On Monday, Martin Luther King Day here in the United States, this was posted in the Men’s Rights subreddit, where, as you can see, it was quite popular with the assembled Men’s Rightsers:
How wrong is this? Let me count the ways.
1) It’s wrong because Men’s Rights “Activists” aren’t “warriors for peace,” or justice, or even for their own backwards notions of men’s rights. MRAs, like a lot of men insecure about their own worth, love to claim credit for the accomplishments of great men in the past (without accepting any responsibility for the terrible deeds of the terrible men who lived before them).
But even in terms of claiming credit where no credit is due this is especially ridiculous. Aside from a tiny handful of “fathers rights activists,” who’ve bizarrely chosen to try to advance their cause by vandalizing paintings and/or dressing up in superhero costumes and climbing up buildings, and one troubled man who killed himself in hopes that his death would spur other MRAs to acts of terrorism directed at courthouses and police stations, MRAs don’t risk anything with their “activism,” insofar as they engage in anything that can be called activism at all.
There’s nothing heroic, or risky, about posting anonymous rants online about how women are all a bunch of hypergamous bitches, or sending some vague threat to the feminist villain of the day.
Indeed, MRAs face so little risk that some are forced to invent stories of persecution — like John Hembling’s tall tale of being confronted by a mob of boxcutter-wielding feminists, thoroughly discredited by The Daily Beast — in order to cast themselves in the role of the persecuted victim-turned-hero.
2) It’s wrong because the person posting this message, and attempting to suggest some sort of link between the civil rights movement of Martin Luther King and the Men’s Rights movement today, is someone who also posts in the White Rights subreddit, a haven for the same sort of hateful white supremacists who hurled racial epithets — not to mention actual rocks and bottles — at King when he was alive.
When one Redditor pointed this out, and noted (correctly) that numerous white nationalists post in the Men’s Rights subreddit, they were quickly downvoted for their troubles.
The original poster explained that he only posted in White Rights about “real cases of white discrimination.”
Another poster offered an example of what he saw as one such case of “real” anti-white discrimination:
Yeah, that was totally a real thing.
3) It’s wrong because it’s wrong. As in, factually incorrect. Warren Farrell is talking out of his ass, again. Here’s a slightly longer version of his quote, which you can find on his web page. (It’s originally from The Myth of Male Power.)
Men are likely to be not only the warriors of war but also the warriors of peace. Almost all those who risk their lives, are put in jail, or are killed for peace are men. While some of the peace warriors—Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King, Gandhi, Dag Hammarskjold—are remembered, most are forgotten. Remember Norm Morrison?
Well, no, Warren, I don’t remember Norm Morrison. But I think you’re forgetting a few people too. Like half of the human race.
Women have been involved in peace and social justice movements as long as women have been active in the public sphere. Ever hear of Women Strike for Peace? Code Pink? At every large demonstration I’ve been at that has involved civil disobedience, I’ve seen both men and women arrested, with some of the women old enough to be grandmothers or great-grandmothers. The idea that women don’t put themselves on the line for peace or social justice is patently false.
This is really kind of basic stuff. But with MRAs, alas, you always need to go back to the basics.
But the post in the Men’s Rights subreddit was all about co-opting the civil rights movement, so today I thought I would remind anyone who might have forgotten — or who never knew — that it wasn’t just men who put themselves at risk in the struggle for civil rights.
You can click on the pictures for more information.
I’ve just been down a delightful rabbit-hole, listening to women composers. Here’s another one:
I laughed at Sam’s quoting the idiot Paglia with her “no female Mozart” when there was, literally.
If you think Paglia’s any sort of feminist, Sammy, think again.
http://classical-music-online.net/stat/?type=top_persons&person_type=composer
Feminist Camille Paglia stated that there is no female Mozart because there is no female Jack the Ripper.
There is no law that states that you have to have one to have the other, this is a random correlation trying to justify the false notion that what happened in the past was just the natural order of things and not the result of social order that could quickly be turned on It’s head given the right conditions. In the last 40 years alone we’re witnessing the male bastions of superiority falling one by one and that’s just a really short period and the changes will continue to unfold.
I don’t think anyone is demonizing men or masculinity per se but as you probably know absolute power corrupts absolutely and some things have to be adressed and corrected.
Not sure what else I can say that hasn’t already been said, except…..R.I.P. MLK Jr. You were taken from us all too soon; may your legacy live on forever.
LOL the “proof” is that the top composers are all male. Hmm wonder who’s making these lists, or who promoted/encouraged their pursuits in the past?
It couldn’t have anything to do with women being prevented from such things or when they did try not given the same opportunities. Nope, not at all.
From the Mozart Wiki:
“However, given the views of her parents, prevalent in her society at the time, it became impossible as she grew older for her to continue her career any further. According to New Grove, “from 1769 onwards she was no longer permitted to show her artistic talent on travels with her brother, as she had reached a marriageable age.”[1] ”
That makes me sad. Imagine all of the good things we missed out on because half of the human race was effectively silenced? It certainly makes me more appreciative of the fact that I have more opportunities, and more likely to take them when they do come my way.
But guys, for every genius you have to have a serial killer (and one that specifically picks their targets for misogynistic reasons, too). It’s sciencey!
…How do we know that Jack the Ripper was male?
Paglia is to scholastic excellence as McDonalds is to fine dining.
That makes me sad. Imagine all of the good things we missed out on because half of the human race was effectively silenced? It certainly makes me more appreciative of the fact that I have more opportunities, and more likely to take them when they do come my way.
It’s really sad indeed and this thing keeps happening even today even thought it’s more subtle than in the past. I just read Christine Lagarde who said that she herself was strongly against quotas for women untill she experienced the discrimination herself.
Dunno if this book is any good, but it exists:
http://www.amazon.com/Jack-Ripper-The-Hand-Woman/dp/1854115669/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1390780251&sr=8-1&keywords=Jack+The+Ripper%3A+The+Hand+Of+A+Woman.
Yeah, Camille Paglia’s “statement” is doubly idiotic.
And LOL at link to a bunch of famous white dudes (well, I do see at least one non-white non-male person is on the list).
Paglia’s attitude towards masculinity is downright fetishistic. Which is fine, people are allowed to have fetishes, but basing your academic career on pretending that your fetishes are some sort of universal truth is a bit sketchy.
Yeah, who needs context?
Your only evidence for which was “somebody said”. And evidence has been offered to the contrary.
And even if it’s true that men are more likely to die in activism, so what? The thesis of the OP is that women aren’t even out there marching, which even your paraphrased comment about “using” women in civil rights marches seems to contradict. So what, exactly, are you trying to prove? Do you even have a point?
The idea seems to be that the cops are more likely to try to hurt male protesters (not necessarily true), which is the fault of female protesters/feminists/women in general because…it just is, OK? You’re all evil misandrists!
It may not be the fault of the female protesters, but it’s certainly their duty to attempt to get hurt more.
Paglia, Christ. I guess it’s something that he didn’t bring up Dworkin, but Paglia? That woman gives me a headache.
Her writing always gives me that TMI feeling. Like, um, OK, thanks for sharing your sexual fantasies with the class, but maybe you should have asked if that would be alright with them first?
Just seeing stuff about Paglia quoted in the papers (which is mercifully rare here) makes me queasy.
Paglia is Queen of Assfax.
And the only one keeping a gender scorecard is Sam.
Camille Paglia is not a feminist. She’s a “dissident feminist,” which, as her work reveals, is really just a code word for “pro-patriarchy feminist.”
This is a misleading description. Society has granted men agency, but that doesn’t mean they have often existed in “extremes.”
Translation: An analysis of how gender relations oppress women? Nah, you’re just a gender ideologue.
More like “pointing out the good things that some men have done for civilization is a common silencing tactic used against a movement that has for decades criticized patriarchal norms that oppress women.”
Also, really? All men who do evil things are condemned for their actions? You’re going to have to try to back up that sweeping generalization, you know.
AllyS: Seems like these guys can’t track their own “logic.
“Women in general are terrible because of this in particular.”
“By that logic, men in general would be terrible because of that in particular.”
“WHY DO YOU BLAME ALL MEN!?!”
*facepalm*