Categories
a voice for men actual activism antifeminism evil women FemRAs FeMRAsplaining GirlWritesWhat imaginary backwards land imaginary oppression incoherent rage ladies against women men created civilization misogyny MRA oppressed white men paul elam reactionary bullshit Suzanne McCarley things that aren't fascism we hunted the mammoth

Turns out VICE made a video about that Men’s Rights rally in Toronto. GO WATCH IT.

This is not an embedded video, so don't click on it.
This is not an embedded video, so don’t click on it.

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.

1.1K Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
CassandraSays
CassandraSays
11 years ago

He’s definitely not a troll, it’s just that there are some significant points of disagreement between him and some of the other regulars that will probably never be resolved.

kittehserf
11 years ago

Who the hell is Hauptsatz? Feminist Bees using a different email?

Also I’m trying to recall where Cassandra was assholish in this thread and can’t remember.

Unless it was insisting on eating dinner before popcorn. 😛

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
11 years ago

Hey, my mum was very firm about the whole no treats until after dinner thing.

gillyrosebee
gillyrosebee
11 years ago

Red baiting is better understood in the general sense of poisoning the well and attacking individuals for being communists, whether it is true or not, because of the false assumption that them being communist is a bad thing and a discredit in and of itself. And whenever you claim we should hide our affiliations for the good of the Cause, you’re Red baiting, even if you’re doing it under the guise that “everyone else will Red bait us”.

Okay, sure, I’ll grant that as a fair elaboration of the term. But it still does not apply in this particular case because the argument is not whether or not being a communist is a bad thing, but whether or not it is advisable to use a particular symbol because of the unavoidable historical content the symbol carries. Try as you might, you use that symbol and you have already communicated so much to your potential audience that you have to spend all your time trying to clarify and de-mythify your usage of it.

Just look at all the poor pathetic groups trying to “reclaim” the swastika. Sure, they have a great point about the historical lineage of the symbol, long before the Nazis ever stuck it on a flag. Sure, they are 100% correct about the associations it carries from before it’s appropriation, and they are poignantly correct that those more recent associations are unfair. But that’s just too bad, because everyone who sees it will see the more recent associations. Connotation overwhelms denotation and distorts the sign.

No one is saying that you can’t proclaim your “affiliations”, though you don’t get to determine what the reaction is going to be when you use such heavily loaded signifiers. And, again, if you are spending all of your time arguing why someone misunderstood your signifier and why what you really meant was something else? You. Have. Lost. The discussion and your potential audience.

thebewilderness
thebewilderness
11 years ago

Does it seem cranky out? It has been an oddly cranky day for me.

kittehserf
11 years ago

BlackBloc is a long-term commenter, but definitely channelling trolls at present.

Hey, BlackBloc, been out to destroy paintings of people you don’t approve of lately? I seem to recall you had little-to-no problem with MRA-types doing that.

gillyrosebee
gillyrosebee
11 years ago

Fuck it. I’m just going to blockquote everything and have another beer.

sparky
sparky
11 years ago

I have no idea why that failed so bad.
I’ll try it again.

“No! We should definitely put words in other people’s houses, because that would be hilarious. Imagine, you get home and find “Sunshine” spelled out on your living room carpet in blocks, and you don’t have any children.”

That would be great opening for a horro movie.

cloudiah
11 years ago

@thebewilderness, I think “exploits” has a different meaning under communism, and Stalinism =/= communism, and the two halves of that saying aren’t really equivalent.

THEREFORE I DENOUNCE YOU.

(Or actually, I have a disagreement with you on the value of that quote.)

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
11 years ago

Think Haupsatz would be in a better mood if I presented a formal self-criticism?

kittehserf
11 years ago

Sparky – they used something like that in an episode of Lewis, I think it was – letter magnets on a fridge kept getting moved.

thebewilderness – it’s cranky weather-wise here, looks like rain coming. I see the blockquote monster’s cranky, too, it just got gillyrosebee.

kittehserf
11 years ago

Update, it is now pissing down!

Damn, I need to have lunch and do the vaccuuming.

Unimaginative
11 years ago

I’m cranky, and weepy, and I made cookies after all, but I burnt the bottoms. The tops are okay, though.

Shadow
Shadow
11 years ago

@gillyrosebee

But we were not talking about the whole seething mess, we were talking about one particular tendril of it. And no matter how important it is (and it is, vitally so) to understand the intersectional nature of institutionalized oppression, arguing against homophobia with MRAs is like trying to treat tuberculosis with aspirin. They will only trot out their (single?) lesbian to argue how they couldn’t possibly be anti-gay because, hey, some of their best content providers are gay. And meanwhile all the discussion is about identity (and at the edifying level of “Nuh uh!” “Yuh huh!”), rather than the bogus basis and bigoted effect of their rhetoric.

True. I think this really depends on what the point of the protest was, though. If the point was to argue with the MRAs, or refute the MRAs, then I completely agree with you. If the point was to EXPOSE the MRM on the other hand, then I don’t have a problem with the chant because it’s for the benefit of the observers, if you see what I mean.

@Cassandra

Now that I agree with. There are a lot of different pieces to the MRM that could conceivably be driven apart because their secondary focal points don’t match up, and doing so isn’t a bad idea.

I was thinking more about disrupting recruitment, but that’s a valid point too.

@kitteh’s
While there are plenty of those, there are also plenty of (for example) POC misogynists, that would be quick to tell racists to fuck off. While anyone who looks even somewhat deeply into the MRM would find all this out for themselves, there are also a lot of people who support causes based on what activists tell them, without looking too deep into things for themselves. It’s those people that I’m concerned about (concerned that non-misogynists may be fooled, and concerned that misogynists that may actually be turned away from the MRM won’t be).

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
11 years ago

On the issue of intersectionality, nobody here is saying that intersectionality isn’t important. What’s actually happening is a disagreement about what is and isn’t effective strategy at a political protest, or an effective means of countering MRA rhetoric in general. Notice how the conversation that Shadow started has been drilling down on the details a bit?

gillyrosebee
gillyrosebee
11 years ago

When you’re attacking the hammer & sickle you’re attacking Communists, because it’s a symbol of communism

But not *the* symbol of communism. There is not one communism, as you yourself admitted with your attempted snark about the red versus the brown. You use the hammer and sickle and you associate yourself with a particular historical example.

Which is, let me be absolutely clear, perfectly fine.

But you don’t get to decide whether or not people who don’t like that particular historical example work to counter you based on it, or when those who might otherwise be on your side choose not to march under it. When you use a symbol, you carry it’s baggage along with your own. And if you are not willing to support everything that happened under that particular historical banner, then don’t use that particular signifier.

Plenty of us choose our symbols very carefully based on the ideas we are willing to expend our effort to carry forward. If you can’t be bothered, that’s fine. Go flail yourself uselessly on as many different battle fronts as you choose. But peddle your petulance about the fact that people are upset about the symbol elsewhere.

LBT
LBT
11 years ago

RE: sparky

That would be great opening for a horro movie.

I once came down from my room to find nobody in the house, just the words ‘DO NOT GO OUTSIDE’ written on the communal whiteboard. I STILL think it’s the best opening for a horror story ever.

Athywren
Athywren
11 years ago

I have to go and send a report to my anti-communist masters, and then I’m going to bed. Good night everyone… and if anyone has a weather machine, could you turn the wind down in Yorkshire? It be blowy.

gillyrosebee
gillyrosebee
11 years ago

Statements like this make the Sweeping Generalisation Panda very upset.

*Reminder to self: do not read Athywren’s comments when mouth is full of liquid which would be painful if expressed nasally*

cloudiah
11 years ago

So, I am actually quite torn on how to most effectively counter MRA “events” and wish we could have a productive discussion about it. It’s good that they’ve been so pathetic that mockery is really all we need to do. What if they get bigger? What would an effective counter protest look like?

kittehserf
11 years ago

Shadow is talking intelligently, rather than doing a “Wahhh I’ll take my bat and ball and go home because you’re all mean meanies!” as BlackBlock is.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
11 years ago

I was thinking more about disrupting recruitment

That would actually be a great approach for some of the people who have friends who’re getting pulled into the MRM. “But they hate you almost as much as they hate women” could be an effective place to start with some people. For young men who’re getting pulled in via seeing MRA talking points repeated endlessly in comments threads it might be easy for them to miss the fact that the MRM as a whole hates anyone outside a very narrow paradigm straight traditionalist white dude friendly acceptability, so pointing them towards some of the stuff that makes it clear just how broad the MRM’s range of not-acceptable is could be a useful way of nipping things in the bud.

thebewilderness
thebewilderness
11 years ago

The quote was accurate and timely at the time it was spoken. Political philosophy, for the most part, reads far better than it lives.

sparky
sparky
11 years ago

LBT: Wow. That is really spooky!

1 7 8 9 10 11 44