Well, the denizens of Reddit’s TOTALLY ALPHA Red Pill subreddit have weighed in on the stolen celebrity nude pics that have so many Redditors — and other skeezballs — so excited. And they have some, well, intriguing explanations for why feminists are troubled by the widespread dissemination of stolen nude pictures that were never supposed to be seen by the general public.
In a thread with the lovely title Why are the feminazis so buttdevastated about the leaked nude pics?, a RedPill dude with the lovely handle trpmdsrfggts explains that said feminazis are angry because the pics — some of which show the celebrity women looking like, you know, actual women — are driving down the “price of pussy.”
I’ll let him explain, because his logic is obviously more sophisticated than anything I learned in my pussy economics classes in college:
Wow. That seems completely ass-backwards to me, but what do I know? I’m just a beta or gamma or epsilon or pi or whatever Greek letter it is that dudes like me are.
Others in the thread expand upon this, er, argument. I’m just going to paste some of their comments in, because, honestly, trying to parse their “logic” in order to think of funny things to say about them hurts my brain. (Clicking on any of these pics will get you to the original quote in context.)
Oh, there’s more, so much more, but that’s about all I have time for now, as I need to get back to poppin bottles and, you know, doing whatever else I can to keep up the price of pussy, because, as a male feminist, that’s obviously job number one for me.
“Guys probably find themselves confused by the conflicting messages feminists put out about nudity, empowerment, victimhood, male gaze and so on. While men generally agree that it isn’t appropriate to violate people’s privacy, we see images from [voluntarily shared in public] slutwalks and feminist breast-baring demonstrations that leave us wondering why a few nude photos [stolen from what was supposed to be a private place and shared in public] are such a big deal.”
Let’s try rephrasing that by adding some new words.
“Guys probably find themselves confused by the conflicting messages feminists put out about nudity, empowerment, victimhood, male gaze and so on. While men generally agree that it isn’t appropriate to violate people’s
privacy, we seeimages from [voluntarily shared in public] slutwalks and feminist breast-baring demonstrations> women voluntarily having sex in ways that that leave us wondering why a fewnude photos [stolen from what was supposed to be a private place and shared in public] are such a big deal.instances of rape are a big deal.”Or…
“Guys probably find themselves confused by the conflicting messages feminists put out about nudity, empowerment, victimhood, male gaze and so on. While men generally agree that it isn’t appropriate to violate people’s
privacypersonal bubbles, we see imagesfrom [voluntarily shared in public] slutwalks and feminist breast-baring demonstrationsof women flirting willingly with men that leave us wondering why a fewnude photos [stolen from what was supposed to be a private place and shared in public]catcalls and repeated requests for dates after being turned down are such a big deal.”Or (to put it in language that they can possibly understand)…
“Guys probably find themselves confused by the conflicting messages
feministscharities put out aboutnudity, empowerment, victimhood, male gazegenerosity, giving donations, sharing your wealth with the less fortunate, and so on. While men generally agree that it isn’t appropriate toviolate people’s privacydeprive people of their property, we see imagesfrom [voluntarily shared in public] slutwalks and feminist breast-baring demonstrationsof celebrities leaving money that leave us wondering whya few nude photos [stolen from what was supposed to be a private place and shared in public]things like stealing and embezzlement are such a big deal.”“It’s not theft if it’s from a woman, because women aren’t people.”
It’s not theft if it’s from a woman, because women aren’t people. They’re property.
Oh, sorry.
I didn’t mean to be offensive. I don’t know exactly what “crazy” entails but I thought it was more of a catch all for disturbed and inappropriate behavior, something you choose, rather than any actual handicap.
But if it’s anything like how in swedish “CP” was used as a slur (which was really demeaning towards people with Downs syndrome), then yes, I see what you mean..
When it comes to mental illness, it’s not like I hate or look down on them or anything, but it may affect what sort of trust (if any) you can put on a person. I had a friend once whom I really liked, still do, but she was a notorious liar, abused trust and was an expert on weaseling things out of people. Not completely her fault as she was one of eight children in a home with one parent (who was mostly absent). It’s not all that strange she developed her own methods to get by. She was a whole lot of fun to be with, but you had to be careful not to disclose anything sensitive, entrust her with larger sums of money or anything..
I can sort of see how some guys she trapped absolutely hated her afterwards, and I suppose she fit the description a of gold digger. I think a person who behaves that way is disturbed somehow, but I don’t consider them lesser or evil or anything. It is what it is..
But Ayn Rand and her acolytes I really hate. That stuff is evil for real but yeah, there are better words than “psychobitch” I suppose, but I’m still at a loss for finding them 🙂
phew…
Karl, was your ex-friend actually diagnosed with mental illness? If not, I’d be be hesitant to armchair-diagnose her as mentally ill just because she had some shitty personal experiences. We don’t give out armchair diagnoses around here.
You could do it without using a word that denigrates women and people who are in a state of psychosis and find a word that describes what they actually are. I, for one, like Randroids.
Yeah, I am not surprised that men who view women as only sex objects (with emphasis on the object part because anyone who can speak about a person’s body parts as if they are discussing stock options pretty clearly doesn’t view the person who owns the parts as an actual human being) wouldn’t understand of care about the whole violation of consent which is the basis of feminists being angry and upset.
This is probably way off topic, but I’m going to put this on this thread because of the earlier responses to Karl.
I am having trouble understanding why the word crazy is troublesome. I have been hospitalized for severe depression a couple of times, and yet, I don’t understand the issue. I’m not necessarily trying to argue for its usage (although there are times when I think some of these misogynists have a worldview that’s so delusional it might almost constitute a form of mental illness).
It’s just that right now, I’ve been avoiding it because the rules for commenting here say to. I would like, instead, to better understand it. I’ve read quite a lot of theory and interesting blogs from Autistic people and people in the deaf community, so I feel like I understand ableism to some extent from their points of view, so I guess what I’m asking is if any of you happen to know of some good reading material about the offensiveness of “crazy.”
I did try Googling this myself, but I so far I haven’t found any articles defending the offensiveness of crazy that were from the point of view of actual people who suffer from mental illness and were stating for themselves why they found the term hurtful or offensive. I’ve only found articles from people who didn’t claim any mental illness of their own but seemed to be talking about why mentally ill people should be offended by it. And well, frankly, I think it’s a little bit offensive to decide what should be offensive to a marginalized group that you don’t claim to be a member of.
Speaking from a personal point of view, I have only rarely thought of myself as actually “crazy.” But on those occasions when I’ve labeled myself as “crazy.” It actually helps me feel better. So, it’s kind of a personal word to me in some ways. One that’s helped me deal with, well, my own craziness, in positive ways.
Hm, sorry, maybe I was not being fully honest with myself when I said I wasn’t trying to argue for its usage. I am being honest, however, when I say I truly am interested in hearing other perspectives.
Thanks in advance, and please excuse my ignorance. I’m also sorry if this has been covered on other threads, and you’re tired of talking about it or something. So if no one responds, I will understand and just keep looking around on my own (and keep avoiding the word here). 🙂
Hi Belladonna,
We have covered this in other threads, but I don’t think anyone expects you to go digging around in there to find them! 🙂
So I tried to distill some of the discussion, and a link to some reading, in Update #4 of the WHTM Welcome Package. Did you get one yet? If not, there you go!
Hope that helps.
Belladona, the reason we avoid it is because calling someone who’s just hateful and malicious and willfully stupid is an insult to crazy people. Most non-neurotypical folks are actually wonderful, wonderful folks who do not need to get lumped in with asshats.
If labeling yourself crazy when you have mental health issues is helpful, that’s totally legit. Some people with disorders are really hurt by being labeled as crazy, so not calling people who are mentally ill crazy until you know whether it’s helpful it not is garden variety kindness.
Does that help?
Belladonna,
I get where you’re coming from. At the same time, I think that the main issue is that it’s counterproductive to label people who do or say terrible thing as “crazy.” On the one hand, it assumes that crazy people (i.e. mentally ill people) are pretty much guaranteed to do terrible things. On the other hand, it assumes that people who do or say terrible things only do so because they have a mental illness and that those people aren’t really responsible for their actions. Assuming that terrible people must be mentally ill also keeps us from examining any other societal problems that might have led them to do terrible things. See the group who kept insisting that Elliot Rodger only killed six people because he must have been mentally ill because apparently only someone mentally ill would kill six people and write the things that he wrote in his manifesto. First of all, they’re using circular logic (i.e. people who do terrible things must be mentally ill because only mentally ill people do terrible things). Second of all, that group was primarily focused on insisting that Rodger wasn’t really motivated by misogyny and that misogyny isn’t a societal problem.
And also what Contrapangloss said. Labeling terrible people as “crazy” gives a bad name to non-neurotypical people, most of whom don’t do terrible things.
Manosphere: “Hmmm… How can I get people to take me less seriously today? I know! I’ll say that every Feminist is evil and at the same time I’ll type how I think half the human population are not even human but just objects!”
“Hee Hee, I’m such a contradicting hypocrite.”
Karl: “Crazy” is a catch-all phrase for almost any form of mental illness (something which the sufferer of has little to no control over). Using it to refer to people who are in complete control of their actions, and just choose to act really, really shitty towards other human beings, is an insult to the mentally ill AND a (usually unintentional) way of excusing those choices.
@Cloudiah @Contrapangloss @Alais
Thanks so much for the helpful viewpoints. I definitely get the arguments of basic kindness and not wanting to excuse willful stupidity. Also I must hang my head in shame. I had already received the welcome package and even read it. I can’t believe I forgot. Apparently I need to read it again.
“Crazy” is a word used to denigrate and dismiss individuals with mental illness. It justifies treating them as less of a person because it implies they are lesser for their disability. It’s a slur like any other.
I was diagnosed with Bipolar I Disorder at 21, and because of that was treated horribly by a boyfriend. He would use “crazy” to describe anything I said that was in opposition to one of his viewpoints. In this way, he was able to make me doubt my own brain and arguments and ensure I had little enough faith in myself to accept some pretty nasty abuse and stay in the relationship. Because of this, I take special offense to that word.
Depression is arguably more acceptable in the public eye than Bipolar Disorder. People can accept someone being pathologically unhappy, but not nearly comatose for several days, weeks, or months and then taking random road trips, buying gifts and unexplainable things they don’t need, and being aggressively upbeat about everything the next few. Many don’t even understand it as anything more than an insult. At my last job, my co-workers would hiss about our manager being bipolar if she was in a bad mood. Some people think it’s having multiple personalities or hearing voices–“real crazy” in normal speak, DID or some form of schizophrenic disorder in psychological terms. It’s actually a chemical imbalance, much like depression, that causes spikes or lulls in certain neurotransmitters which affect the moods. It’s also a degenerative disorder, meaning it tends to worsen without medication. It also depletes gray matter at a slightly accelerated rate in comparison to “normal” brains. It isn’t just some excuse to be a jerk or get sympathy–it’s a real, measurable illness.
Some people aren’t bothered by the word “crazy”, but for those of us to whom it is a term used to call our character, intelligence, and very humanity immediately into question, it is appreciated if you avoid using it.
@Belladonna993 and Karl and anyone else
The word “crazy” and its derivatives do not offend me. Actually, some of them can be used in a positive way. “Crazy” and “insane” are examples. The words are not inherently bad, not like some.
However, it is problematic to use them to refer to people when the trait one is highlighting is a choice, including beliefs and prejudices, but also other things like troubling behavior. There is a societal stereotype that mad people are untrustworthy (see Karl’s assertion that the friend MUST be crazy because she is a liar) which is extremely, extremely harmful. I have an unbelievably difficult time getting decent medical care, for instance, because many, many, many, many doctors see my list of medications and say, “Oh, this person is nuts and therefore must be inventing these symptoms, the problem is just the nuttiness and I don’t need to even address the open wound full of pus.” This is a thing that has happened to me: open wound full of pus, but the doctor would talk about nothing except my bipolar disorder. I had some episodes of vertigo earlier this year, and the doctor paid not even the first bit of attention once he saw my medication list. He didn’t even say, “Well, one of your drugs is causing it,” (which would have been BS btw, I have been on the same regimen for 6 years without dizzy spells). He just assumed I was telling stories, for attention I guess.
I’ve also seen people dismiss anything that came out of the mouth of a mad person, completely handwaving away clear abuse (fortunately it was not me). You may not understand how important your credibility is to you until you don’t have it anymore, and when you lose it for reasons beyond your control, and for reasons that are actually unrelated to your actual truthfulness, it makes it impossible to function in society.
When you link behavior which has not been determined to be the result of mental illness to a mental illness, you are feeding this stereotype. You are feeding the stereotype that mad people just do things that no normal person can understand, and we should just expect whatever the hell out of them and treat them like some kind of bizarre quantum effect that nobody can predict.
It is harmful, and not in the hurt-feelings way (although there is that, too) but in the physical, quantifiable damage way.
It’s also used to separate neurotypical people who do horrible things by throwing them at non-neurotypicals. “Oh, we don’t have to worry about what the implications of this person’s attitude because they’re cray-cray and no normal people would do things like that amirite”
In case we wondered if Price’s point of view was accepted over on the The Spearhead, check out the comment votes here:
boo September 3, 2014 at 16:45
Nope. It’s no different than someone hacking into YOUR personal photos and info. You wouldn’t like it. You would be pissed too. No one’s business but ur own.
Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 10
Scarlettpipstrelle,
That kind of says everything, doesn’t it.
:: head-desk ::
Karl: But Ayn Rand and her acolytes I really hate. That stuff is evil for real but yeah, there are better words than “psychobitch” I suppose, but I’m still at a loss for finding them 🙂
“Sociopathic shitweasels”
That’s not really an improvement.
It isn’t gendered, “sociopathic” is a useful descriptive term for their ideology, and it’s alliterative.
@Phoenician
Actually, I’m pretty sure “sociopathic” would fall into the same category as “crazy” for dismissing their bad choices as mental illness. (And thanks to Policy of Madness and Alais, up-thread), I think I understand this argument, now. 🙂
No they don’t “find themselves confused”. Srsly! They aren’t confused about catcalling or groping either.
They are testing you to see how much bullshit you will tolerate before the meter redlines.
Epithets should be used carefully and judiciously, I think. Particularly the derogatory ones.
@ryeash
I am trying very hard to empathize with you. I think if the word “crazy” had been used regularly against me as a bludgeon or dismissive tactic, I would feel very different about it, too. And I do appreciate that you gave me your viewpoint on this, and I respect that viewpoint.
I do, however, feel that calling Depressive Disorder socially acceptable pathological unhappiness is just a little bit dismissive. I’m sure that wasn’t your intent. Especially because the DSM-IV criteria for depression and bipolar depression are, I believe, exactly the same. (I don’t know if this changes in DSM-5.)
I will grant that Bipolar I can be more debilitating in many cases and I’m grateful to have only experienced hypomanic episodes too brief in duration to qualify me for Bipolar II. But, well, I just don’t really want to play the “my pain is worse than your pain” game.