Categories
a voice for men anti-Semitism antifeminism cuckolding cultural marxism evil single moms evil SJWs homophobia Islamophobia literal nazis memes men who should not ever be with women ever oppressed white men racism

Memeday: “You got your racism on my Men’s Rights Activism…”

An AVFM meme found on the Feminist Hypcrisy Facebook page
An AVFM meme found on the Feminist Hypocrisy Facebook page

Every Friday is Memeday here at We Hunted the Mammoth, and today we’ll be looking at some memes I found on a Facebook page called Feminist Hypocrisy.

At first glance, this page looks like any number of other Men’s Rightsy Facebook pages.

There are the requisite jokey memes mocking feminists. (“What do you call a basement full of feminists?” one caption asks, over the picture of a donkey. “A whine cellar!”) There is a post about Anjali Ramkissoon, the Uber-driver-attacking (female) doctor who’s become something of an obsession amongst MRAs in recent days. There are memes on such Men’s Rights hobbyhorses as the evils of child support — like the one above, which the folks at Feminist Hypocrisy borrowed from A Voice for Men.

Indeed, the admin of the page seems a bit preoccupied with this last issue, in particular with the specter of men being forced to pay for children fathered by other dudes.

femhanotherman

Yep, it looks like some Men’s Rights Activists are as obsessed with cuckolding — or, more crudely, “cucking” — as any internet Nazi. Or maybe even more so:

femhcensored

 

(I had to censor that one a little.)

Now, when the internet Nazis talk about “cucking” there is almost always a racist angle to it — the cuck-er invariably being black or brown and the cuck-ee white. Sometimes this “cucking” is meant literally, other times figuratively — with the internet Nazi squad especially pissed at white “race traitors” who support immigrants said to be “cucking” Western Civilization by, well, not being white.

Guess what? It just so happens that Mr.Feminist Hypocrisy is also racist as hell.

femhsoyouwillmiss

Look how seamlessly the Men’s Rights activism slides into this blatantly racist meme. Bigotries flock together, after all.

Poking around amongst the rest of the memes up on the page, it quickly becomes evident that Mr. Feminist Hypocrisy shares quite a few of the preoccupations of your standard issue internet Nazi — from the terrible oppressions faced by white Christian dudes …

femhwhitedude

… to, uh, whatever it is we’ve got going on here.

jewsmakeyougay

Huh. I thought Obama was supposed to be a secret Muslim, not a secret gay Jew.

There are many more racist memes on the page, including a number too crude and violent to repost here.

And then there are a few memes that seem utterly inexplicable, at least to me; if anyone can decipher the meaning of this thing, I would greatly appreciate it. (The readers of the Feminist Hypocrisy page seem to have been as baffled by it as I am; apparently that’s former Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s head photoshopped onto someone else’s body.)

It would be nice if we could just dismiss the Feminist Hypocrisy page as a weird outlier in the world of Men’s Rights Activism. But it’s not. The page has nearly 20,000 “likes” on Facebook. Its posts draw comments and shares.

And the way I found it in the first place? I was looking through a list of Facebook pages “liked” by A Voice for Men, and there it was.

On a less depressing note: My headline today was inspired by the classic commercials for Reece’s Peanut Butter Cups which some readers here will remember from their childhoods. Here’s one of them:

Turns out that chocolate and peanut butter do indeed taste great together. Racism and Men’s Rights Activism, not so much.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

143 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
BoinkBoinkBoinkBoinkBoinkBoink
BoinkBoinkBoinkBoinkBoinkBoink
5 years ago

Who’s more child-like? The person who recognizes the impact their language can have on others and makes efforts to talk in a way that doesn’t needlessly exclude people, or the person who looks at a request not to use particular words and throws a little temper-tantrum about free speech?

Yes, this. Everyone needs this hanging right beside their computer.

Also, hi. I’ve lurked this site for awhile and randomly commented here and there. I’ve gotten run off Imgur, Reddit, Twitter, and even the Cracked comment section by racist/sexist/nthphobic trolls. I figured I’d try here.

mildlymagnificent
mildlymagnificent
5 years ago

The one that gets me is the “destroys dreams” notion.

There are plenty of men, my husband and my daughters partners for three examples, whose dream is to have children they can be dad to.

They want babies in their arms, toddlers they can play silly games with, kids they read books to, kids they can take to the museum and to swimming lessons, kids they can help with homework, kids they can teach to cook. If they could swing it, they’d also like some full-time parenting leave so they could have a baby or toddler to themselves while the mother goes out to work. That’s something they would regard as a bonus , a bonus really worth having.

I’m willing to bet that there are many more men who really want kids and a fully involved family life than there are of these petty shitheads. They’re so uptight that they’re too scared of making duck or train noises while reading a book to a child for fear of looking childish. Those of us with a healthier self regard see a lot of parenting as golden opportunities to let our inner child out for some fun.

contrapangloss
contrapangloss
5 years ago

Kasper, am I correct in thinking you were objecting more to David blurring out the words in the memes than you not being allowed to use said language?

Because it looks like a few of us have interpreted you as “I should be allowed to use censored words” instead of “David, why are you censoring the memes?”

If it’s the “I should be allowed to use censored words” than I don’t really have all that much sympathy. If it’s the “censoring the memes” thing…

Have you considered that not all of David’s readers are adults? I know for sure that we have had teens who were regulars in the commentariot. Furthermore, some of us might read webpages around other people. I know we have some family folks around.

Would you really be thrilled as a parent if you were reading David’s posts and your little 6 year old (who’s finally aced the whole reading short words thing) walks up behind you and asks “How can a **** be ruined and floppy? I thought they were cats?”

Then, we do also have adults who prefer not to read/listen to crude stuff when we don’t have to.

That’d be me.

I kind of think of foul language like a stress headache (not a migraine, just a little headache).

Is it going to kill me? No.
Can I live with it? Yes.
Is it still obnoxious? Yep.
Does it occasionally make me grouchy and less productive? …yeah.

WeirwoodTreeHugger
WeirwoodTreeHugger
5 years ago

Why do these dudes always connect single motherhood with feminism? There are feminist single moms, but are feminists more likely to be single moms than the general female population? Not that I know of.

I guess it’s just the typical MRA trick of calling it feminism every time a woman does something they don’t like.

I’m also wondering if it’s only evil to them if it’s men raising kids that aren’t biologically theirs. Is it evil for single dads to partner with women that aren’t the biological mom? Because my cousin is helping raise her stepdaughter along with lots of help from my uncle and his wife. Every one treats the kid as part of the family. Nobody seems to feel oppressed by her presence. Her bio mom is a meth addict who’s sometimes in jail. Is her dad evil for bringing a her into our lives? I never thought so. She’s a pretty good kid. Not a dream destroying flesh monster.

dlouwe
dlouwe
5 years ago

@Kasper, In addition to what everyone else has said, there’s nothing in the comments policy about not allowing you to use foul language; it’s AFAIK just an editorial decision on David’s part. I can’t fathom how one would take issue with that. It’s just such a completely inconsequential thing.

littletaeo
littletaeo
5 years ago

I love how that third-to-last racist one is supposed to be something that… what? Instills fears in us wimminz or something?

I’m about to graduate and become an accountant, hopefully make (okay) money, and I don’t want kids. Because I know that as cute and cuddly as they are, I wouldn’t be a good parent.

So if I lived in a world where suddenly being in business + not having kids meant I was somehow benefiting others (literally anyone) in any (literally any) positive way whatsoever… awesome! Where do I sign up for that?

Is it sort of like some frequent flyer miles thing? Do I go tell someone I don’t want kids, and trade in my right to kids for a points card? Every dollar I earn gets other people points?? How does it work?? Sign. me. up.

(I totally see why they would think it’s scary, though. Because they lack all empathy and it’s inconceivable that anyone would want to ever -gasp- actually assist their other fellow human beings in any way whatsoever)

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
5 years ago

@ WWTH

I don’t know if it’s the same in the US, but over here “single mother” has often been used in a pejorative way (especially a couple of decades past). It’s not just the “moral turpitude” aspect. There’s a myth that single mums are benefit spongers to such an extent that it’s a common ‘meme'(?) that hordes of teenagers are desperately getting knocked up so they can get free council housing and tons of tax payers’ money.

And we all know how women like to sponge off the hard working male, right? (only men work hard enough to pay tax)

Fabe
Fabe
5 years ago

@Alan

Yeah its like that here in the US/Canada. In fact a few weeks ago a guy came into the fast food place I work at wearing a Tee-Shirt that said “I support single moms” with a silhouette of a stripper on a pole.

weirwoodtreehugger
5 years ago

Alan,
Oh yes. Many people here think women become poor single mothers just to get all that sweet, sweet welfare money. Especially black women. The right is also obsessed with people on EBT (food assistance) using their benefits to buy steak and lobster. Or sillier still, alcohol and cigarettes even though you can’t actually do that.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
5 years ago

@ fabe & WWTH

Quick glance at this gives you the idea about the UK and where things started to change. Not making a political point about any particular party. It was very much a societal attitude across the board that was probably parties being populist as much as setting the agenda.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-141844/Party-told-blame-single-mothers.html

ETA: I do not recommend you google ‘single mothers’. You’ll see things that make that t-shirt seem positively nice.

Paradoxical Intention
5 years ago

MexicanHotChocolate | January 29, 2016 at 11:22 am
As the son of a single mother, I think a more accurate meme about single mothers would be some asshole buying himself new stuff while holding a tiny child support check just out of a woman’s reach while their kid, dressed in clothing he’s clearly outgrown, cries in the corner. That’s what would depict my experience, anyway.

That sums up my experiences as a child of a single parent. My Bio Father tried that whole “That child isn’t mine!” stuff, got proven wrong via DNA test, got ordered to pay child support, then lived off of his father’s money so he wouldn’t have to pay for any child support (not just for me, but apparently for a handful of other children, all of them first-born girls as well.). Of course, he paid child support for his precious first-born son, who is going to “carry on” his family name.

I’ve never met my sperm donor, nor have I met any of my step-siblings. I’d like to one day, just so I can give my step-siblings a hug, and tell Sperm Donor to fuck right off.

dlouwe | January 29, 2016 at 12:10 pm
I wonder what these shitbricks think about adoption? Like, is it suddenly okay to raise a child that isn’t “yours” if it’s not biologically related to either parent?

I imagine they’d think it’s the worst thing ever. Until they’re praised for giving a child a “good” home, then it’s a totally “Alpha” move because then they can martyr themselves all over the place.

“Lookit me, I’m sacrificing SO MUCH to raise this little lump of flesh that isn’t mine! Praise me!”

I feel sorry for any child who gets adopted by one of these shitheels. They’d most likely be used as a status symbol.

weirwoodtreehugger | January 29, 2016 at 5:05 pm
Alan,
Oh yes. Many people here think women become poor single mothers just to get all that sweet, sweet welfare money. Especially black women. The right is also obsessed with people on EBT (food assistance) using their benefits to buy steak and lobster. Or sillier still, alcohol and cigarettes even though you can’t actually do that.

On the topic of EBT: Apparently Wisconsin is trying to pass a ban that says that people can’t spend some of their EBT allowance on shellfish.

But, they have to spend 2/3 of their allowance on things the state deems “nutritional”, like white potatoes, meat, and fresh produce. The idea is to “promote healthier eating” and to “stop fraud”.

And, of course, this does seem to be based on purely anecdotal evidence.

Of course, since EBT and SNAP benefits are federal level and not state, Wisconsin would need a federal waiver to get this passed, and no state has ever gotten something like that granted.

Doesn’t stop those pushing for it from thinking it’ll go through anyways.

DaveL
DaveL
5 years ago

So let me get this straight: single mothers “get the kids and the praise”, where “kids” means “balls of flesh that eat money, destroy dreams, and sh_t stress” and “praise” means being considered some sort of unlovable creature with ruined genitalia and mental issues?

David N-T
David N-T
5 years ago

I think that the AVFM’s endorsement of a page that depicts single mothers and their children in such a negative manner isn’t really that surprising given Paul Elam’s own less than stellar parenting. Why aren’t men who have kids with these women being held to any standard of responsibility within the AVFM paradigm? And exactly why shouldn’t a single mother pursue a relationship with someone she’s in love with? My reaction, if it works out, would be happiness for them, whereas the MRA would see this as some sort of tragedy. Genetics and natural/sexual selection are descriptions of a process, they are not moral imperatives.

Bryce
Bryce
5 years ago

They can kid themselves, but they’d be just as crap at parenting ‘their own’ kids as they would any other child.

I remember my father suddenly showing in interest in me at 19. Later I realized he’d found out my mother’s diagnosis. Must have thought I’d inherit her estate. What a guy!

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
5 years ago

@ david n-t

It’s simple in their mindset.

Man who walks out on a child forever = hero standing up for his rights

Woman who gets a babysitter in once a month so she can see friends = feckless irresponsible slattern

weirwoodtreehugger
5 years ago

On the topic of EBT: Apparently Wisconsin is trying to pass a ban that says that people can’t spend some of their EBT allowance on shellfish.

But, they have to spend 2/3 of their allowance on things the state deems “nutritional”, like white potatoes, meat, and fresh produce. The idea is to “promote healthier eating” and to “stop fraud”.

Another state did something similar. Either Kansas or Missouri. I forget which.

That so many people care how a recipient spends their EBT is proof positive that they don’t care about “small government” or “fiscal responsibility.” They just want poor people to suffer. According to the just world fallacy the right always seems to operate from, they must deserve to suffer because if they were decent people, they wouldn’t have wound up poor.

One gets a set amount on their EBT card a month. If someone blows the whole thing the first day of the month on expensive items, the “taxpayers” aren’t out any more money. It’s not like when your allotment runs out, you just go fill it back up on the government’s dime. So why do they care about this? It can’t be for any other reason than that they think poor people must be constantly miserable and suffering and can never spend money on anything more than lentils and the monthly bills.

Kirbywarp
Kirbywarp
5 years ago

@WWTH:

It can’t be for any other reason than that they think poor people must be constantly miserable and suffering and can never spend money on anything more than lentils and the monthly bills.

There is another reason, but it’s not that much better. They think that the poor are poor because of bad choices, not bad circumstances. Blowing their EBT card on one meal means they aren’t spending their money “better,” which means they stay poor longer (and in worse circumstances, thereby making it necessary to give them even more money), and are thus more of a drain on the system.

Somehow they think that avoiding spending $100 once on a microwave is going to be the deal-breaker that could have lifted a poor person out of poverty.

And there’s just the simple “how dare you spend MY (tiny tiny share of a huge tax-payer pool of) MONEY on frivolities! If you’re just gonna spend MY (teeny tiny share of probably-going-entirely-to-the-defense-budget-anyway tax) MONEY on things you don’t absolutely need, then why in the world am I even being charitable in the first place?”

But that last one is pretty much what you’ve already said.

dlouwe
dlouwe
5 years ago

So why do they care about this? It can’t be for any other reason than that they think poor people must be constantly miserable and suffering and can never spend money on anything more than lentils and the monthly bills.

I guess the reasoning must be something along the lines of “If they spend their allowance on ‘luxury’ items, they must not actually need it.” Because if they must accept the existence of a social safety net, they want it to provide only up to the point where recipients are not literally and immediately starving to death, but nothing more. Which likely extends from, as you’ve said, the idea that poor people deserve to suffer for so long as they “choose” to remain poor.

ScarlettAthena
ScarlettAthena
5 years ago

RE: EBT cards. Ugh. There is so much demonization of poor people and what they should be able to buy/not buy with their gubbmint money. All this discussion about what kind of meat, seafood, veggies they should be able to buy is disgusting. They can buy all manner of junk food, but fish is considered luxury?

Then, there are all those (I’m assuming phony) stories about “food stamp people” having “iPhones” (it’s always iPhones too) and designer purses and tattoos (seriously? are people supposed to remove their tattoos to merit getting food stamps? which is a bigger cost. I guess the assumption is they got the tattoos with money they could have used to buy food?).

Americans like to brag about how there are no classes, but when you read the stories about EBT cards, it’s really apparent how we construct class in this country.

And to touch on the meme and my earlier comments, a lot of those stories have racist hues with specific music being played or specific names or phrases associated with African-American communities.

David N-T
David N-T
5 years ago

@Alan

Yeah, I know. There’s just something about AVFM’s use of ethics of convenience that really bothers me. It’s the basest form of selfishness trying to masquerade as something admirable.

Cleverforagirl
Cleverforagirl
5 years ago

@MexicanHotChocolate

Don’t forget the yelling about how everything is everyone else’s fault, bc he is holy and blameless.

My dad was always hit or miss with the child support and flaked on me more often than not. I just got lucky that mom’s side of the family is super close so one family members troubles become something we all work on together.

ScarlettAthena
ScarlettAthena
5 years ago

@dlouwe

“they want it to provide only up to the point where recipients are not literally and immediately starving to death, but nothing more”

Given some of the descriptions out there, I think they want to see the extended bellies of people in extreme deprivation, like in those commercials to give money to the starving children in Africa. So much of the rhetoric is that people should literally not have a penny to their name, be out on the street and not eaten in months to deserve any sympathy.

Lea
Lea
5 years ago

I also like how it is assumed that being a single mother = mental problems

I bet he means “She isn’t about to mess with my triffling ass because she’s experienced and knows a red flag when she sees one.”

These same men advocate abusing women and destroying them mentally and emotionally and claim women lie about being abused to steal those children these men clearly see as things.

They’re so transparent. What they’re really angry about is not being masters over other human beings.

Paradoxical Intention
5 years ago

ScarlettAthena | January 29, 2016 at 6:24 pm
Then, there are all those (I’m assuming phony) stories about “food stamp people” having “iPhones” (it’s always iPhones too) and designer purses and tattoos (seriously? are people supposed to remove their tattoos to merit getting food stamps? which is a bigger cost. I guess the assumption is they got the tattoos with money they could have used to buy food?).

Some people have snuck pictures on their phones of these supposed “phonies” and posted them online, but thankfully quite a few people raised some valid points:

1. Those “luxury” items could have been gifts from better-off people in their lives.

2. You need a phone to look for a job these days, and smartphones might be the only access someone has to the internet (my mom’s an example of this), and thus contact with potential employers and family and friends.

3. Some of those “luxury” purses and such could be knock offs. I know I could go down to my local flea market and pay roughly twenty bucks for a “Louis Voitton” purse (Which honestly I’d rather do if I wanted that look than spend upwards of ten times that much on a purse I’d be too afraid to take anywhere for fear of ruining it).

4. Those items could have been purchased at an earlier point in that person’s life when they weren’t facing hardships.

5. That person is especially thrifty and managed to get good “luxury” items at a really, really, discounted price.

I also see people say things like “Well, why don’t you just sell your luxury items to pay your bills?!” when my bills are in the thousands, and all my “luxury” items would add up to just a couple hundred dollars, so why sacrifice the few luxury items I have in order to make a dent in a bill that will no doubt accrue interest?

It’s like well-off people can’t fathom that some of the “luxuries” they enjoy are available to poor people because poor people have liquid cash, which banks and the like take advantage of.

And you’re right, there is a hell of a lot of racism involved in this as well.

weirwoodtreehugger
5 years ago

I just hate the mentality that poor people are poor because they’re immoral and lazy, and that the only thing stopping them from bootstrapping is that they like to rely on handouts.

The research on how poverty effects people says just the opposite. That scarcity makes people have to expend all their mental energy on scraping by. You want people to put in lots of time and energy on job hunting and education? Give them enough aid so they don’t have spend all their energy figuring out how to jump through the bureaucratic hoops in order to get amounts of aid that are so small that obsessive penny pinching is still required.

This is a pretty good summary of the current psychological research on the matter http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/publications/observer/2015/september-15/how-poverty-affects-the-brain-and-behavior.html

Not that this will get through to the bootstrapping brigade. I read a story on how giving homeless people homes actually costs the government less money than all the various costs associated with homelessness does. The comments were still full of people whining about how totally unfair it is that homeless people might get free housing when the rest of us have to pay for ours. The money spent on social safety nets is no more the point than opposing welfare programs than journalistic ethics is the point of gamergate.

weirwoodtreehugger
5 years ago

Since the phrase “n****r rich” is a thing that exists, I think it’s safe to say racism is a big part of it.

:/

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
5 years ago

@ paradoxy

spend upwards of ten times that much on a purse

I was actually chatting last week to the tanner who provides the leather for LV handbags. It is the finest leather in the world, but you might be amazed at how much it actually costs per bag.

(Or maybe not, I’m sure you know how Veblen goods works)

Chris O
Chris O
5 years ago

Quoth the Raven: “Whaaaat?”

These memes are so insane I can’t even put it into words.

dlouwe
dlouwe
5 years ago

The comments were still full of people whining about how totally unfair it is that homeless people might get free housing when the rest of us have to pay for ours.

Well, I could just become destitute, and then get free housing! I don’t see any downsides. Other than losing basically all of the conveniences and comforts that my current income provides. And becoming the target of the ire of middle-to-upper class shitheads who will wish suffering on me. Sounds like a dream life.

Kirbywarp
Kirbywarp
5 years ago

@Chris O:

Please read the comment policy, describing things like this as “insane” isn’t kosher here.

Buttercup Q. Skullpants
Buttercup Q. Skullpants
5 years ago

There’s also the fact that toys, clothes, and electronic goods are relatively cheap thanks to globalization, while the things that can help people climb out of poverty, like education, childcare, and health care, have skyrocketed in cost. This graph illustrates just how much costs have diverged over the past decade:

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/Screen%20Shot%202014-05-01%20at%202.38.45%20PM.png

Sure, poor people can afford a microwave, but they can’t afford to send their kids to college, or find quality child care, or get needed medical attention for a sick child. Upward mobility is more about access to institutions than it is about material possessions. There are blue-collar workers who spend thousands of dollars on top-of-the-line snowmobiles and boats, and there are millionaires who drive beater cars and wear threadbare clothes.

I also don’t understand why people focus so much on steak as a symbol of welfare fraud. Steak isn’t necessarily expensive depending on the cut you get. Flank steak can feed a family pretty cheaply. I really dislike the way finger-wagging right wing moralists think poor people don’t deserve decent food and that living exclusively on lentils and rice is a sign of financial discipline. (Their daily $5 Starbucks coffees, of course, are beyond reproach.)

On a side note, I’m amused that the kid who went to college and learned to hate his race, faith, and heritage is wearing a UNH sweatshirt.*

*For non-USians, University of New Hampshire is a state school in one of the most conservative states in the northeastern US. State motto: “Live Free or Die”

Fabe
Fabe
5 years ago

I just hate the mentality that poor people are poor because they’re immoral and lazy, and that the only thing stopping them from bootstrapping is that they like to rely on handouts.

I have a idea for a reality TV show where people with that mindset have to live on welfare for 6 months . They can’t access their bank accounts during the 6 month period but they do start with 2 months of what the average welfare family has. From there they’re on their own.

BoinkBoinkBoinkBoinkBoinkBoink
BoinkBoinkBoinkBoinkBoinkBoink
5 years ago

Malcolm Gladwell did a study that found in certain cases it’s cheaper for taxpayers to subsidize housing than to let that person be homeless.
It was called Million Dollar Murray, if anyone wants to look into it.

Buttercup Q. Skullpants
Buttercup Q. Skullpants
5 years ago

Ugh, borked the link to the graph.

EDIT: never mind, seems to be working now! It’s from the Atlantic Monthly if anyone is interested: http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/05/its-expensive-to-be-poor/361533/

Kirbywarp
Kirbywarp
5 years ago

@Buttercup Q. Skullpants:

There’s also the fact that toys, clothes, and electronic goods are relatively cheap thanks to globalization, while the things that can help people climb out of poverty, like education, childcare, and health care, have skyrocketed in cost.

Wow. That’s… incredibly depressing. How could people insist that capitalism is the solution to poverty in light of something like that?

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
5 years ago

@ fabe

Channel 4’s copyright lawyers have asked me to have a word…

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/tower-block-of-commons/episode-guide

😉

Paradoxical Intention
5 years ago

weirwoodtreehugger | January 29, 2016 at 7:09 pm
I just hate the mentality that poor people are poor because they’re immoral and lazy, and that the only thing stopping them from bootstrapping is that they like to rely on handouts.

The research on how poverty effects people says just the opposite. That scarcity makes people have to expend all their mental energy on scraping by. You want people to put in lots of time and energy on job hunting and education? Give them enough aid so they don’t have spend all their energy figuring out how to jump through the bureaucratic hoops in order to get amounts of aid that are so small that obsessive penny pinching is still required.

This is a pretty good summary of the current psychological research on the matter http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/publications/observer/2015/september-15/how-poverty-affects-the-brain-and-behavior.html

I have to say, this entire post is spot on. Very well said.

And thanks for linking that study. I am well aware of the mental effects that being poor has on people (first-hand experience), and the idea that “Well, just focus on your job search and quit whining about bills, lazy scum” from people who have most likely never worked that hard a day in their life is just a slap in the face.

At least when that comes up in the future, I have a link.

Not that this will get through to the bootstrapping brigade. I read a story on how giving homeless people homes actually costs the government less money than all the various costs associated with homelessness does. The comments were still full of people whining about how totally unfair it is that homeless people might get free housing when the rest of us have to pay for ours. The money spent on social safety nets is no more the point than opposing welfare programs than journalistic ethics is the point of gamergate.

I think there’s this misconception they have that all the houses that the homeless people are going to get are going to be just as good, if not better, than theirs, and that gets their dander up.

What they don’t understand is that those houses are more than likely going to be bare minimum, most likely unfurnished, tiny apartments, not super fancy Cribs-style mansions.

Buttercup Q. Skullpants | January 29, 2016 at 8:00 pm
There’s also the fact that toys, clothes, and electronic goods are relatively cheap thanks to globalization, while the things that can help people climb out of poverty, like education, childcare, and health care, have skyrocketed in cost. ” rel=”nofollow”>This graph illustrates just how much costs have diverged over the past decade.

I’ve seen that graph:

http://www.pewresearch.org/files/2014/05/poorcosts.png

Here’s where I’ve found it if anyone wants to take a look at the article.

Mortarius
Mortarius
5 years ago

@Rockstardinosaurpirateprinces: If you’re wondering where FB’s hilariously awful double standard incidents come from there’s a couple of answers.

Firstly moderators for Facebook are outsourced in a similar fashion to 1990’s call centres, I was reading an article about such a centre in North Africa staffed mostly by young men with little experience of the cultural contexts they are moderating, so it was easy for them to recognise “nudity= not ok” (regardless of context), but memes like these are harder to recognise as obviously not ok due to cultural and language barriers (hell these memes are pretty unintelligible to us).

Secondly Facebook tries to remove as much of the mods judgement as possible by issuing very strict style guides to be enforced rigidly. Trying to define at what point someone’s nudity has become “lewd” is always an exercise in absurdity (underboob is nudity in some US states and not others).

Thirdly: Sexism.

Username Subject to Change
Username Subject to Change
5 years ago

From what I understand the amount a vagina stretches during and after childbirth is genetic, women who have wider hips have an easier time “snapping back” so to speak, while women with a narrower pelvic floor(or whatever it’s called) may not. It’s actually an evolution thing, birth became harder for humans when they gained the ability to walk upright.

It seems to me like the people who create these memes have never spent more than five minutes looking after a child. Children are like terrible puppies that can open doors and locks, love how these losers breeze over it like it’s so easy being a single parent. Even with the minute amount of child support they get from these deadbeats.

Dreadnought
Dreadnought
5 years ago

As a person of east Asian heritage, I feel so left out by these racist memes. These MRAssholes keep going on about black men who are out to “steal” all white women, or Muslims who are trying to flood “white countries” in order to rape white woman; well what about east Asian men? Why don’t we get a racist, delusional, and paranoid narrative? For example: Chinese men are attempting to cuck successful white men by flooding Europe and North America with waves of university graduates; or the popularity of Korean dramas is a conspiracy by South Korean men to steal white woman by making them wet.

If MRAs are going to act like white supremacists they should at least try to do a good job. Stop rehashing old memes and try to create new bigoted conspiracies. Be creative.

Username Subject to Change
Username Subject to Change
5 years ago

Dreadnought OR Koreans are planning to brainwash white women with the influx of their adorable, adorable skin care and cosmetics. TONYMOLY FTW

Buttercup Q. Skullpants
Buttercup Q. Skullpants
5 years ago

That graph really brought home to me why my generation is doing so much worse than our parents. My dad was lucky enough to come of age just after WWII, when housing was cheap, education was reasonably priced, and jobs were plenty. As for me, I don’t know that I’ll ever be able to afford a house, retire before age 75, or send my kids to college without putting them into massive debt. Rent and childcare alone eat up 85% of my paycheck right now. Oh, and our health insurance premiums went up 46% this year. Yay. So many of my generational peers are in the same boat: middle class, quietly drowning financially.

Inequality is baked into capitalism. Yes, capitalism might be more efficient at distributing goods to a greater number of people, but it also requires a pyramid system in order to work. Not only that, free-market capitalism and the profit imperative require continuous, unchecked growth (which invites comparisons to cancer). Socialism seems like a more sustainable system in the long run. There are certain services that government can provide more efficiently, equitably, and economically than private entities, who are beholden to shareholders and analysts and don’t always act in the best interest of consumers.

dhag85
dhag85
5 years ago

Once upon a time, I, a (dirty) foreigner, “stole” a White American Woman TM. I haven’t received any abuse at all in retaliation for this. Is it because:

a) I’m white?
b) she’s arguably somewhat hispanic?
c) they didn’t come up with a conspiracy theory for this scenario yet?
d) something to do with cuck?

Snowberry
Snowberry
5 years ago

I just hate the mentality that poor people are poor because they’re immoral and lazy, and that the only thing stopping them from bootstrapping is that they like to rely on handouts.

I have a idea for a reality TV show where people with that mindset have to live on welfare for 6 months . They can’t access their bank accounts during the 6 month period but they do start with 2 months of what the average welfare family has. From there they’re on their own.

I remember several years back of hearing about a challenge where well-off people who had never been poor would live on a typical poor person’s budget for a limited time period… maybe two weeks? I wish I could remember more. Anyway, a lot of the participants dropped out early, complaining that it was too hard. And that’s *with* most of the advantages that middle or upper class people have still intact.

Dreadnought
Dreadnought
5 years ago

@Username Subject to Change

Exactly! I mean Paul Elam makes thousands off his site, the very least he can do is provide new racist memes for his audience to get enraged over instead of rehashing the same narrative. I mean, it’s 2016 not the 18th century.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
5 years ago

@ snowberry & fabe

The experiment has been done a lot over here. The first one I remember was when MP Mathew Parris tried living on benefits back in 84. The most recent was that thing I linked to above.

It’s all very artificial though. No matter how authentic you try to make it, the participants know the date they can return to their previous comfy life. Real people don’t have that and that must be a factor. I can tolerate all sort of discomforts so long as I know it eventually will end.

Fabe
Fabe
5 years ago

people couldn’t go two weeks? damn and my show called for six months

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
5 years ago

Yeah, and real people don’t have the luxury of saying ‘I quit’.

weirwoodtreehugger
5 years ago

Dreadnought,
I think that it’s because stereotypes of East Asian man don’t threaten their fragile masculinity. Traits like nerdy, small penis, polite, and small in stature, unpopular with women. And of course in the manosphere, all racial stereotypes are unassailable truths.

Stereotypes of black men, and on the hand, are really threatening. Big penis, tall and athletic, tough and thuggish, popular with women.

That’s my take anyway. Everything boils down to sexual conquests and dominance with them. They just don’t see East Asian men as threats in that department.

Of course, I would “cuck” racist, misogynist manospherian asshats with Lee Byung-hun any time. I’m a misanderer like that.