Happy Valentine’s Day, gynocrats!.
Over on A Voice for Male Students, the always-reasonable and never-hysterical Jonathan Taylor celebrates this day of candies and flowers and irritating Kay Jewelry commercials with a lovely little piece entitled “The gynocentrism of Valentine’s Day, and the spoiled princess mentality.”
In it, he takes aim at a holiday he sees as rewarding the sort of woman who behaves like a “privileged princess who didn’t get her pony when she was five.”
His proof of this “gynocentrism?” The custom graphics on Google’s home page today, which I have screencapped and pasted in above.
At first glance, this all seems very innocent. We all remember these adorably crappy candies with the little messages on them. But Taylor is able to discern its insidious deeper meaning in their words:
The inclusion of the “Mr. Right” heart may seem like a small thing, but it is also rather telling, especially coming from the #1 website in the world. Women have expectations and standards. Where are men’s expectations and standards?
We aren’t told about them. Unlike “Mr. Right,” the phrase “Ms. Right” isn’t used in common parlance. The very incidence of men having standards for women is often regarded as sexist, even if they are entirely reasonable – such as not being so fat that you are diabetic by the time you are 35 and bedridden by the time you are 55.
In the age of Feminism, the only people women “answer to” are themselves.
Now that I’ve taken a closer look at Google’s message, I think that Mr. Taylor is if anything understating its creepy gynocentric intent. Take a look again at the first two candies.
CRUSH MR. RIGHT
Clearly this is an invitation to murder. Nay, to MAN GENOCIDE.
FIRST KISS 4EVER YOURS
… because if he is dead, your first kiss will make him — or at least his corpse — forever yours.
PUPPY LOVE
Of course if he is dead, he will not be able to fulfill his normal sexual functions. So Google seems to be recommending bestiality.
BLIND DATE
And then, to cover up your crimes, it suggests that you blind all of your future dates so they can’t see the corpse you’ve got stashed in the spare bedroom. (You may also need to do something about their sense of smell.)
Has the true ugliness of this gynocentric holiday ever been more nakedly displayed?
—
Just in case anyone missed it, this post is almost entirely made up of
… except for the bit about Kay Jewelry ads, which really are irritating.
What would be truly revolutionary would be making the candy taste good.
Corporations like Hallmark, De Beers, etc. are all run by men.
Yes, wealthy, elite white men, the same type who created and funded feminism.
“Yes, wealthy, elite white men, the same type who created and funded feminism.”
And faked the moon landing. And hushed up the Roswell incident. And who create the chemtrails. And are in turn controlled by the Rothschilds.
Full of packing peanuts, I’m telling you.
Packing peanuts are useful…
Not when you’re trying to use them in place of a brain, unfortunately.
Women can’t even feminism. 🙁
Tight tinfoil much?
Aw, shit, Sam, I needed that laugh, thanks.
Yeah, Sam, the white elite dudes created and funded feminism…that’s why so much of NOW’s money (and NAC’s, here in Canada) comes from Hallmark, DeBeers, etc.
I am laughing so hard at your chemtrail theory of feminism that my face hurts.
Wealthy men created feminism? Once again Sam, CITATION NEEDED.
So if the wealthy men behind de Beers etc created and funded feminism, then cis-males are financially supporting it via valentine’s day. Suckers!
What a rabbit hole! So instead of taking the red pill, I should take the pink heart candy?
Hold out for the bon-bons, Kiwi girl!
Ooooo good point! Do I need to worry about the colour of the bon-bons? Are the scented fucking candles down the rabbit hole?
So many questions needing answers!
Don’t forget Google. They must presumably be part of the shadowy cabal of powerful white men who created and now manage feminism, since they used the candy hearts on Valentine’s Day.
My argument is totally about a one sided gynocentric celebration and how femist silence toward and even support of it shows the non-equality that modern feminism seeks.
Feminist silence toward Valentine’s Day:
http://msmagazine.com/blog/2011/02/12/how-to-have-a-feminist-valentines-day/
http://everydayfeminism.com/2013/02/valentines-day-whats-a-feminist-to-do/
http://www.thenation.com/article/166221/valentines-day-occupy-romantic-industrial-complex#
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2014/02/13/valentine_s_day_is_canceled_due_to_snow.html
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2011/02/14/defending_the_denouncers_of_valentines_day_against_the_defenders.html
Googling “feminists on Valentine’s Day” mostly brings up a bunch of anti-feminist writers complaining about how feminists are trying to destroy Valentine’s Day because they hate love and happiness and men. Like this romantic fellow, for example…
http://libertyunyielding.com/2014/02/15/v-victimhood-feminists-hate-valentines-day/
…who mocks feminist criticisms of Valentine’s Day by composing a poem:
Roses are red,
Violets are blue.
The heteronormative patriarchy
Is raping you.
You guys need to reach some kind of consensus as to what the feminist conspiracy is plotting here.
And we ate ALL the chocolate-covered strawberries last night.
Wild applause for Shaenon!!
LOL similar story here, my engagement ring was a $10 job from Etsy a friend bought, some sort of resin with a fleur-de-lys. It lasted a couple of months.
Mr K and I had been married years when I got that ring, too. We didn’t do any weddingy stuff in order.
THIS.
Seconded. Demanding citations from a rape victim = banhammer time, to me.
Mx. Right would make me a very happy camper. Semi-relatedly, happy valentine’s day dear, I crashed my car into a guardrail but I’m fine — a summary of my day so far. Ze hasn’t told me how bad the damage is yet, but at least ze’s okay.
Also, my French lesson for the day included le bonbon, so now when anyone says bonbon my brain is going to read it as a general term for candy. Which works since I have no clue what a bonbon is! (It also included je mange du poisson and no I don’t!)
That’s a good question – what do MRAs mean by bonbon? It tends to make me think of a hard-ish, vaguely toffee-like center covered in powdered sugar, which is sometimes colored. So basically you suck the outer part till it dissolves, then chew the center. The way MRAs talk about it I have no idea what they think it means, or if they think it means anything at all other than “thing women expect because they’re evil entitled bitches”.
Well, it has to be expensive, since complaining that women want to eat cheap chocolate wouldn’t make sense even by their standards (well, probably, but it seems to be a stand in for “really expensive things women waste money on”)
When they say “bonbon” I’m picturing this.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Q9vHTnr02pk/S10M0sJE8sI/AAAAAAAABb0/3TUAPxwexF0/s400/bonbons.jpg
Whereas I think they’re picturing a femdom scene in which a man is fearfully offering chocolate truffles to a woman holding a whip and lounging on a divan.
In Minnesota people call mint chocolate chip ice cream peppermint bonbon sometimes.
To me, the primary example of bonbons are cough drops. That is, hard all the way, and it all dissolves in your mouth. In fact, I don’t really like bonbons with fillings. But yeah, I suppose chew bonbons are categorized as bonbons as well.
…and well, that hasn’t much with the metaphor anymore, has it? Heh.