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.
anecdotally, a woman friend of mine is a fire fighter. she’s about 5’1″ tall.I spent a weekend camping with her and fifteen other people, including men over a foot taller and a hundred pounds heavier than her who are not fire fighters. not a single one of us even put up a respectable fight when it came to arm wrestling this woman. even the bear-sized drummer lost, although he lasted for more than 30 seconds. that is because this woman is a fucking fire fighter, and it is her job to do difficult things with her arms. ffs
So, it’s probably just because it’s so late, but I read that as “pissy privilege,” and wondered what the privileged was pissed off about.
OK, back to reading the actual post.
OK, new rule! Anyone who is going to talk about how easy it was for the suffragists to get the vote MUST READ HISTORY!
Beatings, arrests, hunger strikes and forced feedings… Yeah, it was just soooo easy for them. It was all because they threatened their husbands with “no sex for you until I get to vote.”
Arrrgh.
As for the draft, why do they keep bringing that up, when anyone who has read anything about the women’s rights movement can tell you that women have been DEMANDING the right to serve on the front lines, in combat, and to be signed up for the draft in equal measure to men? Of course, a lot of feminists don’t like the draft at all, but they never said, “Give me the rights, but not the responsibilities.” We want the responsibilities, too, darn it! Our fore-mothers fought, physically FOUGHT, for those very responsibilities.
You know, some of those sweet Victorian ladies had female bodyguards? Yeah, they had a whole passel of long-skirted ladies surrounding them, ready to break out the kung-fu (might have been karate or tae kwon do), when their leaders were attacked. And, in fact, there were several instances where they DID fight against policemen who physically attacked the women who were just asking to be treated as equals. And then those women showed themselves to be ready and willing to fight those men on equal terms. Physical terms.
Me, I’m not a fighter. But I know there are plenty of women who are, and these “they take the vote, but not the draft” comments just really get under my skin.
Sorry, im not an expert on this whole feminists-MRA war or whatever. I didnt actually want to call it privilage that these women got promoted over the more qualified male counterparts but just the ownership of a vagina gave them a chance to get promoted but the guys without vaginas obviously didnt have this opportunity you see. It’s not actually forced but the women did have an option of using their vaginas to go up or just avoid the creepy boss and continue their work.
I know there are some women who are pretty strong for their size. Its just that i havent yet met a woman who could beat me in bare strength probably because i didnt spend my teen years playing call of duty but working out a lot and regular cardio and as a result there are just a few men i know who could wipe the floor with me.
I did not know about the firefighting methods and stuff mainly because i havent ever been in a real flaming building nor have i cared enough to do a detailed research on it. I guess that bit of my knowledge came from hollywood movies. LOL.
@alice, all those women fought for only women and minority groups. Noone actually cared enough to fight for men’s rights as a whole no matter how trivial it is. I’ve seen loving fathers lose custody of their children far too often to actually believe that ALL fathers who lose custody were jerks and did not deserve custody.
Im have no real idea about the manosphere you talk about but i seriously care about human rights as a whole and not just women’s rights. So when i see injustice, i speak out.
Im no war expert but i cant take you seriosly when you undermine the lives of men who went to fight for your freedom in war zones by claiming they were not the primary victims of war. Can you provide sources for your claims that dosent link to a feminist website?
Rest of you can keep mocking me. I dont take you seriously if all you want to do is mock me without any productive dialoge. I laugh at your insults. Do keep it intresting though.
Asixpack, I could in fact carry you, despite being female. Hell, I managed to carry someone around your size when I was a skinny teenage girl who had not yet done any weight training. This is mostly because technique actually matters more than brute strength, but also because, dude, you ain’t that big.
More importantly, you seem to have fundamentally misunderstood how recruitment works. You don’t just fill in a bunch of demographic criteria and then get a random person who fits those. You can actually interview and test the candidates. If strength is important, you can test their strength. This means that excluding women from certain roles doesn’t actually add anything. All it means is that you lose out on those female candidates who could actually do the job.
Let’s see, last time I tried to pick up a person who weighed over 200 pounds (I was on the smaller end of a size 6 at the time, so a lot lighter than him) he was about Asix’s height (coworker – we were drunk and he was going on about me being little and weak, so I decided to give him a shock). Carrying him over my shoulder would have been a challenge, because I’m 5ft2 and that would be a bit awkward in terms of long dangling limbs, but if I can pick someone that size up by wrapping my arms around their waist, bending my knees, and lifting, then I’m betting that most female firefighters can drag them just fine.
Not that any of what we’re saying has any hope of getting through his misogyny-reinforced logic shields, but, you know. For the sake of anyone reading who isn’t in “one woman hurt me and now I must have revenge on all of them, the despicable creatures” mode.
Jefrir, I do agree with you on that one, women who can prove themselves worthy of that role by passing the SAME criteria kept for men for that particular role should be allowed to do it and should not be denied that role just because she is female. But i guess there are certain limitations for women in combat roles due to obvious biological reasons. On that note, i dont really support the proposal to lower physical requirements for women just to increase the number of females in the army. I believe in the ‘best man/woman for the job’ philosophy. If a woman wants to work in the army her feminity shouldnt be questioned and likewise a male nurse’s masculinity shouldnt be questioned either. But both people should prove their worth and not get a free pass just because of their gender which i hear some feminists supporting. Gender should never be a criteria for any job. Considering gender for these roles completely disregards the people who dont fit into the traditional defenitions of male/female.
Like what, exactly?
And lower requirements may make sense if the requirments for the role are “is fit and healthy” rather than “can lift this amount”. It depends on what you’re testing for. So, for example, paramedics are required to move a dummy weighing the same as an average man, because that is actually needed for the job, and there is no distinction made between sexes. The military, on the other hand, mostly just needs to check that soldiers are reasonably physically fit, so some differentiation based on sex is reasonable.
Vengeance-bot must punish the wimmins. This is very important to vengeance-bot.
In fact looking at the British army recruitment standards:
Officers have requirements differentiated by sex, because the aim for them is to check that they are generally fit and will cope with the training.
For soldiers, the requirements do not vary based on sex, but they do vary based on the role you are applying for.
Sounds about right to me.
Jefrir, that sounds reasonable to me too. Bit i still oppose lowering standards on the basis of gender but if a particular role like being an officer only requires reasonable fitness, then a reasonable lowering of standards is acceptable. But when you are out on the battlefield carrying guns under extreme conditions, you have to have more than reasonable fitness. The last thing the squad need is someone slowing them down. My grandfather used to serve in the army and he always used to tell us that he had nothing against women but he would never trust his life with one on the battlefield. 😛
Im not a woman so i dont know the physical aspects of being female. But i do know a few things that differentiate women from men but diff women deal with those differently so i dont know, i guess il shut my mouth now. 😛
I like the british implimentation though. It sounds reasonable enough. but hey im no expert on the military. So my only sources of knowlege about these things come from CNN and fox news (coming from a family of republicans if it means anything) and the internet.
@cassandrakitty, -_- really?
Wah, why aren’t women nicer to me? You’d think they’d appreciate my being honest about treating their fellow women like crap, and yet this does not appear to be the case.
And @asspack’s classic solution to sexual harrassment in the owrkplace?
That banging sound? It’s me banging my head against the desk.
It’s all part of the same thing, isn’t it? Use sex to punish women to feel like the big man. Whine to women to feel coddled and validated. It all comes down to “women exist to make me feel better.”
Am I the only one who always reads WF Price as WTF Price?
@titanblue
You’re taking that one out of context. I really didnt mean it as a general solution to sexual harassment at the workplace. I was talking about my particular case where the boss didnt outright make sexual advances but some women did exploit his weakness for their benefit. I know the reverse happens a lot and such people should be punished and i did not say it in a way to undermine the experiences of women who were in fact subject to harassment. Im sorry if it somehow sounds like im victim blaming but im not. I was just talking about a particular case. Please dont stoop to the level of some MRAs by taking things out of context.
Assfax,
Fuck off.
Gladly. 😉 Fucking is my specialty.
Uhg.
Don’t do dat.
I agree with @titanblue.
My issue is with “avoid creepy boss and continue their work”.
Sometimes you can’t “avoid creepy boss”. I have a relative, who was the sexual harassment officer at his work, and his “hobby” was going through the stuff of the only woman engineer in the section and making pornographic tableaus across her desk. We found out as he proudly told us about it as he thought it was funny … WTF???
But that is OK, because we can just avoid our desk and work materials and continue our work.
Yes, @Asixpack, I know your case and this case could be different, but “avoid creepy boss and continue their work” is a simplistic and unrealistic attitude.
@AL3H i really didnt mean that literally. Im sorry if that part was offensive. I really am. I wish i could edit posts. The language i used was not right for the situation. Even though i dont have any direct experience of sexual harassment at the workplace, i still can understand to an extent the pain they may experience coz i was sexually harassed by my babysitter. I apologize for that part if it seemed offensive.
@marinerachel, I can understand why everone is mad at me but they dont have to dismiss everthing i say by telling me to fuck off when i really wasnt talking about my life here but rather an opinion on the topic at hand. I know im unwelcome here and i dont blame them.
You’re not alone.
Asixpack: If you know you’re unwelcome, fucking leave already. Stop saying offensive shit and then wishing for an edit button, there are consequences to your fuckery. Own it.
Normally when people know they’re unwelcome somewhere, they leave. Tsk tsk, some people have no manners at all.
Ugh, quit beating around the bush (no pun intended) and just admit that you’re talking about menstruation. And then explain why having one’s period makes one unable to fight fires or hold a gun.
“I know I’m not welcome here, but telling me I’m not welcome here is mean”. Dude, do you even read what you type?
And if you know you’re not welcome here, why are you still commenting? Do you always ignore women when they tell you “no”?