So our old friend Janet “JudgyBitch” Bloomfield has written a rather silly post on how men are a bunch of STEM geniuses while women are basically designed to make babies. (On average.)
You’ve heard all this nonsense before, I am sure:
Human achievement depends on the tenacity and ingenuity of men, and their willingness to shoot for the moon (or a comet). Our mastery of the human condition, an end to suffering and poverty and disease and destitution requires technology. Water doesn’t magically clean itself, food doesn’t spring forth from the Earth without coaxing (at least not in sufficient amounts to feed all of us), the oceans do not replenish, diseases do not cure themselves and our ability to communicate and connect with each other, from one side of the planet to the other, all depends on technology.
Technology is designed, built, installed, maintained, repaired and operated almost exclusively by men. Without men, we would be living in grass huts, eating mud.
I’ll give her credit for at least suggesting a slightly novel “solution” to women (allegedly) being a bunch of stupid-heads compared to men. And by “novel” I mean “novel” only to MRAs.
Here is what I propose: we socialize girls to be more like men, and more like exceptionally intelligent men, in particular.
As she sees it, that means (among other things) making girls play with legos instead of Barbies (or any other traditionally girly toys), forcing them all to play Dungeons & Dragons (no, really), and requiring that they
study logic and rhetoric and traditional game theory, to sharpen their ability to work through a problem using reason and the empirical method.
Huh. I’m thinking that most of the dudes in the Men’s Rights movement must have slept through that part of their male socialization.
JB’s proposals are weirdly totalitarian, envisioning a mandatory one-size-fits-all approach to education for girls. And the misogyny underlying her glorification of “male” ways of thinking is fairly obvious. Her attempts to challenge traditionally gendered ways of raising girls fall more than a few steps short of feminism.
Sure, feminists have long fought against the pervasive gendering of toys. But they’re also into, you know, kids making choices for themselves. Encouraging girls to play with legos? Great! Forcing all girls to play exclusively with Legos, because you want them to become STEM geniuses? Not so great. Some girls want to play with legos; others prefer dolls. As do some boys.
For what it’s worth, JB describes her proposal as, yes, a “modest proposal,” so it’s not clear if she actually thinks that raising girls the same way as boys is a good idea, or if it’s one akin to eating babies.
Speaking of babies, here’s my favorite line in her post:
[T]he ultimate expression of femininity is a baby, and the ultimate expression of masculinity is the Large Hadron Collider.
Assuming this is true — and Janet Boomfield said it, so it must be! — just imagine what humans could accomplish if men and women worked together.
Yes, I’m talking about the ultimate in technology: the Large Baby Collider.
Oh, wait, we already have one of those; it’s called the Men’s Rights Movement.
But that’s a pretty primitive model. Here’s a prototype for an improved Large Baby Collider. It’s still a long way away from perfect — you may notice that half of the babies have been replaced by dogs — but it’s still a wobbly step in the right direction.
H/T — @TakedownMRAs
re Hedy Lamarr: also in the comic Pandapool linked, sorry.
Also, thanks EJ (The Other One) for the info about Maria Kirsch. A fascinating life story and set of accomplishments.
Lego was one of my favourite toys when I was 7-12. I liked the versatility of the basic building blocks, plus I loved attaching wheels to things (misandry!) or Lego flowers (docile femininity!). Later on my brother and I would make up complicated scenarios: my favourite was the story in which a captain of the Belgian military police traveled to Kodiak Island, Alaska, to track down the Lego villain Ogel and a bunch of kids ended up catching the bad guy somewhere in Qatar. I contributed the mechanics, he the geography (I hardly knew where Belgium was back then, never mind Qatar!)
And now I’m sounding like a commercial. A bizarre, sentimental commercial. 🙂
Women do indeed make Large Hadron Colliders but they do so with Comic Sans, and that’s just unacceptable.
Ooh, I’m afraid we do have to dock some Serious Scientist Points for that.
“The ultimate expression of femininity is a baby, and the ultimate expression of masculinity is the Large Hadron Collider.”
Which means that a majority of women (though not me) have reached the “ultimate expression”, whereas almost no men have built a Large Hadron Collider, so the men are clearly punching way below their weight.
So even by JB’s absurdly twisted world view, all the men she knows are failures.
Do they know she thinks that about them?
I had four babies back in the 80s. Is that the achievement equivalent of 4 Large Hadron Colliders?
entropyjukebox – Welcome!
I thought of Paglia too. JB takes sources from all sorts of places, as long as they are critical of women in some way, and not critical of men, so Paglia would be perfect for her.
Oh, forgot to mention. My best friend’s wife (also a good friend) is an architect. Their daughters have inherited her massive Lego collection, and adore them.
Dang, shitting an LHC sounds painful.
Also painful: Laughing with a mouth full of Altoids (now a nose full of Altoids). =P
Thank you for this David. Judgy Bitch is a mediocre troll at best.
@Weirwoodtreehugger
Good points. One thing to remember about JB and her corner of the manosphere is that their lifeline is the traditionalist conservative set. People who are eager to recast their misogyny, racism, and homophobia as concern about America’s social problems, and who are apt to claim proof of their views lies in bogus science, evopsych, or “facts” , you know, like, it’s just a fact that most women just aren’t that smart and they are wired to prefer designer clothes and babies and that’s why everything was invented by men.
At the end of the day she often backpeddles from her ridiculous and inaccurate statements, claiming “but it’s satire!” Which must be how you get away with calling yourself a writer and blogger without actually having to know or research anything.
Sorry to kinda necro this thread, but this was where the Lego discussion happened, and I just saw a really damn awesome Lego commercial featuring a girl doing some really cool things (and saying that she was inspired by both her parents, not just dad):
390 word article; by my count, 226 of those words are in sentences with ad hominems or outright insults. Impressive!
Janet’s point is that feminists are socializing boys to be like women; reciting the stated goals of feminists, which they have clearly left behind long ago, does little to counter the point. Were we to use a more reactive dictionary which moves with the time…say, urban dictionary, we get a very different picture of feminism then Webster would give us. Furthermore, she then states that it would be more logical to go the other way around, though anyone with a brain can understand that she thinks both are not good to begin with.
By the way;
‘The ultimate expression of femininity is a baby, and the ultimate expression of masculinity is the Large Hadron Collider.’
If you disagree with this, then provide alternates to these two ultimate expressions, and back them up. And remember, if you disagree that ‘femininity’ and ‘masculinity’ are things, you need to explain how Caitlyn Jenner can have a ‘female brain’, or else the PC bros will be after you in full force :].
So Judgybitch is looking at becoming a Duggar clone? How many babies has she borne and why is she spending all her time goofing off on the Internet when she has diapers to change, toilets to clean, and sammiches to make? Apparently, she hasn’t thought through her devotion to Phyllis Schlafly and the John Birch Society.
Tehy5: Why does there have to be an ultimate expression of masculinity or femininity at all?
“Reactionary.” The word you’re looking for is “Reactionary.”
“And remember, if you disagree that ‘femininity’ and ‘masculinity’ are things, you need to explain how Caitlyn Jenner can have a ‘female brain’, or else the PC bros will be after you in full force :].”
Fuck it, I’m bored, I’ll tackle this. First off, wtf are “the PC bros”? Bros aren’t exactly trans friendly, as a general rule. Of course, you clearly aren’t either, so fuck you for using trans people to try deriding feminists.
Second, that “born in the wrong body” thing is a simplification so you cis folks can have some idea wtf we’re talking about without making ignorant heads explode. It’s not so much “female brain” in some social roles thing, so much as the parts of the brain in charge of body mapping (the same ones that let you scratch an itch you can’t see), got a bit befuddled, such that the anatomy you’ve got doesn’t match wtf your brain says should be there. And I’ve now oversimplified dysphoria for you!
Third, dude, I’m non-binary. I reject both those social roles and land somewhere in between, what I see when I look down doesn’t match what should be there, but I don’t want to transition to the “opposite” sex, that would feel just as wrong. So no, smarty pants, trans people don’t prove the concept of gender roles, and we certainly aren’t your GOTCHA against feminists.
Now then, go use urban dictionary to look up imaginary sex terms, not political concepts that the 12 year olds that edit there don’t even remotely grasp.
Trolly is also assuming that every trans woman expresses her femininity the same way. A butch lesbian trans woman is as much a woman as a straight girly girl trans woman. Feminine isn’t the same for every trans woman any more than it’s the same for every cis woman.
@Argenti
I think the “PC bros” is a South Park reference.
‘Trolly is also assuming that every trans woman expresses her femininity the same way. A butch lesbian trans woman is as much a woman as a straight girly girl trans woman. Feminine isn’t the same for every trans woman any more than it’s the same for every cis woman.’
No, it’s assuming that most do-because most do! But forgive me for not stating the blindingly obvious truth that most generalizations don’t apply to anyone. Trolly is calling your opponent a troll despite him purposely using mild words to avoid emotional reactions and therefore conduct a calm, reasonable debate.
‘“And remember, if you disagree that ‘femininity’ and ‘masculinity’ are things, you need to explain how Caitlyn Jenner can have a ‘female brain’, or else the PC bros will be after you in full force :].”
”
Fuck it, I’m bored, I’ll tackle this. First off, wtf are “the PC bros”? Bros aren’t exactly trans friendly, as a general rule. Of course, you clearly aren’t either, so fuck you for using trans people to try deriding feminists.
Second, that “born in the wrong body” thing is a simplification so you cis folks can have some idea wtf we’re talking about without making ignorant heads explode. It’s not so much “female brain” in some social roles thing, so much as the parts of the brain in charge of body mapping (the same ones that let you scratch an itch you can’t see), got a bit befuddled, such that the anatomy you’ve got doesn’t match wtf your brain says should be there. And I’ve now oversimplified dysphoria for you!
”
So, it’s purely a matter of anatomy? In that case, why the hormone therapy ?_? And moreover, why do trans women alter how they look, and wear female clothing? Are you really telling me that the whole trans thing is purely a physical feeling? From everything I have heard from trans people, I have an incredibly tough time believing that.
”
Third, dude, I’m non-binary. I reject both those social roles and land somewhere in between, what I see when I look down doesn’t match what should be there, but I don’t want to transition to the “opposite” sex, that would feel just as wrong. So no, smarty pants, trans people don’t prove the concept of gender roles, and we certainly aren’t your GOTCHA against feminists.
”
No one mentioned you and your wonderful non-binarity, so why are you shoving it in here? Seriously, this has nothing to do with my argument at all.
Also, I don’t appreciate your… “And now i’ve oversimplified dysphoria for you!’. You social justice types have decided it’s the correct …humor style, or something…it’s not very humorous, and also it’s douchey, cut it out and tell your friends to cut it out too
‘Now then, go use urban dictionary to look up imaginary sex terms, not political concepts that the 12 year olds that edit there don’t even remotely grasp.’
‘Were we to use a more reactive dictionary which moves with the time…say, urban dictionary …
“Reactionary.” The word you’re looking for is “Reactionary.”’
No, the word I was really looking for was…real. Urban Dictionary responds to what is really going on in our society and social media today, rather than what most people believe. Feminists are acting like first-class assholes, focusing on first-world problems like manspreading, air condiioning, and sweat-shaming, all while barraging any man to say anything remotely problematic. For example, Tim Hunt said ‘women cry more’. Rebecca Watson posted a video showing that women have smaller tear ducts, proving him right. Didn’t stop him from getting hate-mobbed and fired. Never mind that he has mentored many prominent female scientists, advancing the very cause you fight for. No wonder people disdain feminism.
Oooh! We haven’t gotten a tone policing troll in what, 48 whole hours?
It really doesn’t matter whether you use mild words. The content of what you say is what matter. Saying assholish things in a civil tone is still being an asshole. Trying to pit trans people and cis feminists against each other to defend the rantings of a misogynist is an asshole thing to do, no matter what tone you do it in.
Also, who asked you to have a debate with us? Nobody here did. We keep anti-feminist trolls around to mock until we either get bored with you and have you banned or until you’ve been fed so much you burst and flounce. This isn’t a debating site. It’s a mocking misogyny site. You’re not entitle to a calm debate here just because you decided you want one. Don’t like it? Post elsewhere.
Tehy:
Well… About first world problems, if it’s so insignificant that we shouldn’t care, why should you? Is manspreading so important to you that you need to defend it?
And Tim Hunt didn’t simply say “women cry more.” What a horrible misrepresentation. He said: “Three things happen when they are in the lab: you fall in love with them, they fall in love with you, and when you criticise them they cry.”
This is about men and women working in labs together, that women shouldn’t work in labs with men because they are a distraction to the men doing real science. Even though problems usually arise from how women are treated, somehow it’s the fault of the women for being there. That is the problem, not that he says women simply “cry more.” And he did that at an invitation-only lunch in honour of women in science!
And before you say he was joking, after the fact in his “apology” he also stated:
“I did mean the part about having trouble with girls. It is true that I have fallen in love with people in the lab and that people in the lab have fallen in love with me. It’s very disruptive to science, because it’s terribly important in the lab that people are on a level playing, and I’ve found that these emotional entanglements have made life difficult.
I’m really really sorry that I caused any offense, that’s awful. I just meant to be honest, actually.”
So yeah… And he wasn’t fired, they were honorary positions with no income.
Protip: To quote before the part you want to quote type in (less than sign)blockquote(greater than sign) and then after the part you want quoted it’s (less than sign)/blockquote(greater than sign)
http://wondermark.com/c/2014-09-19-1062sea.png
Bonus points for the casual misogyny.
Judgy Bozo’s “point”, if she has one, is plainly situated at the top of her skull. As is yours, apparently. Which makes it rather convenient for inserting up her ass, as you both plainly seem awfully fond of doing.
Also, LOL @ your Urban Dictionary brainstorm. Yes, let’s use ignorant trolls’ ever-shifting definitions of everything as our gold standard of reference. Never mind that it’s mostly dross!
And another thing: Who’s this “anyone with a brain” you’re referring to? Surely not you and Judgy. You’re both witless wondertwits.
Oh, fuck you. I can disagree with your (and her) bullshit without providing examples. I don’t owe you shit, troll.
Aw, if you don’t like sarcasm, you should maybe read the byline before commenting! Somewhere in that “we mock misogyny” is the clear implication that there will be sarcasm.
And no, I didn’t say it was *just* a matter of biology, I said it wasn’t simply a matter of wanting to fill the “opposite” gender’s role, nor a matter as simple as there being two distinct binary options. Which is why my gender is relevant oh polite one! Because no, masculinity and femininity aren’t discrete things. And no shit Sherlock, things like clothing go into what gender people perceive you to be! I’d have never guessed that people would be more likely to call me ma’am in a shirt and heels and sir in a suit and tie, it’s not even remotely like I’ve done both!
As for hormones… go get a science book if you really don’t understand how hormones affect your body. Like, seriously, I can’t even with that one.
RosaDeLava — should’ve known it was a pop culture reference, I’m rubbish at those! Still haven’t the foggiest wtf our new friend meant though.
Anyone got the bingo cards? Cuz this one has trans friends y’all!