The reviews are in!
Well, at least one review is in.
In a 5000 word review essay that is perhaps too charitably described as “rambling,” military obsessed blogger Freiherr Karza von Karnstein explains why he loves The Sarkeesian Effect so much.
While his, er, argument is too convoluted for me to summarize in a brief blog post, I have taken the liberty of extracting some sentences from it that I think would work well as blurbs to use on The Sarkeesian Effect’s DVD cover and in other publicity efforts.
I have also taken the liberty of adding exclamation points to all of the possible blurbs below to give them a little extra zing!
Specifically and concisely, I do not see government participation in business and tariffs/sales taxes as irrevocably evil, but rather as tools that can be useful, and I do not share Rand’s disdain for sacrifice, a behaviour common to many aviation and racing pioneers and a behaviour common to winners of the Knight’s Cross, the Grand Cross of Valour, the Victoria Cross and the Medal of Honour!
Yes, that is an actual sentence from the “review.”
On another note, I disagree with Mr. Owen on the biological necessity of “manspreading!” He has argued that “manspreading” is necessitated by the fact of male anatomy! Males have dominated the ranks of airborne troops the world over since the 1930’s! Paratroopers are trained to keep their feet, calves and knees together when they are about to make contact with terra firma, since “manspreading” one’s lower limbs will lead to fracture of at least one lower limb on impact, a situation which tends to be prejudicial to the proper functioning of a paratrooper! Not all males need to manspread! Only airborne-unqualified/airborne-incapable males need to manspread!
That one might be a teensy bit long for a blurb, sorry!
Specifically, while most Englishmen, it seems, have surrendered their right to fly the Union Flag without a fight, this is definitely not true of the Loyal Protestants of Glasgow and the rest of Lowlands of Scotland (the sheep-molesting animists once referred to as “Highlanders” but properly referred to in 2015 as Teuchters are another story altogether) and of Ulster, all of who are consistently putting up a hell of a fight to maintain the Union and the Union Flag!
Ok, while that is an actual sentence from the review, it doesn’t seem to have much to do with the movie, or Jordan Owen, or anything even vaguely related to either. I’ll try to do better with the next blurb.
In this regard, The Sarkeesian Effect is essentially a 2015 cinematic version of Derry, Aughrim, Enniskillen and the Boyne, of the First Day of the Somme!
I don’t know what on earth that means, but it does at least mention the name of the film, which is good, right?
Mr. Owen was right to do onto the manosphere element of the production what King Hussein did to the PLO in 1970’s Black September!
Hmm. That might be a little confusing. Maybe we could shorten it to just:
Mr. Owen was right … !
Let’s try another:
Twenty years ago, I remember Neal Knox trying to instigate a coup against NRA leader Wayne LaPierre, a coup that was halted when Soldier of Fortune editor/publisher Colonel Robert K. Brown, an NRA board member, publicly declared his support for LaPierre and condemned Knox!
Sorry! That one, which is also from the review, doesn’t seem to have any obvious connection to the film, so let’s forget it.
The Manky Bheasts are people who, in the time of Jane Austen’s novels, were quite likely to be hanged for stealing chickens or shoes, who, in Downton Abbey, would be footmen and stable boys like Barrow who knew their place and knew to only be heard saying “Yes, milord, no, milord!”
Crap. That one might not work either. Not even the exclamation point I’ve added can save it.
In objective reality, Canada is one of the lesser of Her Majesty’s Dominions, less important that Belize, the Falklands and Fiji!
Well, that might not work as a blurb for The Sarkeesian Effect. But it could be put to good work by the publicity departments for Belize, the Falklands or Fiji!
Let me try one more:
Long story short, when the Manky Bheasts and other feminists/SJW’s launch their video Alpha Strikes against Mr. Owen and The Sarkeesian Effect, know that they are coming at this with an agenda and a sierra-load of biases, unlike those who confirmed the existence of the Higgs-Boson particle!
I think we’ve got it!
There’s your blurb, Jordan!
You’re welcome!
Not me. I mentioned the words you used solely because I thought it demonstrated that you understood that sometimes it’s appropriate to do something — that normally would be rude if there were no provocation — in the presence of provocation. Guess I was wrong.
But it wasn’t long, and it wasn’t a huge deconstruction. Not getting the sense that you really read what I said here…
And here I thought they were “asking,” which usually is a plea for someone to provide an “answer,” and usually is not a waste of time. Just speaking an opinion to a crowd and getting huffy if they don’t accept it with no further dialogue is.
There’s a semantic deconstruction for them.
OT: If anyone’s supply of male tears is running low, check out #MasculinitySoFragile on Twitter. SO MANY BUTTHURT DUDES.
@katz:
Love the thread about the dude who challenged women using the hashtag to a fight that promptly ran away when a woman accepted. Absolutely perfect.
@katz
Love it. Apparently every sexist dude using that hashtag has this weird translator in their brain that swaps “masculinity” with “men”. They actually think the hashtag is saying “men are fragile” and that they are being soooooo clever by pointing out instances of, as they see it, “women being fragile”. Not realizing the only thing they’ve proven is how insecure they are of their gender identity.
And Sargon of Asshat’s (who apparently makes ‘rational and well-reasoned arguments’) tweet is extra layers of missing the point:
https://twitter.com/Sargon_of_Akkad/status/646665210217037824
I don’t know how to copy so here’s the link
https://mobile.twitter.com/michellemalkin/status/646698859742126080
Pffft what?
Multiple women, apparently! I hope someone storifies that shit.
@Moocow:
Gah. That tweet actually makes me want to have a twitter account to see if I can fit a good definition in 140 characters.
“Masculinity is a narrow standard, and one deviation makes you not manly. Men suffer from being forced to conform to it. Fragile and toxic.”
And just barely within the character count. Do @ mentions count towards that limit? If so, it wouldn’t work…
@Fruitloopsie:
Yup, just as moocow said; they think “masculinity” means “man” so “fragile masculinity” means “weak masculinity” means “weak man.”
Jordan Owen at least completed his version of the Kard… Sarkeeeeesian effect, unlike Aurini himself.
what is masculinity? If someone made a comment on femininity I would also think they talk about women. Aren´t they (the -inities) the sum of everything men or women do respectively? So these concepts defy definition?
But I´m sure MRAs equate stereotypical masculinity with men.
I like how he calls it Owen’s “debut film”, because while technically correct, it threatens that there will be more.
I live in London, and I use manky all the time. Quite a good word.
By the way, I think I’ve met this blog writer. I was once ‘picked up’ by a bouncy, drunk Australian in the tube station and he took me to the manky pub across the road. He then wandered round the pub for a while and brought back an ex-Para, retired copper to our table who talked a lot like this. The ex-Para bought me a shot and a pint, so I won’t hear a word against him.
I abandoned the Australian on the high street, despite him telling me he had something he wanted to show me in his flat and reassuring me that his wife was travelling away and went home alone.
All right, there is something i gotta ask that is pretty off-topic, but something i’ve wondered about for some time.
Totalbiscuit, Or John Bain, is he a supporter of GG? Cuz i’ve heard some of the shite he said and some stuff that he has done that makes me wonder. He always struck me as a bit off a wanker. He is also apparently a buddy with Milo Yiannopolous and supports Thunderfoot.
Really, i need to know this.
@Spacelawn
Yes, he is. A vicious one who’s even taken part in the harassment against Anita.
@kirbywarp
I avoid twitter because I get into arguments easily as is. And the 140 character limit makes it hard. I had to resist the urge to not comment something along the lines of “False dilemma, masculinity is toxic AND crumbles easily; also masculinity is a series of traits, not a group of people; also you’ve all just proven how fragile masculinity really is with your massive insecurity over your gender identity.”
@Ethfiel
“Aren´t they (the -inities) the sum of everything men or women do respectively?”
First, ‘inities’ is not a suffix. Are you thinking of the word ‘infinity’? Because “infinities” is made up of the prefix ‘in-‘ and ‘finite’, meaning “no ending”.
Second, If the definition of ‘masculine’ was ‘the sum of everything men do’ and the definition of ‘feminine’ was ‘the sum of everything women do’ then ‘masculinity’ and ‘femininity’ would literally be synonyms and both mean ‘everything human beings have done ever’. Because what are men doing that women cannot? And vice versa?
My favorite #masculinitysofragile tweets are all the “Men fought in wars!” ones. Masculinity so fragile it needs a literal army to defend it.
@SFHC
Gotta admit that im disappointed that Jim Sterling speak favorably of him, considering Jim’s views.
And of course Bain has more then two million subs on youtube….
Ethfiel:
They are simple stereotypes that have been escalated by society into “rules”. So no, they aren’t the “sum of everything men an women do respectively,” they are socially defined behaviors the respective groups are supposed to conform to, or else they are a failure of their respective group.
@Tessa
Preach!
Oops pressed post too soon! Continuing!
The toxicity comes from which rules are more stringently enforced and the effect they have on the members of that group. Fragility would be the level of self worth one applies ( and is encouraged to apply) to being a successful member of that group.
ANYWAY, the big problem is for members of the respective groups that do not fit the prescribed stereotypes, or dare to follow behaviors assigned to the other group.
@spacelawn
100%.
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sjkslb
Though he will try and play the “both sides are kind of assholes” argument as well as the “any group of people is going to have some assholes” rationalization, it’s paper thin.
“TL:DR – If Zoey Quinn did engage in censorship via the abuse of the DMCA on Youtube then I thoroughly condemn her actions as being both fucking stupid and unethical. If outlets did provide her favourable coverage because she had intimate relations with some of the writers, they’re goddamn idiots for doing it, why the hell would you compromise the trust of your readers for that? The shitstorm is too insane right now to make a huge amount of sense of and I have no idea what is true and what isn’t. Cooler heads prevail, heard of that phrase? Calm the fuck down and things might become clearer. Also please stop shouting at me, thanks.”
Notice the lack of “if those are all lies made up by assholes who seek to silence her” scenario in his list of hypothetical despite his declaration that “I have no idea what is true and what isn’t”.
Hah, and while doing a little research, I discovered this glowing review from a certain ‘gaming’ website operated by a sexist rapist scumbag we are all too familiar with:
http://www.reaxxion.com/2808/totalbiscuit-shows-how-sjws-are-disgusting-human-beings
But as much as he tries to play ‘true neutral’, his views on sexism in video games amounts to “problem? what problem?”
http://i.imgur.com/M6qIiya.png
Fun story, a friend of mine was in line to meet TotalBiscuit at a con in new york. She’s a big fan of competitive starcraft and was excited to meet him because he’s a big name in that world.
She’s next in line but then he skips her and goes to the next person.
When she asked why the hell he skipped her, he said he had just assumed that she was just a girlfriend of someone who was actually in line and that ‘he didn’t think girls watched this stuff’.
So yeah, fuck that guy.
Newt has it: “bheast” is apparently a pejorative used by Glasgow Rangers fans regarding Glasgow Celtic fans (as the nickname of Glasgow Celtic is “The Bhoys”). That, combined with the rest of his obsessions, suggests a particularly reactionary Northern Irish Unionist. Perhaps Glaswegian, but his rambling suggests an unfamiliarity with Glasgow except as filtered through the sectarian divide (and I would rather prefer people like this to be as far away from me and other Glaswegians as possible)
FWIW, there could absolutely be an analogous concept of toxic femininity (for instance, girls being pressured not to be smart). The difference is that such femininity is created by or for the perceived benefit of men.
Totalbiscuit is, afaict, not totally on board with the KIA/Gamergate bunch, but he is one of those bleep bloop blorp blep Rational Men whose Rationality is based on a bunch of priors that they’re not willing or interested in examining. Add that to a complete sense of self-absorption and massive ego (argue with him and “I HAVE MORE FANS THAN YOU” is only a tweet away from coming out), and he seems like a pretty unpleasant character, only looking good in comparison to people like Milo.
I wonder, too, if this “review” is just some kind of… trolling effort? Or joke or… something. As a few others have said, it almost seems TOO random and nonsensical to be “real”.
That wacky review aside, the “documentary” itself is… hard to fathom. Like, even as I am watching part of it play on my screen (only in the form of videos like the one posted here a few days ago, with the clip and the dog falling asleep – there’s no way I’d subject myself to watching it in full on its own), even as it’s a real piece of media that I am watching and it has movement and sound that I can perceive with my senses, even then I feel like, is this real? This can’t be real. It’s SO bad, so unprofessional, so poorly put-together and poorly thought-out. There are Star Trek fan films with far better production values.
Re: manspreading – wow, seriously? I have seen some bizarre arguments about this issue in the past, but trying to say it’s not okay to point it out because it’s not okay to talk about a stranger’s genitals?? I’m sorry but wtf?
Asking someone to move their leg is, in and of itself, a request that does not have anything to do with, or call any attention to, the other person’s genitals. Seriously.
And manspreading absolutely is a thing. I’m a man and it’s something I’ve found annoying myself! Some dudes just insist on sitting with their knees jutting out at this crazy angle, like they’re lounging at home in an easy chair (and no, not just tall or big guys with longer legs, who might at least have a partial excuse). And sometimes, you sit down and your leg bangs up against theirs, because theirs is way over in your seat space, and they don’t seem to care. =/ I NEVER do that to anyone, because… it’s not hard. And it’s rude. Is this THE DEFINING FEMINIST ISSUE OF OUR GENERATION? No, of course not. Doesn’t change the fact that it’s rude and unnecessary, and anyone who argues that it doesn’t exist/isn’t a real thing is either A) full of shit, B) rarely rides any form of crowded mass transit, or C) is extraordinarily lucky to have never encountered this.
ALSO
A “buzzword” is a word that is created needlessly, i.e. it’s redundant because perfectly good words already exist for the thing in question, but somebody wanted something cooler or sexier. Or, alternatively, a word that has been overused and applied so loosely, and is so associated with this nebulous, hollow usage, that it doesn’t really mean anything anymore (e.g. “core competencies” in the context of employee performance evaluations in an office).
“Manspreading” and “mansplaining” fit neither criteria.