Categories
a voice for men antifeminism domestic violence doubling down drama gaslighting gross incompetence lying liars misandry misogyny MRA straw feminists that's completely wrong

A Voice for Male Students: Misquotation, Schmishquotation!

Is THIS your quotation from Marilyn French? No? Um ...
Is THIS your quotation from Marilyn French? No? Um …

Is there something about Men’s Rights Activists that renders them utterly incapable of admitting a mistake? The other day, I performed a bit of rudimentary factchecking on a collection of allegedly “misandrist” quotes assembled by  Jonathan Taylor of A Voice for Male Students.

Among other things. I pointed out that the drastically truncated version of a Marilyn French quote he posted completely misrepresented the actual meaning of what she had said, making it appear that she was charging the majority of men with killing, or beating, or raping women and/or molesting their own daughters:

“As long as some men use physical force to subjugate females, all men need not. The knowledge that some men do suffices to threaten all women. He can beat or kill the woman he claims to love; he can rape women…he can sexually molest his daughters…THE VAST MAJORITY OF MEN IN THE WORLD DO ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE.”

– Dr. Marilyn French, The War Against Women, p. 182, her emphasis.

In fact, she had said something rather different, as I pointed out by quoting the original passage straight from her book:

As long as some men use physical force to subjugate females, all men need not. The knowledge that some men do suffices to threaten all women. Beyond that, it is not necessary to beat up a woman to beat her down. A man can simply refuse to hire women in well-paid jobs, extract as much or more work from women than men but pay them less, or treat women disrespectfully at work or at home. He can fail to support a child he has engendered, demand the woman he lives with wait on him like a servant. He can beat or kill the woman he claims to love, he can rape women, whether mate, acquaintance, or stranger; he can rape or sexually molest his daughters, nieces, stepchildren, or the children of a woman he claims to love. The vast majority of men in the world do one or more of the above

It wasn’t clear to me if Taylor had been aware that he had drastically misrepresented French, as it appeared that he had simply cut and pasted the quote from another site without actually checking French’s book to see if it was accurate. So it appeared to be sloppiness on his part rather than deliberate deception.

Taylor has now responded to my post with a long and bizarre rant titled “Futrelle & Co. all in a tizzy as AVFMS exposes misandry in academia. AVFMS dissects their “counterarguments.”

He starts off by freely admitting that he misquoted French, but claiming that it doesn’t count as misrepresentation because it didn’t really change the meaning of the quote at all.

That’s right. Instead of acknowledging the misrepresentation, he’s doubling down — even though his explanation is in direct conflict with the evidence that I posted and that he reposts on his own site. He simply redefines reality until the misrepresentation mysteriously vanishes. Here’s his, er, argument:

I copied/pasted the quote from Antimisandry, although I had to find the source page for the book independently. I’ll admit: on this one I didn’t get the full quote and simply took Antimisandry’s reproduction of it. I am happy to amend it (which I have done in the original post).

David Futrelle, editor of the blog Manboobz, thinks this is a gamechanger, that it renders the meaning “completely different.” Not so fast.

He then pastes in my screenshot of the original quote, and my comments pointing out that the longer quote has a completely different meaning than the shorter one.

Then he tries to wave away his mistake with this ingenious bit of sleight-of-hand:

Actually Futrelle, according to Feminist ideology everything Marilyn French listed was a form of violence. Need I remind you what all constitutes “violence” according to Feminist ideology nowadays?

Pay no attention to my giant mistake behind the curtain! Look at THIS instead!

“THIS” being, in this case, a random feminist paper titled Intersecting Inequalities: A Review of Feminist Theories and Debates on Violence against Women and Poverty in Latin America, which suggests at once point that “[e]conomic violence against women occurs when they are denied access to or control over resources, or the right to work and earn income.”

Now, none of this has any relevance whatsoever to the question of whether or not Taylor has misquoted French — which he has — or indeed to what French’s statement actually means. There’s no evidence that French was in any way influenced by the paper Taylor quotes — which would have been a tad difficult, given that it was published 18 years after she wrote The War Against Women.

Apparently Taylor thinks that feminism is some sort of Borglike hive-mind that transcends time and space.

And he apparently thinks that when a famous feminist says that the vast majority of men have probably at least “treat[ed] women disrespectfully” in some way it is the same as if she had accused the vast majority of men of being murderers, rapists, woman-beaters and/or child abusers.

Taylor then takes issue with her references to men “beating down” and “subjugating” women, and indignantly insists that while

I know this may sound like heresy to Feminist and pro-Feminist ears, but the vast majority of men do not abuse women, let alone to an extent that they “subjugate” them.

Taylor has completely misunderstood the basic argument of French’s passage, which is that the majority of men do not have to physically abuse women in order to gain a certain advantage from the fact that other men do. You may disagree with that, but, again, she is not saying that the vast majority of men abuse women; quite the opposite.

Taylor then asserts that the really important thing is that what she’s saying still counts as “misandry.”

So apparently if someone is an evil misandrist, in Taylor’s eyes, you can misquote them all you want, and it doesn’t really matter, because … MISANDRY

Taylor continues on with his fulminations for some time after this, focusing mainly on “rebutting” comments from Man Boobz commenters. He posts an appalling photo of a crowd of white men posing proudly in front of several black men they have lynched, with the caption: “The powerlessness of women: point a finger and kill someone.”

I honestly don’t have the energy or the patience to deal with any more of his sophistry today. I’m not even going to read the whole thing. You can have a go at it if you want, dear readers. Let me know if there’s anything else in it that I need to address.

My plan today, after the nastiness in the post yesterday, was to post a bunch of pictures of my kitties. So, dammit, that’s what I’m going to do. Give me a few minutes, and I’ll put them up in another post.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

157 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Fethez Matt (@MatthewGenero)

AVfM are a bottomless barrel of laughs.

Alice Sanguinaria
7 years ago

Providing context for quotes is MISANDRY! *nod*

Chie Satonaka
Chie Satonaka
7 years ago

So, a company is trying to raise money to launch a line of “anti-rape” wear that basically brings back the chastity belt — it’s “knife resistant” fabric that literally locks up the genital area with a combination (because obviously PIV intercourse is all that rape’s about, there is nothing else at all to be concerned about, is there?) Feminists have been arguing that this line will not really have much of an affect on the incidence of rape, and that it continues to focus on the victim rather than focusing on the rapist.

MRAs, on the the other hand, claim this line of clothing is “misandry” and have swarmed the fundraising comment thread to say so.

LBT
LBT
7 years ago

And somewhere, Martin Luther King Jr. rolls in his grave, clawing at the coffin door, determined to dig himself up and return to life because our society obviously still needs him.

Out of curiosity, David, do you know if Taylor from the South? Because dude has some really fucked-up idea of what lynching was, how it was implemented, and who was responsible for it.

HeatherN
7 years ago

Aside from all the obvious, what makes this whole thing so damn depressing is that this is apparently the academic arm of AVfM. This is coming from the space for students and it’s written by someone who is apparently, “a former college instructor of composition and argumentation.”

And the huge freaking leap he makes from Dr. Patemen’s “consent as ideology” quote to assuming she means that consent ONLY exists in the minds of ideologues is just…wtf?! Reading comprehension is obviously not this guy’s strong suit.

Lea Tapp
7 years ago

LBT,
That lynchings in the south were the fault of women is something I’ve seen several times from MRAs. They claim that the same “rape hysteria” is being used by feminists today to imprison innocent men.

Athywren
Athywren
7 years ago

“THIS” being, in this case, a random feminist paper titled Intersecting Inequalities: A Review of Feminist Theories and Debates on Violence against Women and Poverty in Latin America, which suggests at once point that “[e]conomic violence against women occurs when they are denied access to or control over resources, or the right to work and earn income.”

But a feminist said it and, as we know, it is feminist ideology that anything a feminist says is true. Therefore it is universally accepted feminist ideology that denying a person access to or control over resources is violence. It’s irrefutable! Because.

There’s no evidence that French was in any way influenced by the paper Taylor quotes — which would have been a tad difficult, given that it was published 18 years after she wrote The War Against Women.

Denying feminist time travel abilities now, are you? Psh.

You’ve gotta appreciate some of the comments, though:

Good effort Jon, really good article. You certainly have more patience than I do. Dealing with the sheer ignorance and brainwashed fuckwits that try and defend those quotes must take a lot of willpower.

That’s right! Calling people out on quotemining? Approaching claims with a skeptical attitude? Ignorant and brainwashed is what that is! True intellect and freedom of thought comes with uncritically accepting anything you’re told. Sure does!

Athywren
Athywren
7 years ago

Providing context for quotes is MISANDRY! *nod*

What? Didn’t you know? Context is a word that creationists use, therefore it proves that we’re wrong!

La Strega
7 years ago

@Heathern

“This is coming from the space for students and it’s written by someone who is apparently, “a former college instructor of composition and argumentation.””

Former! Probably means he was hired for a quarter in haste, and just as quickly dismissed.

Still, I agree it is disappointing that college students cannot do better than this.

katz
7 years ago

Countdown to MRAs saying that David is talking about posts he didn’t even read…

Dvärghundspossen
7 years ago

So, a company is trying to raise money to launch a line of “anti-rape” wear that basically brings back the chastity belt — it’s “knife resistant” fabric that literally locks up the genital area with a combination (because obviously PIV intercourse is all that rape’s about, there is nothing else at all to be concerned about, is there?) Feminists have been arguing that this line will not really have much of an affect on the incidence of rape, and that it continues to focus on the victim rather than focusing on the rapist.

MRAs, on the the other hand, claim this line of clothing is “misandry” and have swarmed the fundraising comment thread to say so.

This is absurd even by MRA standard, and that says something. I mean, I get that they think rape basically never happens, it’s all just innocent men being locked up on the whim of women, and therefore talking about rape and trying to raise awareness about rape is misandry, since it’s just gonna end in more men being locked up. But how is a chastity belt gonna send someone to jail?

Alice Sanguinaria
7 years ago

Athywren – :O So does that mean evolution is misandry?

Alice Sanguinaria
7 years ago

Dvärg – don’t you know? Not being able to cut open someone’s drawers in order to fuck them is MISANDRY! Women’s garments should be openable with just a slight touch, so that any man can feel her or fuck her up whenever he wants to. Otherwise, it’s MISANDRY!

cloudiah
7 years ago

Anyone who wants to know more about the real history of lynchings in the south should read Red Summer by Cameron McWhirter(?)–not 100% positive of the author’s name, but it’s easy to find.

Meanwhile, AVfMS seems to positively require Myoo’s fabulous dancing goalposts.

hellkell
hellkell
7 years ago

This is coming from the space for students and it’s written by someone who is apparently, “a former college instructor of composition and argumentation.”

Note that said “instructor” and not “professor.”

cloudiah
7 years ago

p.s. You just know they’re going to say David putting up pictures of his kitties is an admission of defeat, when the reality is KITTIES ALWAYS MEAN VICTORY.

calburn88
7 years ago

Reblogged this on Discombobulate.

Tulgey Logger
Tulgey Logger
7 years ago

It’s already pretty bad when white, mainstream feminists ignore the intersectionality of race, class, and gender, but MRA types take intersectional blindness to a whole new level. These “voices” for men just love to forget all about race and appropriate the violence visited upon black men to pretend that racial oppression proceeds along the axis of misandry, forgetting that it was white men who did the lynching and that you’d never see a white man in the days of lynching strung up for whistling or looking at a white woman. TL;DR Fuck you, AVFMS.

LBT
LBT
7 years ago

RE: Lea Tapp

That lynchings in the south were the fault of women is something I’ve seen several times from MRAs.

Same, and it makes me SO ANGRY. Don’t you DARE fucking grab such brutal history and claim it for your stupid pet cause, assholes. You don’t know shit. Lynching was an overwhelmingly horrible racial crime perpetuated by white people on blacks, treated as a family occasion with souvenirs. It was a RACIAL CRIME, not a gender-based one.

burgundy
burgundy
7 years ago

Let me see if I’ve got this right – most men have at least treated women disrespectfully -> disrespectful treatment is a form of violence -> most men are violent abusers -> MISANDRY! Is that the line of thought here? Because the idea of someone from a movement that is based on spreading the gospel of disrespecting women getting his gender-non-specific underwear in a wad over the suggestion that men are disrespectful…there is a certain beauty in that logic, even if it a Lovecraftian kind of beauty that will drive you mad if you stare at it too long.

Cthulhu's Intern
7 years ago

So let me get this straight. MRAs hate that one person said that men are disrespectful, which is why they’re in a movement… that does nothing but be disrespectful.

dlouwe
dlouwe
7 years ago

The thing that really kills me about the French misquote is that there’s even ellipses to indicate that the quote was shortened, just not in the part that was removed to change the quote’s meaning. There are full sentences flat-out vaporized without note, and they just happen to be integral to the meaning of the passage? How can that be anything other than blatant intellectual dishonesty?

I mean, even from Taylor’s perspective – how can he argue that even with the full quote it’s no different in meaning when the source he got it from (“Antimisandry” lol) clearly had the intent of obfuscating its meaning?

(btw I know the answers to these questions – I just tend to get rhetorical when my flabbers are ghasted)

Dvärghundspossen
7 years ago

Oh, just got some real male discrimination from the school world up in my Swedish feminist group on Facebook… A teacher works at a school where the other teachers don’t wanna let boys apply for being “Lucia” (Swedish tradition: http://www.svenskakyrkan.se/default.aspx?id=953948 “Lucia” is the person in the middle of the pic with candles on her head), because that’s for girls only. Seriously, every year this happens at schools all over the country. GET OVER IT, SCHOOLS EVERYWHERE! Boys can sing while having candles on their head just as well as girls can!

Athywren
Athywren
7 years ago

So let me get this straight. MRAs hate that one person said that men are disrespectful, which is why they’re in a movement… that does nothing but be disrespectful.

Well, let’s be fair. What she said is that most men are at least disrespectful.
(I kinda want to clarify that farther, since it’s entirely possible that the one thing that most men have done is not disrespecting women… but is it actually possible to do the others without disrespect? Technically it says “treat women disrespectfully” which is not the same as actually respecting them… but then paying someone less for the same work, expecting them to be a servant at home, and molesting or killing someone are definitely all disrespectful treatment. Hmm.)

dlouwe
dlouwe
7 years ago

Hey now you folks, the MRM is nothing but respectful! Haven’t you seen the tagline for their slogan? “Fuck Their Shit Up: in a thoroughly respectful and nonviolent manner”. Or “Bash a Violent B**ch Month: using only what force is necessary to secure your personal safety”.

LBT
LBT
7 years ago

Anyone who just copy/pastes shit from a propoganda site without reading through his quotes is a sad example of academia, I’ll tell you that.

(And this, by the way, is why my MSTs are generally unabridged. Nobody can claim I’m making Cockrub Warriors of Mars any sillier than it already is!)

Athywren
Athywren
7 years ago

Athywren – :O So does that mean evolution is misandry?

Yes! The totes true scientificus of evolutionary psychology proves that men are supposed to be enslaved bodyguards to women, therefore evoution is misandry, and it’s irrational to oppose it, because what’s natural is what’s good.
(And we know that what’s natural is what’s good because the totes true scientificus of evolutionary psychology proves that women should stay home and do all the babby-related stuff, and never ever do boythings)

A teacher works at a school where the other teachers don’t wanna let boys apply for being “Lucia”

Now that is misandry! We have evidence that boys are capable of singing with candles on their heads!

See?!

tedthefed
tedthefed
7 years ago

do…. do these guys seriously think most feminists want any man accused or suspected of rape to automatically be severely punished? Because… hey, we can clear this up right now! No: Most feminists, while critical of many of the ways rape is trested, DON’T want to replace the current legal system with a combination of Wild West viligante mob justice and vicious, Orwellian state control! If you think they do, then you’re probably overgeneralizing from specific encounters and quotes from extremist or angry outliers (and you probably misinterpreted those people, too)! Also, there is nothing contradictory about being a feminist and disagreeing with things other feminists have said!
Problem, uh, solved?

Alice Sanguinaria
7 years ago

Athywren – Mind = Blown.

mindjustblown.jpeg

aebars
7 years ago

Hey David this post has got me thinking… could you do a post about the hate mail and threats you’ve received over the years? Screencaps of e-mails, and such? I’m sure you must have received plenty.

Ashley
7 years ago

“Actually Futrelle, according to Feminist ideology everything Marilyn French listed was a form of violence. Need I remind you what all constitutes “violence” according to Feminist ideology nowadays?”

Huh? He makes no sense here. Is he confusing the word “violence” with “abuse,” because those are two different things? I suppose it would make a little more sense if we were talking about “abuse” but not violence. Yeah, I’m pretty sure no one in their right mind, including feminists, considers refusing to hire women in well paid jobs, paying them less, or treating them disrespectfully as VIOLENCE.

Brooked
Brooked
7 years ago

@HeatherN

Aside from all the obvious, what makes this whole thing so damn depressing is that this is apparently the academic arm of AVfM. This is coming from the space for students and it’s written by someone who is apparently, “a former college instructor of composition and argumentation.”

Wow, I assumed the original article was by a college student or someone who majored in one of the haloed fields STEM. I guess he doesn’t spend a lot of time teaching students how to correctly site sources.

In the original post he made this rather broad, unsubstantiated claim.

Lastly, it bears mention that virtually nothing has been done prior to the publication of this post to take a substantial stand against misandry in academia by the academic community itself.

It bears mention that I went to Amazon and searched the word “misandry” and the first three books that come up are Legalizing Misandry, Spreading Misandry and Sanctifying Misandry, all of which were written by Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young, a professor and a researcher from McGill University and McGill-Queen’s University Press. The three books are about 1400 pages combined and the forth book, Transcending Misandry: From Feminist Ideology to Intersexual Dialogue, is even out yet.
I don’t know if this qualifies as a “substantial stand”, but it beats collecting 40 random quotes (some copied and pasted), labeling them misandry because they are in some way critical of men and calling it a day. That’s what Taylor did and I see no reason to take his “warehouse” of quotes seriously.

This is from his response:

It’s my job to find quotes that are generally representative of misandry, regardless as to whether that misandry is advocated by Feminists or traditionalists, and regardless as to whether it is generally representative of Feminism or not.

I doubt doing research is his “job” since he’s not very good at it. Since Mr Taylor seems to read the comments, I like to point him to a short study sheet called “The Historical Approach to Research”.
http://tinyurl.com/og7we6y

1. the recognition of a historical problem or the identification of a need for certain historical knowledge.
2. the gathering of as much relevant information about the problem or topic as possible.
if appropriate, the forming of hypothesis that tentatively explain relationships between historical factors.
3.The rigorous collection and organization of evidence, and the verification of the authenticity and veracity of information and its sources.
4. The selection, organization, and analysis of the most pertinent collected evidence, and the drawing of conclusions; and
5. the recording of conclusions in a meaningful narrative.

Chie Satonaka
Chie Satonaka
7 years ago

This is absurd even by MRA standard, and that says something. I mean, I get that they think rape basically never happens, it’s all just innocent men being locked up on the whim of women, and therefore talking about rape and trying to raise awareness about rape is misandry, since it’s just gonna end in more men being locked up. But how is a chastity belt gonna send someone to jail?

According to them, the mere existence of this garment means that all men are assumed rapists, which is misandry.

Chie Satonaka
Chie Satonaka
7 years ago

And at the same time, locally in my town a woman was sexually assaulted by a man she’d been socializing with at a bar. He got her alone just outside and assaulted her. The comment thread on the article is filled with victim-blaming — “What did she expect, hanging out with someone she barely knew?”

Damned if we do, damned if we don’t. If we assume someone might be a rapist, we are psychotic man-hating bitches. If we let our guard down around the wrong person and get raped, we are stupid bitches who were asking for it. Funny how no matter what the scenario, it’s always the woman who is wrong to these assholes.

LBT
LBT
7 years ago

Transcending Misandry: From Feminist Ideology to Intersexual Dialogue

ErLACH. Now I remember why I don’t miss school at all. It feels like my brain is getting bludgeoned with a dictionary.

Alice Sanguinaria
7 years ago

Chie – Links? I might add on to my blog post about the anti-rape undies.

katz
7 years ago

It feels like my brain is getting bludgeoned with a dictionary.

And not just any dictionary.

dlouwe
dlouwe
7 years ago

According to them, the mere existence of this garment means that all men are assumed rapists, which is misandry.

Well that just logically follows, since the existance of locks makes the assumption that all people are thiefs – wait…

CassandraSays
7 years ago

Eh, this one is acting like a troll in full-on NO U flameout during a comment war, so I’m going to treat him like he deserves and mostly ignore him. If all you have is one flawed but important-to-your-sense-of-self hammer to cling to, then everything becomes a misandry nail.

I will note that rape-prevention underwear can’t send anyone to jail and could in theory be used to defend against a rape charge (hey, they’ve used regular old jeans to argue that rape was impossible in Italy), so campaigning against its existence is…interesting. If MRAs are right and rape almost never happens then it’s just a useless purchase, and they won’t be the ones paying for it, so why should they care?

Athywren
Athywren
7 years ago

@Ashley
He’s actually quoting from a particular feminist article:

Actually Futrelle, according to Feminist ideology everything Marilyn French listed was a form of violence. Need I remind you what all constitutes “violence” according to Feminist ideology nowadays? According to the Feminist publication “Intersecting Violences”:

“Economic violence against women occurs when they are denied access to or control over resources, or the right to work and earn income.”

Indeed, domestic violence in particular is now not just physical violence, but also:

Economic violence
Emotional violence
Psychological violence
Physical violence
Sexual violence

I don’t see any mention of emotional violence in the article, though that could be because so far I’ve only done a quick word-finding search rather than reading through it. It’s entirely possible he’s just extrapolating from certain mentioned of psychological violence.
I’m not sure about the value of the term “economic violence” but it’s use is explained to a certain degree on page 24 of the linked article:

Vivian Milosavljević (2007) stresses that poverty should not be perceived solely as unequal distribution of income but also as the result of women’s subordinated status in a male-defined world. She argues that conventional methods of measuring poverty are influenced by a cultural myth that defines the household as a homogeneous unit of analysis and a harmonious or democratic entity whose members are per se willing to share household assets equitably. However this assumption ignores power dynamics within the household – a dangerous oversight given that recent surveys of intra-familial and conjugal violence report a high incidence of intra-household VAW (2007: 144). Milosavljević recognises that all forms of violence – physical, sexual or psychological – contribute to women’s impoverishment, but insists that poverty analysis must include economic violence against women, which occurs when they are denied access to or control over resources, or the right to work and earn income. Ignoring these forms of violence out of an idealistic assumption that households are spaces where “harmonious power relations are never disturbed” makes an important aspect of VAW remain invisible (2007: 141–4).

So it’s not something he just made up out of whole cloth. It is unskeptical and dishonest garbage to assert that it is entrenched in feminist ideology, and it’s also a pathetic attempt to distract from his earlier lack of intellectual rigor in posting the original quotemine, but it’s not a complete invention on his part.

CassandraSays
7 years ago

Physical violence is included in a list of things that are now considered physical violence. Whatever job in academia this guy used to hold, I can see why he doesn’t have it any more.

CassandraSays
7 years ago

With the explanation that the list tagged “not just, but also” too. Poor thing, he’s not too bright.

CassandraSays
7 years ago

Ugh, the stupid is rubbing off on me. Check out that sentence structure.

If I start to write like an MRA I’m blaming this blog.

Athywren
Athywren
7 years ago

It’s my job to find quotes that are generally representative of misandry, regardless as to whether that misandry is advocated by Feminists or traditionalists, and regardless as to whether it is generally representative of Feminism or not.

Sounds like it’s our turn to cite ideology: Feminism is the problem. Feminism is always the problem. Even considering that it might be traditionalism, and that feminists might actually be possible allies in this fight is MISANDRY!!!

kittehserf
7 years ago

You’d think they’d be pleased about it, because if it worked, then they could say any woman not wearing the things was asking for sex.

Chie Satonaka
Chie Satonaka
7 years ago

@Alice, someone at Pharyngula indicated that these comments were at the original Slate article, but I see now that many are deleted. Slate article is here:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/11/04/ar_wear_these_anti_rape_shorts_update_the_chastity_belt_for_the_rape_culture.html

kittehserf
7 years ago

(My previous post referred to the anti-rape pants.)

LBT
LBT
7 years ago

As a rape survivor, I am shocked, SHOCKED that MRAs are inconsistent in how they believe rape should be dealt with. Truly I am.

(And see, this is EXACTLY why I want nothing to do with them. I share a traumatic experience with female rape survivors; with the average MRA, all I share is a piffling identity label.)

CassandraSays
7 years ago

It would even make sense (though I would disagree) for them to argue that the anti-rape underwear is tinfoil hat stuff, and view it as a bit out there. Where things get weird and interesting is them viewing the act of someone wearing special underwear as an attack on men as a group. Call it silly or pointless and I’ll think you’re being a bit insensitive, but call it misandry and I’m going…guys, it’s underwear. You won’t even know if someone is wearing it if you see them walking down the street or sit next to them on the bus. If you’re not in a intimate relationship with the person wearing it then it has exactly zero impact on you.

kittehserf
7 years ago

But Cassandra, wearing it means she doesn’t trust men! It means she’s saying all men are rapists! You know how sensitive dudes are, the very idea that some woman somewhere might think that about ME, ME, INNOCENT DUDE ME is wounding and insulting and just too much misandry for a guy to deal with!

That’s apart from those evil scary strangers that say hello to women or have a drink in a bar or whatever, because a woman should totally know what to expect if she talks to strangers, amirite?

1 2 3 4