Once upon a time, you may recall, women were denied the right to vote, couldn’t own property, were prevented from having careers of their own. Well, it turns out that all of these pesky “restrictions” weren’t really restrictions at all! They were protections that men provided women out of the goodness of their hearts. Men protected women from the terrible burdens of voting and property-owning and so forth, because they just cared about women so much.
Or at least that’s what a lot of Men’s Rights Activists seem to think, judging from this highly edifying discussion in the Men’s Rights subreddit.
![rogersmith25 325 points 1 day ago As I read /r/mensrights[1] more and more, it is becoming increasingly clear to me that the primary female privilege is empathy. If a woman or girl is hurt, people care. If women are kidnapped, there is international media attention. If women are killed, their deaths are highlighted. If there is a conflict between a man and a woman, then people will jump in to defend the woman. If women are under-represented in an area, people want to take action to make things "equal". If a man is hurt, it's funny. If men are kidnapped, we hear silence. If men are killed, their deaths are glossed over. If there is a conflict between a man and a woman, people will attack the man. If men are under-represented in an area, the president will call it a "victory" (as he did regarding the female majority in colleges). Basically, people are programmed to have more empathy for women than men. 200 years ago, that empathy manifested itself in keeping women safe from harm by having them stay home to raise the family rather than die on battlefields or toil in mines. It was empathy not misogyny that kept women from having careers. Present-day, work is safe in offices, so today we have campaigns for women to earn more money and yet have more "balanced" lives where they can both raise a family and earn an "equal" career and, in other words, "have it all". permalink save report give gold reply [–]sierranevadamike 82 points 23 hours ago wow... as a history major, I never looked at the "repression" of women throughout history as empathy rather than misogyny. I NEVER considered this option.. blew my mind.. thank you](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/empathy1.png?resize=567%2C594&ssl=1)
It wasn’t just sierranevadamike who was “blown away” by rogersmith25’s comment: the Men’s Rights mods were so impressed that they reposted it and pinned it as the top post in their subreddit.
Apparently every day is “Opposite Day” on the Men’s Rights subreddit.
EDIT: Here, courtesy of Cloudiah, some more pictures of girls and women protected from that big nasty world out there.
She also starts the whole thing with the clarification that she’s not using biblical rationality. This kinda thing has been bouncing around the atheist community, the secular pro choice bit. As if not being biblically based makes hampering my reproductive rights suddenly valid. “Oh, your misogyny isn’t based on the bible? By all means!”
::squee::
Max-Arthur is the best! He is a mighty kitteh.
Continuing the shark-cat theme, this video from Cole the Black Cat landed in my inbox today.
http://youtu.be/Te92cX9cMzE
“Culture of Death” is the biggest load of bullshit. Their complete lack of self-awareness is astounding. They vehemently claim that abortion is the “murder” of an unborn child but when the child is ACTUALLY BORN they suddenly don’t give a shit anymore. Whatever opinions they may have for who should raise the child, (as they will think the mother is a whore and a bad person) they couldn’t give two shits about it. Many of them are also anit-gay and would actively try to strip anyone within the LGBT spectrum of rights to adopt or have their own children. I don’t have the quote on me but there was a ….police chief I believe who stated he would rather have an irresponsible drunkard look after his kids than a gay person. They would actively put their children in harm’s way because THE GAYS are evil or something. Children are beaten, abused, and raped but they never talk about that. They don’t care about that. Children dying in Gaza probably had it coming. Black children getting shot? Well, he or she was probably just a thug. Then there’s all that war they love so much and all the weapons that go with it. Boy, do they love weapons. The people who shout “culture of death” seem to celebrate death and violence more than anyone else.
@insanitybytes22:
“(…) I’m challenging the idea that some people believe they have the right to dictate their own perception of reality onto the rest of us, as if they are more qualified to define it than we are.”
You are entitled to your own perceptions; but if you want to convince anyone of their correctness — and you’d not be here if you weren’t — then you should support them with facts.
“In the lower classes, men often provided protection, financial protection, emotional protection, protection from crime, protection from invading armies.”
And in the upper classes, men also often — one could even say usually — provided protection, financial protection, emotional protection, protection from crime, protection from invading armies. So what is your point, really? That the lower class fellas were more protective than the upper class ones? Again, you need to show some evidence for this. (I don’t think you can, simply because there isn’t any; but if you insist on arguing this particular perception of yours, you need to show some facts and numbers in support of it.)
“Acknowledging the fact that men and women have been residing together in a kind of mutual symbiosis for centuries and that men were often in a position of protecting women, isn’t complicated rocket science, it’s reality.”
Sure, men were often in a position of protecting women. Men were also often in a position of destroying women. And sometimes — one could even say often — men were also in a position of oppressing women under the guise of “protecting” them (from obtaining education or from voting, for example).
You are not saying anything that anyone does not know — apart from arguing that the lower class men were somehow more protective of women than their upper class counterparts, a contention without any factual support.
Bwahahaha. What turnip truck did YOU fall off of with THAT figment of high insight?
Me, I prefer to acknowledge that antifeminist women are sad confirmations of what misogynists say about the intellects of ALL women. Because, hey, why not stick your neck through that noose if it’s plated with gold and encrusted with cubic zirconia diamonds, right?
I don’t know if it’s true of insanitybytes – stuffed if I’m looking at her website, blech – but it’s so often the case that USian anti-abortionists are really keen on the death penalty.
Whose was the culture of death, again?
I love my cage. It’s very pretty and my owner gives me lots of toys to play with. Why must feminists insist on trying to free the women who want out of their cages? That is very offensive to me as a woman who loves my cage.
From insanitybytes22 blog:
Are you kidding me? I’m neither. I don’t want children, ever, I don’t see myself as a “giver of life” I see myself as someone who has made a choice to do the right thing and not reproduce. Some people are not suited to being parents, I know I am not and never will be. I’ve never been pregnant, I have been quite lucky with my birth control and never had a failure, but if I were to become pregnant I would get an abortion without a second though.
I also happen to enjoy sex, a lot. I’m not a receptacle, I’m an enthusiastic participant. You seem to think that women can’t be sexual in their own right and only do it to please men. That’s far from the case.
Also there’s the implication that women (not girls, you’re talking about adults not children) who don’t want to get pregnant are all having casual sex. Has it never occurred to you that being in a committed relationship does not automatically mean someone wants to get pregnant?
Shh, nobody tell her that sometimes couples sit down together and figure out how to ensure that they can have lots of sex without making any babies. She might be drinking something, wouldn’t want her to ruin her keyboard.
I know. It’s not like my ex had a vasectomy or anything… oh wait.
Either “sexual receptacle” or “giver of life”. Hmmm, that sounds an awful lot like how men try to police women.
“Sexual receptacle” mostly makes me think she must not be enjoying her sex life at all. There are things she could read that might help with that, but unfortunately most of them are written by evil feminists.
Protection from whom? Large fellbeasts, vecause they wrought havoc? Ravenous, marauding super squirrels, which ate houses? Other men, because without the ability to own yout life you have to enter a kind of protection racket and just hope against hope all turns well?
I mean, it’s not wrong. Men did protect women! Sure. That’s just not an answer unless you also tell us what from…
I don’t buy the idea that she’s approaching abortion/whatever from a secular perspective. Secular writers don’t typically refer to women as “givers of life” although misogynist atheists still do the whole women are sluts trope. Strange biological factoid: women aren’t parthogenic so one can argue that men are “givers of life” as well.
Misogyny BS: the final frontier of illogic. These are the voyages of the starship WHTM. Its permanent mission: to explore strange beliefs, to seek out misinformed comments and blogs, and to go boldly where logic fails to penetrate.
The Rationalisation Hamster Speaks! O8
Sexual receptacle? What, like I’m as passive as a fleshlight?
Hahaha
Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha
The silliest thing about people like insanitybytes is that feminism isn’t actually stopping them from living the lives they want. They’re free to enter into traditional relationships, value family over education, and so on. No feminist is trying to stop them from doing those things, because honestly, we just don’t care. So why so pissy about the fact that we’re trying to ensure that women who don’t want to take that life path have options too?
Fibi – they protected us against giant deadly cats, obvs.
Or not, in this case.
Ugh. Nice virgin-whore paradigm Insanitybytes has going on. You’re either a perfect pure giver of a life or a worthless dick receptacle? Gross.
I’d like to know why she hung around and made so many non-offensive and misogynistic posts before finally showing her true colors. What is she even doing here?
Kitty and doggy in a traditional relationship where kitty is well protected. Wait…they’re both females. WAIT…..THEY’RE NOT THE SAME SPECIES.
All I can work out is that they have a “this is what women should be like” very detailed stereotype in their head and they think it’s their job to castigate any woman who doesn’t fit all the facets of that stereotype.
They’ve internalised a bunch of shoulds, that they feel they need to shout out to everybody:
– women should have a men as a protector
– women should not have abortions
– women should not enjoy sex
They feel society has become more confusing as fewer and fewer people are fitting the historic rigid stereotypes. What they fail to understand is that those stereotypes never really held for the majority, historically, anyway.
Anyway, we all know that the one key thing is that goody goody gumdrops icecream* is terrible. So it is imperative that you agree with me on this fact. If you don’t agree, you are mistaken and it is my job to repeatedly tell you how awful goody goody gumdrops icecream is until you agree.
* my partner loves this, I think it should never have been thought up, let alone made. It is bubblegum flavoured (I thought bubblegum comes in various flavours, but I digress) and contains gumdrop lollies. Here is a photo of the 2L container: http://shop.countdown.co.nz/Shop/ProductDetails?Stockcode=363336&name=tip-top-icecream-goody-goody-gum-drops
You just know that kitty’s going to be boss-cockie when she grows up. 😀
Kitties normally are. They are so very irreverent and irrepressible. 😛
Truth! 😀
cassandrakitty
They don’t actually think it’s a desirable option. If people had a choice they would never do it. Similar to the fear misogynists have that women will no longer need men, as if no women want them.
Alternate answer, when you’ve already reduced women to baby incubators, why would you give a baby incubator a choice? If they are going against their assigned function, it’s obviously wrong.
There’s something really funny about the “only natural colors and flavors” label on a carton of ice cream with gumdrops in it.