Oh dear. Some very confused dudes on the A Voice for Men Forums are angry at the Huffington Post for suggesting that Confused Cats Against Feminism might just be a parody of Women Against Feminism.
A guy calling himself Humansplaining w/ Jarred starts off the thread — titled “HuffPo tries – and fails – to politicize ‘Cats Against Feminism'” — with this little rant. (I’ve bolded some of the especially silly stuff.)
So, being that ‘Women Against Feminism’ is an internet phenomenon, through Tumblr as well as Twitter, the internet inevitably took this thread in the direction it takes EVERYTHING nowadays – cats.
If you read through all the ‘Cats Against Feminism’ memes, you’ll notice that they pretty much all revolve around, well…CATS. Go figure, huh? References to food, tuna, shedding, and biting predominate these posts. The references to ‘Feminism’ are basically incidental, since this is just piggy-backing on the viral success of ‘Women Against Feminism’. Those posting these memes never really express whether they are in favor of, or against Feminism. It’s clearly not meant to appeal to EITHER side of the issue. Rather, it’s simply a silly meme meant to produce a few chuckles for ANYONE that happens to run across them. Just like every other stupid cat meme on the internet, of which there must literally be TRILLIONS.
But HuffPo apparently sees things differently …
You know what? I think those CATS are smarter than the people at Huffpo that produced this article. THEY think that Feminism is a stupid and pointless human concept, and they wish you’d stop talking about it and fighting amongst each other, because they need you to FEED them!
Seriously HuffPo, learn to take a joke, and give the ideology a rest for 5 FUCKING SECONDS already.Because the cats are laughing at YOU now…
AVFM forum dudes, I hate to break it to you, but the cats aren’t laughing at the Huffington Post. They’re laughing at you.
Maybe I need to start up a new blog: Confused Cats Confused by Confused Cats Against Feminism.
I dunno, I half-remember pell from way-back, and he was way more persistant. Maybe time has softened him? Otherwise I’d expect more appeals to authority (of his alter-egos).
The last time he was here he dropped in and out over the course of a few days. There was a lot of head-patting and ‘splaining, and then he started fussing about immigration equaling cultural genocide and said feminists should look up to Marine Le Pen. He got pretty agitated, but he never did pop. Sad.
Flying Mouse, THAT is the pell I know.
niall is a bit like the early days of the last Pellsock (pierre lacroix, I think he was?). Only time will tell if I’ve correctly wagered the proceeds from my gynocracy-mandated government feminist support check.
Niall: As for the numerous posters above that said men have enough political clout, well, they knew exactly what I meant. There are very few supporters of mens issue in Government. It was clear that’s what I meant.
Dude… I asked you in what ways men are in need of aid from the gov’t. What are the “issues” which need to be redressed. If you can’t list them, fine, but don’t pretend they are so obvious they don’t need naming. You made a claim, you have to back it up. That or concede the error of your ways.
The backlash at feminism is only beginning.
See, katz was right, you do have a sense of humor. No really… what with the backlash (and that the accusations about feminism are modern). What a hoot.
Niall: The point is, men and men’s issues are not represented in the first place very often.
Again, what issues?
(PS… you know the Guardian isn’t a very good citation. Better than the Daily Mail, but still a far cry from your vaunted “peer reviewed sources”; even with your hand waving equivocation of “severe domestic abuse” as being on a par with non severe), but the piece you used doesn’t say where the study being bruited by the group talking it up was done, nor where one can read it.
In short, there are several palmed cards in that article, and you palmed them again by comparing to an accessible piece of peer reviewed data.
– where did I say prison rape contributes to gender symmetric violence? ‘
here
That was easy. Care to try again?
I like to invoke Michel Foucault’s theory of power and resistance to explain this:
The reason women’s issues are more represented in political discourses is that said discourses are a response to men’s oppression of women. Power, as Foucault sees it, engenders its own resistance, and resistance manifests itself in political discourse among other things. So the relative silence regarding men’s issues is in fact evidence that women, not men, are oppressed on the basis of gender.
For a similar reason, there is underrepresented discourse of “white rights” because white people are not oppressed. They have no need for anti-racist discourse. All they need, as agents of white supremacy, are discourses concerning the maintenance of white people’s domination. See: white nationalists, Nazis, KKK, etc.
@gilshalos
I’m just going to give up coding forever now.
OMG the blockquote mammoth got Fibi again!
Aw man, is Pell trolling again? Dude, it’s summer vacation, go build a bottle rocket or something.
yep, this site is indeed amusing – now that I’ve created my own entertainment through you lot. Other than that it’s a witless cesspit: devoid of humour, or indeed a single person that can prove to me women are worse off as a collective than men in US society – for one would be forgiven for thinking it was the opposite around here.
Clearly, I was asking too much.
We could double up on irony here folks on a ‘parody’ site that prides itself on calling out misogyny.A parody site it claims to be nonetheless (sorry, but that’s quite funny to me).
It’s like a parody of an illiberal liberal.
We could even double up on parody and have a laugh – but I suspect that would go clean over your most of your heads.
So, to recollect and surmise the entirety of your late post collective argument – women are objectified in the media.
Well boo fcuking hoo.
You forgot your cartoon villain laughter, niall.
Hint: you’re supposed to go MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Oh, so you admit you’re a misogynist. Honesty is a wonderful thing, y’know?
Niall: TIn Ireland, UK, France, Germany and other EU countries, the rates of domestic violence against men is similar to that against women. This is a perfect example of why feminism actively harms men at times.
Really…? Could it possibly be that (accepting, for the sake of argument the base contention) the rats of violence against women have been curtailed, so that the occurence has level off at parity?
The real issue many people have with feminism is that not does not address men’s issues
Those people are stupid. You know the problem with the SPCA? They don’t address the problem of rural poverty.
The problem with veterans’ organisations is they don’t work for the issues of non-veterans.
And the NAACP doesn’t work to solve the great trials facing white people.
You might also like to look at the difference between men and women in that chart.
The point here, is that a woman has options when pregnant.
1. Abortion.
2.Keep the child
3. Adoption.
A man has none. Not one.
Bullshit. When a man gets pregnant he has the same options a woman does when she gets pregnant.
Oh, you poor baby. You are so put upon in your quest to shit all over our rug.
It’s not parody, jackhole, it’s mockery. You are being roundly mocked, sir.
Oh, lest I forget, for many on here, despite the fact you cannot argue that men are worse off in US society in all the important areas of life from life expectancy to family,it seems the most important question for them was my definition of a rad-fem. Lol. Now that is fucking hilarious.
Just goes to show you, how priviledged you are sparky. .
LOL troll:
you were the one making these assertions so you were asked for evidence. You never provided it.
My how blinding clever you were, making assertions with no evidence, and then trying to change the burden of proof.
I call BS on your “social sciences” degree.
So, basically, niall, you can’t define what a radical feminist is.
Because you have no fucking clue what radical feminism is.
Which is glaringly obvious from all your previous posts, as all your issues with feminism derive from straw man caricatures of feminism.
You don’t know what you’re talking about an you don’t understand what you’re arguing against.
So give it up already. You’re just making a fool of yourself at this point, and are getting really damn dull.
What naill is basically saying: HAHAHAHA I AM SO SMART BLARGH WORDS *fart noise* I LACK SUBSTANCE PUTTING WORDS TOGETHER MAKES SENTENCES . *extra period noise*
He’s like a bad parody of all the trolls I’ve seen here O.o
Niall: – now that I’ve created my own entertainment through you lot. Other than that it’s a witless cesspit: devoid of humour, or indeed a single person that can prove to me women are worse off as a collective than men in US society –
Of course no one can prove it to you. God could come down from heaven and scribe the facts of how it’s not so in stone at your feet and you’d tell him it’s better to be ignorant in Hell, than informed in Heaven.
You, my sad little man, have THE TRUTH on your side, and won’t let pesky little things like facts sway you from it.
It’s not the most important question. It’s just that you persistently ignored it, and critics of feminism are known to be lazy with terminology. Far too many of them scream “Radical feminism is bad!” without ever knowing shit about what radical feminism actually is.
Niall: Oh, lest I forget, for many on here, despite the fact you cannot argue that men are worse off in US society in all the important areas of life from life expectancy to family,it seems the most important question for them was my definition of a rad-fem
Now you are just lying. We asked you to detail the issues facing men.
We asked you to provide actual studies (and found huge flaws in the ones you did cite).
We challenged you to explain the mechanism by which the men in power have come to oppress themselves.
We called you on the shifting of goalposts and the galloping gishes. We cited your words when you changed your story.
But you, with your degree in Social Sciences, and your “manly intellect” couldn’t keep track of all that, and chose to fixate on the issue of rad-fems (where, as with all the rest, you still failed to come up with a cogent answer… hell any answer).
@pecunium: stop reading my mind, it’s freaking me out! 😛
OK, Niall, here’s the story. This is a site for mocking misogyny, not for teaching Feminism 101 to clueless young guys who don’t know how to make friends with women and find out what they really feel. Most of us are older than you, some a lot older, and we’ve heard all the straw-woman talking points you get from the MRAs about 5,764,292 times. They were all thoroughly debunked before you were born. Nobody here really has the time and energy to debate you on these stale old lies and cherry-picked arguments — we have in fact been tolerant of your crap far beyond anything you might reasonably expect. So you have two options — run along and spend the next ten years to find out what real feminists have written and what women really think and the conditions they actually have to live under, or keep coming to this site to get insulted as the misogynistic twit you have proved yourself to be.
Aroint thee, sir.