Many Men’s Rights Redditors see themselves as fighting a noble fight against genuinely evil, misandrist radical feminists on the internet. One of their most powerful weapons: the deadly downvote.
Reading through one old thread on Men’s Rights last night, I noticed how some Men’s Rights Redditors had deftly deployed their downvotes to fight off the evil feminist misandry lurking in this comment:
Outrageous! A statement that could have been ripped straight from Valerie Solanas’ SCUM Manifesto!
Kudos to the brave Redditors who saw this vile misandry for what it was.
Elsewhere in the same thread, I happily noticed, Men’s Rights Redditors were helpfully upvoting the reasonable and uplifting sentiments of decent fellows, like the Men’s Rights Redditor who goes by the name theboners, who offered a sensibly critical take on the always controversial question of whether or not it was a good idea for men to give in to “pussy privilege” and let ladies have the vote:
Oh you irresponsible women! Why do we let you do anything?
I mean, aside from letting GirlWritesWhat make YouTube videos; that’s ok.
–
It might be time for that blinking
gif to remind possibly literal-minded readers that I do not actually agree with theboners or think SweetieKat is a reincarnation of Valerie Solanas.
If I thought that someone didn’t want to have sex then I wouldn’t want to have sex with them, because why would I make them do something that won’t be fun for them? If a bunch of men are walking around thinking that women as a group never want sex, but trying to get them into bed anyway…blech. That’s messed up.
@pecunium
Nailed it. *files for future reference*
RE: Kim
“A small red bloodstain was on the sheets, and again the possessive monster inside me threw back his head and roared his pleasure.
My husband’s reaction to this was, “If she’s bleeding, I’m CONCERNED.” Like, do not a single one of these people ever get the idea, “Oh shit, I should check and make sure they’re okay!” Why is their first response always pride? It’s like, congratulations, asshole, you made your partner bleed and apparently don’t care. Good for you.
RE: zippydoo
I have heard people talk about how virgin women have absolutely no clue how to get themselves or a man off and how this would be sad for a man’s penis and ego.
Gay man, but I always had this fear as well. (Part of my Raping Year was a constant dissonance where I was supposed to be endearingly innocent and inexperienced but also very good at getting him off. He really wanted to be the Corrupter of Virgins.) I STILL feel perversely guilty every once in a while for not being into masturbation, because obviously I’m not learning about myself.
“Creep is a gendered slur,” anyone?
About women voting being bad for libertarianism, riddle me this: Libertarianism states that I should only look out for my own interests. Thus, if libertarianism itself is bad for my interests (eg, if it advocates preventing me from voting), then, according to the principles of libertarianism, I should oppose libertarianism. Voila, a self-defeating philosophy!
katz: Libertarianism is, at root, a self-defeating philosophy.
But you knew that. 🙂
And this was coupled with vague but strong implications from the right that this was in some way unfair or not a “proper” victory. It’s hard to put my finger on exactly what rubbed me the wrong way about the commentary, but there seemed to be a lot of discomfort at the revelation that the straight-white-male vote is no longer necessary to win the presidency.
Katz is right! And so is tinyorc.
“Creep is a gendered slur”
“You just say that because you have pussy priviledge”
“The patriarchy protects women, and it oppresses men!”
“Men are success objects and women are sex objects, so all women see men as replaceable success objects”
“Those poor young men see women pay attention to people who do things, so they think that to get someone to pay attention to them, they must do things, and this means they try so very hard to fit into a role in order to get attention!”
“Refusing women the right to vote is actually just an attempt at safeguarding their innocence, because the world is big and bad! Those poor oppressed men are forced to make decisions while women just reap the benefits!”
The appropriation of terms that are then genderflipped in order to argue for the status quo or argue against political advances is astounding, and a little odd, and it still makes perfect sense from a perspective of completely tomfoolery.
So you get “Pussy priviledge”, because poor oppressed men want to use their power relations to force women to sleep with them
And you get “Heroic soldiers are actually just servant-protectors sent out to die and bribed with glory, prestige, social responsibility and access and control. Large harems are a way of bribing men to die, you guys”
And you get “Unemployment is like rape for a man because it deprives him of that which has given him the love of many women”
and you get “Worrying about the possibility of rape is a a clear example of the demonization of male sexuality and how it’s actually a conspiracy to make all men out as monsters who should be locked away and never trusted!”
It’s a hodgepodge of social theory with a find replace of “women” with “men”
Note that this is where the term “sex class” came from. Sexist men seem to be literally incapable of thinking about women in any way that isn’t directly related to how to get the women to have sex with them, or why the women aren’t currently having sex with them, or whether the women are cruelly having sex with other men, or…
Make the fact that you see us as walking vaginas a bit less obvious, dudes.
Christ yes.
The thing that just baffles me the most is still the parts of Warren Farrell’s writing I can’t seem to dislodge from my skull, because it’s just… seeped in there and won’t go away, but, argh – he has this mini review of The Women’s Room, Marilyn French, that just boils down to “So after breaking up with her husband, she realizes men are jerks, which means that the message is all men are jerks and she shouldn’t be having sex with them! THIS IS HORRIBLE!”
It’s.. just… how? *How*?
Oh, I see I mentioned that already. Sorry. I forgot.
Kind of topsy-turvy lately.
@Fibinachi – I’ve been reading your blog as you wade through Farrell’s muck and I just want to say kudos! (Oh, and please take care of your liver!)
A woman could say “and so then I found out I had cancer and I was scared that I was going to die” and their first response would be “wait, this doesn’t mean that you’re going to refuse men sex, does it?”.
“And, in today’s news, hundreds of women were found to have contracted food poisoning from the diet yogurt that had been aggressively marketed to them in recent months.”
“Does that mean that they’ll be too busy vomiting to give me a blow job?”
“Woman mauled by angry polar bear during arctic exploration”
“So that means none of the men on her team will be getting lucky tonight? Well, that’s just awful. She should have been more careful.”
Did he actually read the book or just the dust jacket is what I’m wondering. If he did read it and that was his takeaway, I’m afraid his reading comprehension is right around zero.
Oh hellkell, they never actually read the thing they’re criticizing. And they definitely never try to understand it.
@Asixpack
The fact is, some men, including you, are twisting the definition of privilege. Male privilege is when men have an advantage JUST BECAUSE they were born male, generally a white male. They don’t have to DO or earn anything for that privilege. It is not a “privilege” to have to do something, much less let one’s own body be used by another in order to get or keep something (one’s job).
Despite what men like you with fucked up ideas like to tell yourselves, fighting in a war is not about “protecting” women and children or our freedoms. It’s about fighting a pissing contest between powerful, rich men who want more power and because there is money to be made. That’s it. The biggest casualties in war are women and children civilians, and don’t even get me started on the rape that soldiers commit. The only entities trying to take our freedoms away these days are the government, big corporations, and religion, so don’t try to pretend some foreign country is actually going to do it. Also, there hasn’t been a draft in forty years, so none of you have had to serve for anything.
And the idea that all men get screwed over in divorce is a huge exaggeration. Some are, but most are just pissed off that they can’t control how things play out and that they can’t screw over their ex wives the way men used to be able to. I clearly remember the divorce climate in the 60s and 70s when divorce was starting to climb, and it wasn’t men getting screwed over most of the time. Women were generally given custody because they were the primary caregivers to children and also, it didn’t take judges and the friends of the court long to realize that most men only wanted custody so they didn’t have to pay their wives child support. Placing children with their primary care-givers was considered the logical thing to do. Women who give up the ability to make money to raise a family has every right to half of the money their spouses make. This all comes down to some men thinking that their wives and children are their possessions to be moved on a chessboard to their satisfaction, and their frustration that it is no longer a given. Now that’s privilege.
Good luck getting a response, tealily. We seem to have driven that wanker off with snark.
That’s, ok, LBT. I don’t need one. 🙂
Fibinachi: And this was coupled with vague but strong implications from the right that this was in some way unfair or not a “proper” victory. It’s hard to put my finger on exactly what rubbed me the wrong way about the commentary, but there seemed to be a lot of discomfort at the revelation that the straight-white-male vote is no longer necessary to win the presidency.
But sixpack argues his getting hurt means all women are like that which is just a fact of life and he needs to make sure other men learn that.
LBT: Even before the flounces sixpack never actually responded to argument, just used it as a reason to complain some more about how the wimminz done him wrong.
emilygoddess: And this was coupled with vague but strong implications from the right that this was in some way unfair or not a “proper” victory. It’s hard to put my finger on exactly what rubbed me the wrong way about the commentary, but there seemed to be a lot of discomfort at the revelation that the straight-white-male vote is no longer necessary to win the presidency.
There have long been complaints about how elections weren’t really, “valid” because the margins of victory in this state, or that, were tipped by Native Americans (or blacks, or whomever “Those People” are in the pathology of the person making the statement). The implicit argument is they aren’t, “real americans” and so ought not be counted.
So the chuckleheads are arguing for taxation without representation.
RE: pecunium
Even before the flounces sixpack never actually responded to argument, just used it as a reason to complain some more about how the wimminz done him wrong.
Yup. Part of why he got my dander up. Nobody cares about your sob story, asshole.
So, after finally getting caught up on the last couple days post, all I can say is, what the fuckety fuck?
Vox Day says its AOK to shoot little girls in the head for wanting to go to school.
Joeblow the troll says if it weren’t for sex and reproduction, we’d just kill female babies at birth. Because women aren’t people, I guess.
Cliven Bundy says slavery is good. W.F. Price doesn’t have a problem with that, but thinks Bundy’s getting bad press because he talks “more like black Americans than urban whites.”
theboners says women shouldn’t vote, because they vote for the wrong people and this is bad for libertarianism.
This is just…I mean, this type of stuff isn’t difficult. It’s wrong to kill people. It’s wrong to shoot children in the head. It’s wrong to treat people as objects. Slavery is bad. Universal suffrage is good.
This is not rocket science. This is not a huge moral or ethical dilemma. These things are just downright obvious. I don’t fucking get these people. Do they think at all? Do they completely lack any sense of right and wrong, morals, ethics, compassion and basic humanity?
Do they completely lack any sense of right and wrong, morals, ethics, compassion and basic humanity?
Pretty much, yes.