maroon.
Oh drat, using the word has sent my comment into moderation.
tl:dr – the slur in US usage has nothing to do with the origin of the word for cigarettes. F*g as short for f*aggot was a slur first against women, not against men, though it may have spread to homosexual men from there. It might also derive from f*gging at British public schools; the younger boys were the f*ags in that situation.
The term for cigarettes is from f*g-end, as in the ratted and worn-out useless end of something, such as frayed rope. It referred to cigarette butts (ooh! Butts! That must mean anal sex, since things only mean what they mean in the US!) but now gets used of cigarettes more generally, ie. a pack of f*gs.
Mr I Hate Analogies (well of course he would – they’re ANALogies) also hates the bother of looking up anything, it seems.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faggot_%28slang%29
Lord, the moderation filter’s sensitive tonight. Even asterisked versions of the word that starts with F and ends with G (or the longer version ending with T) get slammed.
Mr Idiot has no more idea about etymology than anything else. The UK and American words have totally different origins and meanings: one from the f– end of something, like a frayed rope, and originally referring to cigarette butts; the other from a slur directed at women, originally, and applied to homosexual men by extension.
Though I daresay he’d even get worked up about ANALogies and cigarette BUTTS, too.
Twit.
Phuck? Sounds like someone from A Midsummer Night’s Wet Dream to me.
Having to poop.