From Comedy Central’s Inside Amy Schumer, here’s a little skit taking on the phenomenon of the Nice Guy. No fedoras so be seen, but other than that she pretty much covers all the bases, right on down to the neckbeards on some of the fellas. Caution: Mild creepshaming.
NOTE TO ANGRY MRAS: This video does not represent an official statement on the part of feminism. Amy Schumer is a COMEDIAN.
They sure aren’t. Sometimes I even wonder if they realize just how awful they make their own ‘movement’ look.
MRA: they have a attitude towards men then the feminists and women they hate.
Dagnabit, for the word “worse” i.e. “worse attitude”
No one commits misandry as much as MRAs. And yes, I am getting a definite “men will inevitably rape, it’s just natural, thinking you can stop it is silly” vibe from that graphic.
The poster seems to be saying that feminists are deluded ideologues who see rape where rape doesn’t exist, like all or most so-called date rape. Also, “rape culture” is just a scary propaganda term for the (supposedly super common) physical occurrence of rape.
The poster assumes that tectonic subduction categorically cannot be violence, both because one plate cannot be hurt and because the other plate isn’t a conscious actor. The authors probably didn’t mean to imply that same applies to sexual penetration, simply because they don’t care if it does. However, they do imply that it’s useless to educate against rape, because rapists gonna rape, conscious actors or not.
Also, they show gross incompetence/intellectual laziness mixing between coastlines and tectonic plate margins. Each of those could have been used separately for this joke, although then it would have been less effective for non-pedants.
Agreed, I think it’s trying (and failing) to paint feminists as wacky, fanatical demagogues who see evidence of patriarchy everywhere, even where it’s totally nonsensical, like massive geologic processes. As if we’re also out there shaking our fists at clouds and trees to stop oppressing us, and marching on the Alps chanting “OROGENY IS MISOGYNY!”
On the other hand, making HURR LANDWONG posters strongly suggests that MRAs see rape everywhere, even where it’s totally nonsensical, like massive geologic processes. Way to flunk your own Rorschach test, dudes.
There actually is a tectonic boundary near Vancouver Island, but it’s off the West Coast, not between the island and Washington state. And it’s not a subduction zone, but a transform fault – meaning that the plates move sideways against each other. Rather more like consensual grinding than forced penetration.
So add “geology” to the list of things MRAs fail at.
In terms of penis-shaped areas, I would think the MRAs are more like Florida: dicks waving pointlessly in the vast uncaring ocean. (Not aimed at Floridians, just the geographic area.)
So Vancouver is twerking?
Beautiful!
Nah…more like the old-fashioned sideways booty-shake.
Geology is Destiny! /s
Also, the Night of the Living NiceGuys was delightful.
The bit where the guy says that one woman “owed him” pretty much says it all, when it comes to Nice Guys. It certainly captures just how disingenuous they are about being nice – which they certainly are not, since harassing women comes into it.
Which episode was this on?
PS I used to be Molly Moon but then I started using a wordpress account
Yeah, that bit made my skin crawl, saintnick.
I seem to remember a man saying those exact words to me before giving me a dressing-down about my decision to date someone who wasn’t him.
Thus, ironically, justifying your decision not to date him, if any justification was needed, which it wasn’t.
Shows how poorly they think of everything – themselves, women, relationships – when they think it’s worth having a date (or, presumably, sex) with someone who’s just doing it out of a sense of obligation. Makes you wonder if it’s about the control or about the chance to orgasm inside someone. If the latter … geez, is it that important?
You know, I’ve tried to figure that out before, and I think it’s because they just don’t care about the other person’s subjective state? By which I mean, even for the ones who aren’t nasty enough to want to make women unhappy, how we feel about things is just kind of irrelevant to them.
I imagine they just think of the woman as a sort of prop (hence why they seriously pursue women they’ve never talked to and know nothing about) and therefore don’t see what the difference would be between a woman who likes them and a woman who merely tolerates them.
I get the feeling that if you tried to have the “but she doesn’t like you, doesn’t that bother you?” conversation they’d react as if you were asking them if it bothered them that their car didn’t like them.
Off-topic: A bit of hilarious homophobia. Two men marrying are discriminating against women! (David, I’d love to see your take on this one!)
My parents are obviously racist because both of them are white and by not giving a non-white person the role of spouse or parent they were totally discriminating.
LOL, “crass ceiling”. Dude’s attempt to sell the idea that confining women to their traditional role as wives and mothers represents a truer form of equality than allowing lesbians to get married does get some points for originality. We should poke him and see if he’ll come comment here, we need some originality in our trolls.
Apparently also lesbians never get married and gay marriage is a nefarious plot to keep all women lonely and excluded.