The Honey Badger Brigade — the all-female-except-not-really gaggle of antifeminist YouTubers — has been raising money, and quite a lot of it, to pay their possible legal bills as they seek “legal redress” against the Calgary Expo for booting them from the event.
So far they’ve raised nearly $14,000 of their goal of $40,000, which they say “will be used for legal costs and costs directly related to our ejection from the Calgary Comics and Entertainment Expo,” whatever that means. That gives them some wiggle room. As “victims” go, they’re pros.
On the group’s fundraising page, the Badgers accuse the Expo of tossing them out
due to our Men’s Rights Activism and unpopular view of modern feminism. Therefore it is our belief that the actions taken by the Calgary Expo staff were of a political nature and contravene the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, in particular freedom of conscience, freedom of thought and freedom of association.
Apparently this is one of the most important civil right struggles of our time.
While the Expo hasn’t given a clear reason for why the Honey Badgers were evicted, I’m guessing it’s not for the group’s “view of modern feminism” but because the group came to the expo flying the figurative flag of GamerGate, a loosely organized but highly virulent harassment campaign disguised, not very convincingly, as a campaign for “ethics in game journalism.” Oh, and possibly because they seem to have gotten into the expo under false pretenses.
Even if we were to assume that the Honey Badgers were booted for being Men’s Rights Activists, there is a teensy bit of irony to their complaint. You see, the HBB is closely tied to Men’s Rights hate site A Voice for Men. Indeed the two most visible HB’s — Alison Tieman and Karen “GirlWritesWhat” Straughan — are volunteer staffers on the AVFM masthead, as is HB hanger-on Sage Gerard.
Last summer, most or all of the HBB attended AVFM’s first conference, held outside Detroit; Straughan spoke at it. Here they are posing with their AVFM comrades.
You know who wasn’t at that conference? Feminists, whom the event organizers made pretty plain were not welcome. Indeed, as journalist Jeff Sharlet noted in his remarkable account of the conference in GQ, attendees seemed to be obsessed with defending their little event against an angry mob of feminists that never materialized.
They keep saying, “No feminist better try coming here!” Local police have dispatched four officers, and the conference attendees have deputized even more security from their own ranks. “Security” wears black polo shirts, and there are a lot of black polo shirts, but since the line is slow, security decides to sweep us all in with a request to return for a “check.” Nobody does. Only one feminist later attempts entry, an activist who goes by the handle “Dark Horse Swore.” The black shirts eighty-six her.
Only a few of these dastardly feminists made it into the event, posing as journalists. Oh, wait, they were journalists. Somehow I suspect that security at AVFM’s planned conference this year will be tighter.
I also suspect that the Honey Badgers will be there, recounting the story of the terrible injustice done to them by the Calgary Expo.
H/T — @idlediletante on Twitter, who’s been keeping tabs on the money so many #GamerGaters are raking in.
Geez, fourteen thousand dollars and they want forty?! And people are giving them money?
@Tina S: one thing the manosphere is really quite good at is overstating how much money they desperately need.
Heh. Sounds legit.
Yeah, forty grand is enough to give each honey badger 2k with daddy Elam getting his tithing. I don’t know why their followers don’t realize they’re being scammed.
“They aren’t gonna do shit, just pocket the money. They are the laziest group of false starters. They raised money for a “smear campaign” to target my husband. Literally nothing ever happened from it.”
why did they say they wanted to do a smear campaign? when was this?
Well, they won’t be suing Calgary Expo at all in the sense that people would generally presume. You don’t sue people for human rights violations in Canada, exactly. You would bring a complaint to a Human Rights Tribunal or the Human Rights Commission (I don’t know what tier, Provincial or Federal, they would need to bring such a complaint to first in Alberta) and then, there may be an investigation and there may be a ‘trial’ or it will go to ADR (alternative dispute resolution). Typically, the defendant will end up paying legal costs if there isn’t a mediated resolution. They may be fined, they may be ordered to pay the victims damages.
This is a well documented event (thanks Honey Badgers!), it was a private event (which is not actually exempt from human rights legislation or the Charter as it may be applied), and the organisers have said exactly as much as they need to publicly about why they asked the Honey Badgers to leave the event, which doesn’t amount to a human rights violation. (No one is obliged to provide a platform for other people to exercise their freedom of expression, which seems to be something the Honey Badgers believe differently.)
I could be wrong (I don’t think I am), but the Honey Badgers have already put the kibosh to their plans to take legal action against the Calgary Expo; they’ve been very vocal about why they think they were allegedly kicked out and it wasn’t for being any specifically protected class named or intended in any legislation. The Calgary Expo says that they asked them to leave for contravening their mandate, they say they were kicked out in violation of their freedom of expression. (Well, they don’t say that exactly, but then they wouldn’t use any actual words referencing Charters or legislation that they don’t know a thing about.)
This won’t even spark the interest of the poor mail room clerk who would have to date stamp their complaint, except to perhaps illicit some giggles if they decided to google these Honey Badgers. The threshold for such a complaint is so low, though, that they may just get away with wasting some Canadian tax dollars. That’s something.
@Alan Robertshaw
Wouldn’t they have to establish a pattern to argue for a horizontal effect? So far they’ve just been thrown out of a single con.
It’s a little bit like women (and other minorities, for that matter) as Republicans and/or public right-wingers. (I know I’m going with US politics on this, but I’m really not that familiar with the politics of most other countries; I have a passing familiarity with some of the politics of Latin America.) In the Democratic Party and leftist institutions you can get women and minorities at a dime a dozen, and for them it actually is a labor of love. Much of the driving force for change and increase in social justice is by people who have borne the brunt of social injustice. But a woman or a minority who goes over to, for lack of a better description (and because I can’t resist a good Star Wars reference), the Dark Side can find a mostly-homogenous sea of white dudes who nowadays are very sensitive to criticism about being hostile to women and minorities. A woman or a minority can become a rising star in that situation, as long as they’re willing to walk the party line and understand that they are there for decoration. I read an article years ago about how, when Republicans get together for photo-ops, the women and minorities find themselves getting pushed to the front where they can be prominently seen. And somewhere on my hard drive is a PDF from a black conservative who attended the Republican National Convention and commented on how white the audience was. There were plenty of minorities among the speakers at that convention.
Also part of the issue with younger women and minorities who join up with Republicans or Libertarians is that they are drawn in by the language that promotes independent thought. I was very attracted by the idea of not being one of the “sheeple” when I was a young person struggling to define myself, which is why I took up with RWs when I was young. It took me working several years at a shit job where I was making shit for money and getting treated like shit before I began to appreciate how right-wing politics does not do anything for me. (I suspect that’s the other issue for young conservatives. They have no personal experience with adversity, real adversity, and for all I think it is important to teach history in school I don’t think that young people, many of whom are growing up with more privilege than previous generations, can appreciate what it meant, to give an example, for workers to organize a labor strike or for women to be legally unable to obtain birth control.)
wonder if this event will change their mind about being feminists?!! Lololol
I was raised conservative by my parents but to be honest, it was the internet that turned me liberal. I read accounts and stories of marginalised groups, began to understand how people who weren’t WASPs like myself were living. Got hooked and read more. Changed my beliefs and sense of morality from what I had been taught. It’s why my parents and I don’t talk politics or deep issues, because we WILL fall out. My dad in fact went into my room to use our computer and saw the WHTM page I had left up. He returned to where I was in the living room and said “You’re into feminism? Oh dear.” He meant it lightly, but I think he’s bought into the feminism = male oppression lie.
That’s what happens when you read the fucking Daily Mail too much. If I could have my way that shit would be contraband in the house but sadly he keeps sneaking out to buy a copy. Sigh.
That was in response to Sarahs post.
@ sunnysombrera
That sounds like one of those McCarthy era Public Information Films.
In case it’s uncool to embed a Honey Badger video (Honey Badger Radio 2: Pressed by the Press starting at 43:08), here’s a transcription of part of Allison Tieman’s rationalization:
o_O How’s that for pretzel logic?
I still think parsing FeMRAs motives is a mistake. They do much the same thing to male feminists with their suggestions of being sad sycophants trying to get laid. We don’t need to make bullshit, pathologizing theories.
I take them at their word that they sincerely hold noxious beliefs.
Just think of old bullshit thoughts you had previously. You most likely sincerely held them due to a lack of perspective, lack of information, or a lack of experience.
I think a better explanation is that they tend to be more traditionalist in their think on sex and gender, supported by a strong confirmation bias. They see feminists as working against these deeply ingrained notions and lash out. We just see the worst and most toxic of them online.
Though a lot of the hate for feminism makes me think of Obamacare. Obamacare’s individual pieces are very, very popular by and large, but because of concerted efforts against Obamacare, the law overall was very unpopular.
They called themselves transgender just because they aren’t “feminine woman” and don’t “damsel”?
They really are FUCKING IGNORANT. God, fuck, they could at least KNOW what the words they’re using MEAN! Fuck, YOU’RE ON THE INTERNET. YOU CAN JUST TYPE WHAT WORDS MEAN, LIKE, RIGHT IN THE URL BAR AND FIND THE DEFINITION.
YOU DON’T GET TO MAKE WORDS UP YOURSELF.
AND THEY’RE FUCKING “DAMSELING” WITH THIS FUCKING MONEY DONATION BILLSHIT PLOY SO THEY’RE JUST BEING MASSIVELY HYPOCRITICAL.
THESE MRASSHOLE WHO GAVE THEM MONEY AFTER THIS MUST BE THE MOST IGNORANT, STUPIDEST SHITS EVER SHAT OUT.
SDFHASDGHFJHASGDFJGASFGJASHGDFJHASG
What.
What.
I meant “you don’t get to make up definition of words yourself”. In fact, I don’t even know why I put in that line.
It’s just that whole logic thing…just…stupid.
Stupid. They’re stupid. They’re just throwing words they’ve heard “SJWs” and “liebruls” say at the screen and it’s just wrong.
Although, actually, it would make sense that they want to be “men” in the sense that they want all the rights men have, but also don’t want to be associated with feminism. But, you know, they’re still ignorant shits.
(Also, sorry for so many posts. I’m just kinda out of it today.)
“Although, actually, it would make sense that they want to be “men” in the sense that they want all the rights men have,”
they already have all the rights that men have.
Jackie, I share your outrage. Even if they were to argue they’re bi or queer, that’s not the reason they were booted! If they’re trying to manufacture a reason to go to the Alberta Human Rights Commission, they have no argument.
If they do go that route:
http://www.albertahumanrights.ab.ca/complaints/complainant_info/guide.asp
Much of the grumbling I’ve been seeing is about teaching the Calgary Expo a lesson. Good luck with that, damsels!
I suppose at least now they understand that “victim” is not a category that people choose to become a part of, but one that external forces cause them to be part of?
Oh wait, that’d be the reasonable thing to do. No no, they are the exceptions! Barely even women, because a woman’s natural role is to become a victim!
You know what the strangest part of it is? They are the ones who rail against “victims,” who claim that women “damsel” to get social support and money. And guess what; when they, according to their own beliefs, put on the mantle of victim by saying they were discriminated against by being kicked out of the con, they got people to give them $14,000.
Would they say that that money is something they cheated their supporters out of, or would they say that that money is legitimate unlike all the other cases of women raising money for a cause?
“I read an article years ago about how, when Republicans get together for photo-ops, the women and minorities find themselves getting pushed to the front where they can be prominently seen.”
That was the case years ago, when there were still enough women and minorities in right-wing circles that they could still get pushed to the front where they could be prominently seen. In the Republican Party conventions of yore, for example (if you’re old enough you probably remember this) the camera used to linger on the clusters of black small businessmen and female entrepreneurs who were in the party because, yeah, they did want to get rich, they thought it was possible for them to get rich, and they also thought voting the Republican ticket would help them achieve their goals.
But that was then. The cameras no longer linger on the countenances of the women and POCs at Republican conventions because there aren’t enough of them there to make for good optics. When you see a black guy or a woman of any color at a right-wing get-together today, the only reaction the sight will arouse in you is how lonely that person looks. And that person will look lonely, because he or she will have little company to none. That’s not something the party shills want the American public to notice; it may sound conspiratorial, but it’s true.
I refer you (“you” being anybody who might be reading this) to any one of the numberless articles written by Republican women between (say) 1995 and about 2005, whose gist was “they’re driving us out of the party.” Actually, at first the gist was more “they’re trying to drive us out of the party”, then it turned into “they are driving us out of the party” which was succeeded by a pathetic little postmortem cough of “well, by now they’ve driven us almost totally out of the party.” Which was succeeded by nothing, of course, because by then the work of expulsion was complete. (That’s why Sarah Palin was such a find. During the Before-Time when reason still ruled, she would have been regarded, correctly, as a liability by the the people whose job it was to find the liabilities and identify them. She got bundled into the “asset” category only because the Republican Party grew anxious to demonstrate that it still had some women in it. Also, she was hot, which certainly didn’t hurt.)
That’s also why the Republicans are now waxing self-congratulatory about their two Hispanic candidates (one of them sorta-kinda Hispanic, the other most definitely Latino) — Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz. They’re absolutely not a party which is willing to nominate a black candidate, let alone elect a black President, let alone nominate a female candidate, let alone elect a female President, but they can submit a couple slightly-darker-than-usual guys for serious consideration. That’s progress, folks.
(None of this is meant to contest what Sarah has to say; simply to enlarge upon it.)
“That’s also why the Republicans are now waxing self-congratulatory about their two Hispanic candidates (one of them sorta-kinda Hispanic, the other most definitely Latino) — Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz. ”
what does this mean? which one them is sorta-kinda Hispanic and which one is definitely Latino?
Here’s what will happen with the HBs’ lolsuit: they’ll raise the money, and then they’ll drop the case because SJWs. Then the money will be “gone” or nonrefundable for Reasons. And the gullible fools who sent them their pocket money will scream about SJWs stealing their money using totally not racist cartoons.
I’m sorry, I can’t deal with the whole “We must be trans because we don’t ascribe to these stereotypical feminine traits we’ve arbitrarily decided feeemales do!” bullshit. I just cannot even fathom the mental gymnastics they had to have done to reach that conclusion.
http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view6/2606202/turk-walk-away-o.gif