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.
They want women submissive, subservient, and there to cater to men’s needs and desires. Even the women at the MRA are convinced of this, and why shouldn’t they? The media and patriarchal standards tell us that men’s needs come first, and we should provide for them before thinking of ourselves.
Sometimes I really wish I had discovered feminism sooner than I did. I would have been a lot happier in the long run.
Cassandra — you could probably do it online, but you’d still have to have an existing relationship first. Like, pecunium and I finally met in person in August, didn’t need to actually meet to have Serious Discussions (or, for that matter, we’re on opposite coasts, but I value your opinions so it’d be theoretically possible for you to change my mind if this all ever was relevant)
Babsbeaty — can we avoid “other people have it worse”? Part of my psychs’ fucking with my SSI is because compared to some of their clients I’m not that fucked up, so it’s a sore spot for me.
Tinyorc — it’s <blockquote> not [quote] — you’ve got your forum code and HTML crossed.
I agree that respect is an MRA euphemism for obedience.
The love for a pre-2nd Wave past is basically a woeful cry of “back then the way society was structured would have assured me a woman to control”. Which is already pretty awful, but it gets even sadder when you see who these men are and realize that no, actually, even in the 50s that would not necessarily have been true for them.
Argenti, your situation with your psych is not comparable to the MRAs’ demands to control women, which they frame as wanting “respect”. Babsbeaty’s point was valid. I get that it’s a sore point but this is not about you.
I think you have a poor grasp of intersectionality if you don’t think their misogyny is articulated with racism, cissexism, and heterosexism. Even their token gay men, bisexual GWW, and anonymous trans folk work hard to perpetuate very damaging ideas about queer folk. I highly suggest Trina Grillo’s “Anti-Essentialism and Intersectionality: Tools to Dismantle the Master’s House.”
I seriously have no idea what’s going on here with these criticism of the protesters, but denying that the MRM does do these things despite evidence and claims otherwise is really strange.
You’re really doing nothing but lend credibility to GWW point, while simultaneously diminishing the concerns voiced by queer men and women. Gender essentialism is core to the MRM, and gender essentialism is core to the marginalization of queer men and women.
GWW point was lame, and of the MRAs she is one of the worst essentialist evangelicals they have. She may be bi, but she’s god damned anti-queer.
Their misogyny is certainly accented and associated with many other kinds of bigotry, but it’s pretty silly to pretend that the misogyny isn’t their primary focus. Nobody is denying that the MRM as a movement is full of all kinds of bigotry, but David is correct in saying that misogyny is the main rallying point and the thing that brings them all together.
(BTW, I’m queer too.)
Also, “lame”? If you’re going to call people out for not understanding intersectionality you might want to try to avoid using ableist slurs while doing so.
You’ve missed the point, Feminist Bees. Yes, the MRM is racist, homophobic and trans*phobic, but their driving force is misogyny. Talking about the first three and ignoring the fourth isn’t intersectionality, it’s ignoring the whole point of the MRM. They’re not out doing racist marches and anti-gay marches, they’re out expressing their hatred of women.
Ninjaed again!
I prefer to think of their racism and homophobia as the cherries on a huge woman-hating shit sundae.
Good point, lame was are really really bad choice of words.
But my contention still stands.
Bigots are rarely bigoted in only one way, but they often like to focus in on one particular form of bigotry.
Unless I’m missing something, they didn’t ignore the misogyny, unless there is a difference in understanding of the relation between misogyny and sexism.
“You don’t understand intersectionality, and that queer person is so lame” is going to go into my personal memory bank of most unintentionally hilarious comments ever.
Am I the only one feeling like Feminist Bees’ comment was the equivalent to “what about teh menz?” Never mind that it’s ALL WOMEN these guys want to be able to beat and rape with impunity, to dictate when and if we reproduce, to deprive us of the right to vote (those of us who have it at all) and take any land or money we have … no, never mind that, concentrate on them hating PoC and LGBTQ people as well.
I can understand where Feminist Bees is coming from. A few months ago, I wrote a post on reddit about how the MRM contributes to the oppression of queer folk. The sort of toxic masculinity that the MRM is so wedded to is inherently hostile towards queer men. Or consider how many men’s rights issues are centered around heterosexuality. Their shitting on queer folk isn’t incidental to their misogyny, it’s built into their value systems.
These two statements… seem contradictory. Ah well, I’m sure never objecting, and having objected for the past few hundred years are absolutely compatible.
Which will stop INSTANTLY, as soon as we disenfranchise women.
I did like GWW pointing out that she can’t be homophobic, since she’s not straight. Because she’s, you know, a woman in an overtly anti-woman group. (Sorry guys, you can protest that you don’t hate women all you like, you actively oppose the movement that champions their rights. If you’re trying to prevent me from exercising my rights, I honestly don’t give a damn if you think you like me.) Still can’t decide whether to laugh at, or weep for FeMRAs.
I’m not a support group or a therapist, but I’ve tried engaging a few MRAs in compassionate dialogue in order to educate them.
Gets nowhere.
They’re not interested in dialogue.
If you’re not with them, then they’ll try to convince you that all of your problems are caused by feminism and women. If you don’t convert, you’re a bigot. They don’t care that all of their arguments are irrational. They don’t care about the errors they’ve made. They don’t even care that everything they believe about feminism is wrong. They know they’re right, and no amount of
reasoningbigotry will get through to them.Just out of curiosity, is that actually a thing that happens over there? There are similar complaints in the UK, but I’ve never seen those notices on job adverts. I’m leaning heavily toward thinking it’s nothing but the same ol’ same ol’ but you never know – America is pretty weird… Canada less so, but still…
They hate freedom, too, dontcha know?
In each dichotomy, you alternate between each state around 16,000 times a second, thus providing cheap, clean electrical energy to the world. The MRM are basically a deep cover Greenpeace operation.
You know what really pisses me off about this, besides the fact that it demands that women be second class citizens? It implies that men can’t take care of their own needs. Men are actually capable of surviving without a slave – that’s how single men live long enough to find someone on whom they can offload their basic survival needs.
Final point: Damn it! Why are so many frustratives just slurs? What is up with that?! From now on, I’m just going to say dardnarbler.
And no, spell checker, I don’t care that frustrative isn’t a word. It should be.
Finally back after a frustrating and rage-inducing day to find that there are no trolls to kick! Pook!
Though, BritterSweet’s video did a lot to help (OMFG those happytwitchyferretfeeties!!!)
Seconding CassandraSays. That shit belongs on a plaque somewhere.
>>>Weren’t most of the protesters from a local gay rights group
They were from Bash Back, which is an antifa queer group. And the MRA is basically that wing of the fascist movement that focuses more on male supremacy and the warrior ethic rather than the anti-Semitism or racism, but it is still a part of the general fascist revival in the West and is therefore addressed by antifa groups as such.
The “Racist, sexist, anti-gay” chant is a popular Pink Bloc (i.e. Black Bloc for Queers) chant in the Canadian ultraleft but is typically aimed at police. I’ve heard it before in Toronto and Montreal. It usually goes “Racist ,sexist, anti-gay. Toronto PD, go away!”.
In most protests, slogans are recycled and not particularly topical (if I ever go to a protest in Montreal that doesn’t have the “So-so-so Solidarite!” chant I’ll immediately die of shock/surprise). I don’t see a point in tone policing the Bash Back comrades here.
@kitteh’s
I don’t think it can be considered equivalent to a WATM, since women fall in the POC and LGBTQ category as well, and oftentimes the misogyny the misogyny that the MRM displays is racist and/or anti-queer. I just think that she read David’s post as being dismissive of the claims of racism etc.
FTR, I do agree with David, and the rest of y’all, that the majority of their racist etc. posts revolve around their misogyny so the chants aren’t very productive. I disagree with David’s point about “some” MRAs, however. Since the racism etc are endemic to all major manosphere sites, and are practically never called out, or even disagreed with by the other posters, I think it’s fair to call the movement itself racist etc.
And my evening just got another 200% better!
Is dardnarbler a noun (“You farfing dardnarbler!”) or an adjective?
The commentator seems to have missed that “a small, hate-filled contingent” is what they already are.
This is right up there with the idiocy of people who suggest that racist hate groups would change their ways if PoC would just engage nicely with them. It’s also got a massive side-order of the notion that it’s up to women to take care of men’s emotional problems. Yeah, these guys want to do violence to us, but they’d be Nice if only we’d be Nice first!
Fuck that.
I feel like their racism and homophobia is pretty closely tied in with their misogyny, given how often the racism manifests as some version of “they’re stealing our women” or “those women from foreign lands are appropriately submissive, as all women should be”, and how closely the homophobia tends to mirror classic gender essentialist thinking. If you’re going to insist that women behave in ways A, B, and C because biology, whereas men are supposed to be D, E. and F, and these things form a complementary whole, then gay men present a problem that’s most easily solved by arguing that they’re doing being a man wrong.
Shadow – I knew I was stretching it a bit with the WATM comparison, but Feminist Bees’ wording really seemed to want to ignore the misogyny – against ALL women, straight, queer, WoC, white, whatever – to concentrate on the other bigotries. I completely agree with David’s comments on that, or as hellkell put it, about the cherries on the shit sundae.