Categories
antifeminism memes misogyny MRA

Memeday: Men’s Rights Activists playing “gotcha” make idiots of themselves

That's what you think
That’s what you think

Men’s Rights Activists and other antifeminists love playing “gotcha” — demanding answers to questions designed to make feminists look hypocritical or illogical or just plain dumb.

Trouble is, despite their fondness for the “gotcha” game, most MRAs and antifeminists just aren’t very good at it. Their questions, often based on gross misunderstandings, tend to reveal less about the alleged hypocrisies of feminists than they reveal about their own profound ignorance of feminism.

Let’s take a look at a few of these failed gotcha memes, collected from a couple of antifeminst Facebook pages and elsewhere online and making use of the popular philosoraptor meme template

phil1

Well, that would be because women have been systematically oppressed for thousands of years; in order to get to equality, we need to focus on the things that have held women back. It’s the same reason that the civil rights movement fought for the rights of black people instead of white people.

If you think it’s wrong to call oneself a feminist instead of a humanist or equalist or whatever, why do you support something called the Men’s Rights movement?

phil2really

Uh, because fighting for the “rights” of a group of people who already have more than their fair share of privileges is backwards and silly? Because MRAs are less interested in making life better for men than they are in making things worse for women? Because most MRAs are ridiculous?

phil2

Uh, because they don’t? Feminists do sometimes point out that the overwhelming majority of rapists are men, but they don’t call all men rapists.

philwhore3

Er, what? That doesn’t make any sense. Among other things, ‘rapists” and “whores” aren’t equivalent categories, given that the latter category involves consensual sex and the former involves nonconsensual sex.

phil3toxic

Do you not understand how adjectives work? When feminists talk about “toxic masculinity” they don’t mean that masculinity itself is inherently toxic any more than someone referring to a “red car” means that all cars are red. Some kinds of masculinity can be toxic; that’s what feminists are taking about when they talk about “toxic masculinity. As the Geek Feminism wiki explains it, “toxic masculinity … refers to the socially-constructed attitudes that describe the masculine gender role as violent, unemotional, sexually aggressive, and so forth.

I don’t know why so many MRAs still don’t understand this; it’s certainly been explained to them more than enough times. And do MRAs not know how to use Google? That Geek Feminism definition I quoted above is literally the first result you get if you Google “toxic masculinity.”

phil4

And now we’re just getting silly. First off, fictional characters don’t hijack franchises; they’re fictional characters. Second, since when do movie franchises belong to a certain gender? There’s no movie law that says ghostbusters have to all be dudes, just because that’s what they were in the original Ghostbusters films.

phil5

Everyone has the right to defend themselves, but “hitting someone back” in a punitive manner is an escalation of the fight, and that’s not a good thing. Also, why are you putting “woman” in scare quotes?

philcrotch

I can’t even. What?

235 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
katz
8 years ago

Let’s see if I’m actually allowed to post.

Dawww.

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
8 years ago

Let’s see if I’m actually allowed to post.

Well, there’s one way to let everybody know you didn’t read the comments policy.

weirwoodtreehugger
8 years ago

Let’s see if I’m actually allowed to post.

It’s also cute when trolls whine about being censored right off the bat even when they haven’t been in any way censored.

Which thousands of years? For thousands of years, men were expected to die for the women in their lives. They were expected to either work themselves to death, or be ready to be killed for her. In return, women assumed domestic roles they quite enjoyed.

This argument again. Women have always worked. This is true even if you’re arguing that housework is not real labor. Life is not an episode of Leave it to Beaver. It was never the case that all women were stay at home moms until the ebil feminism came along. Also, if women universally enjoyed being a housewife, how come we had feminism in the first place? Cleary a lot of women don’t “quite enjoy” being forced into gender roles.

Why stop at thousands of years? Why not tens of thousands. Hunter-gatherer show we’d been doing this exact same thing since we started existing on the planet.

Oh, you hunted the mammoth for us, did you? Again, you should probably stop getting your historical knowledge from 1950’s and 60’s TV shows. Hunter-gatherer cultures are not like The Flintstones. There are still hunter-gatherer cultures around today, you know. And in all of them, women work hard. I’m not aware of any evidence that women were never involved in big game hunting, but even if they only did the gathering portion of obtaining food, that’s still a shit load of work and in most hunter-gatherer cultures, they get more of their food from the gathering than the hunting.

Meanwhile, historically, if a man beat his wife, he was tied to a pole in the public square, reserved exclusively for wife beaters, and flogged. The last man flogged for wife beating in America was in the mid 50s. But if a man was beaten by his wife, he was tied to a donkey backwards while the community threw things at him. Feminism doesn’t have an explanation for this.

Wut.

Egalitarian. You’re going to be seeing that term a lot more.

We’ve seen that term plenty, sweetie. So far I’m not personally impressed by it. At worse the people who label themselves that are actually anti-feminists and not egalitarian at all. At best, they’re willfully ignorant to the fact that some groups are more privileged and powerful than others in our culture.

There are legal rights women have that men lack. Name one that men have that women lack.

Bodily autonomy. No one tries to tell cis men what they can do with their reproductive bits. But in my country, there are hundreds of new laws restricting abortion rights passed each year. The government can’t take organs from corpses for donation unless the decedent gave permission while they were alive. But the right of a pregnant uterus haver (most of whom are women) to make decisions about the pregnancy is subject to all sorts of ridiculous and medically unnecessary regulations. The bodily autonomy of dead people is more respected than the bodily autonomy of a living pregnant women.

There’s also the fact that while discrimination based on gender is technically illegal, the standard of proving that it happed is made almost impossible to meet so effectively, discrimination is legal.

Actually, the idea that all men are rapists was very much a feminist tent pole during early second wave. And we’re still seeing that with the teach men not to rape movement.

You might want to think this statement through a little big more because it does not actually make much sense. The reason feminists are all about teaching that consent is good and ignoring lack of consent is bad is that we don’t believe men are inherently prone to rape. If men were inherently prone to rape, teaching affirmative consent would do no good because men are just naturally going to rape no matter what you do. It’s you MRAs who believe that teaching consent is pointless that are taking the position that men can not stop themselves from raping if they’re horny or drunk or the victim led them on or got too drunk/high to consent. We believe that men rape because of rape culture. You believe that rape culture is a myth and rape is a part of male sexuality. It is you who is the misandrist. Not us.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, sure. I’m less convinced that’s how the term was meant when it was introduced by the Deluth Model. But YouTube up Karen Straughan’s talk “Toxic Masculinity and Toxic Femininity”.

OTD? I thought you said you were going to stop trying to get us to watch honey badger videos?

katz
8 years ago

Feminism doesn’t have an explanation for this.

Feminism doesn’t have explanations for lots of shit you just made up.

Orion
Orion
8 years ago

Link? Because you don’t have a great track record with the truth and that sounds like a drop of reality diluted in a bucket of WATM to me.

EDIT: Taking a moment to re-think my reaction.

Orion
Orion
8 years ago

SFHC,

I’m not sure I understand the referent of your pronouns. Do you mean to say “the assertion that the justice system discriminates against men is a bucket of ‘What About The Men”?” or “The assertion that there was a flame war on WeHuntedTheMammoth about the proposition that the justice system discriminates against men is a bucket of “What About The Men?”

Scaly Llama
Scaly Llama
8 years ago

@Three Guns

Former feminist turned MRA here.

I doubt that. The “former feminist” bit, that is.

Let’s see if I’m actually allowed to post.

Of course you’re allowed to post! The only people who get blocked here are trolls. (And then only after we’ve had some fun.) Dissenting POVs aren’t censored unless they’re truly heinous. You obvs don’t read here regularly if you think this forum would ban MRAs outright. Not what we’re about.

Try to imagine an iconic female role, particularly some kind of kick ass character, being replaced with a male. Who’s angry. You guys. Huh.

Happens all the time in theatre and opera, although to rub salt in the wound they don’t even change th character to being male. Men frequently get cast in some of the best female roles (think Lady Bracknell in The Importance of Being Ernest.)

And yes, I get angry because there aren’t that many female roles to begin with, so giving the Lady Bracknells of the stage to a man (because apparently it’s funnier when it’s played by some cis het guy in drag) is highly frustrating.

NickNameNick
NickNameNick
8 years ago

@Imaginary Petal

It’s cute when MRAs think we’ve never heard the most common MRA arguments before.

That’s because each and every one of them think they’re an oh-so-precious, unique little snowflake that deserves adulation for just existing.

@Scaly Llama

I doubt that. The “former feminist” bit, that is.

Even if they were a “former feminist” – I’d doubt their reason for being such had less to do with genuine interest in equality, and more to do with validating their ego.

@Three Guns

Let’s see if I’m actually allowed to post.

Ah, yes, the self-victimization. As always…

Meanwhile, historically, if a man beat his wife, he was tied to a pole in the public square, reserved exclusively for wife beaters, and flogged. The last man flogged for wife beating in America was in the mid 50s. But if a man was beaten by his wife, he was tied to a donkey backwards while the community threw things at him.

The Moon is made of Swiss cheese!

See? I can make shit up too…

Feminism doesn’t have an explanation for this.

Probably because it isn’t true.

Actually, the idea that all men are rapists was very much a feminist tent pole during early second wave. And we’re still seeing that with the teach men not to rape movement.

God, reading comprehension really has gone down the shitter, hasn’t it? Apparently pointing out that societal attitudes encourage and excuse men from being sexually aggressive translates to “all men are rapists!” regardless of how well you explain the phenomenon.

But YouTube up Karen Straughan’s talk “Toxic Masculinity and Toxic Femininity”.

Sorry, most of us don’t want to waste a good half-hour to hour of our lives to listen to a repetitious rant by a complete non-expert.

It was already obvious you don’t have a single original thought in your head – and this further proves it. If you need to tell someone to watch a video or read an article of someone else espousing their views instead of just stating your case, it means you don’t have an argument of your own.

No, it just underwrites the basic joke. The Ghostbusters are exterminators. From their jump suits to their working class attitude. Late night 70’s and 80’s tv in New York was littered with B-movies and poorly made commercials for business start ups. The joke is what if one of these exterminators hunted Ghosts.

It’s bad enough setting a Ghostbusters film today. But unless women suddenly start itching to get into the extermination trade, the joke has no premise.

It’s literally just iconic movie with male cast, so now must be female because feminism. Try to imagine an iconic female role, particularly some kind of kick ass character, being replaced with a male. Who’s angry. You guys. Huh.

It. Is. Fiction. It. Is. Not. Real.

Get. Over. Your. Self.

Hopefully you’ll understand that – but I don’t think you will…

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
8 years ago

It’s literally just iconic movie with male cast, so now must be female because feminism. Try to imagine an iconic female role, particularly some kind of kick ass character, being replaced with a male. Who’s angry. You guys. Huh.

I wasn’t going to bother, but I might as well respond to this bit.

Mr A has a hundred apples. Mrs B has one. If Mr A gave an armful of apples to Mrs B, Mr A would still have dozens of them, but if Mrs B gave even one apple to Mr A, well, she’d be left with no apples at all.

The apples in this analogy are movie roles.

(Also applies to race, sexual orientation and gender identity!)

weirwoodtreehugger
8 years ago

The “former feminist” bit always reminds me of Michelle Bachman. She claims she used to be a Democrat until she read a Gore Vidal book and realized that all liberals are unpatriotic and horrible so she became a frothing right winger.

These stories of being formerly liberal/feminist/whatever are always way to just soish to be believed. They’re 100% different than the nuanced accounts I see from people who discuss what prompted them to become a feminists or what caused them to leave the quiverfull movement or other similar things.

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
8 years ago

@Orion

… The supposed flame war. I wouldn’t ask for a bloody link otherwise, would I. ಠ_ಠ

bluecat
bluecat
8 years ago

Feminism fails to have an explanation for things that Three Guns produced from his anus for our entertainment.

Damn you, feminism! Damn you!

ETA When did “iconic” come to mean “something I enjoyed when young and now that I’m middle aged nostalgically invest too much significance in”?

Orion
Orion
8 years ago

Exterminator isn’t an all-male job, trolly. It probably wasn’t in the 80s and it definitely isn’t now.

They don’t swat flies with their dicks.

Jarnsaxa
Jarnsaxa
8 years ago

It’s literally just iconic movie with male cast, so now must be female because feminism.

No, it’s two movies and multiple TV shows, one of which already had a woman Ghostbuster. Your proper timeframe for a complaint was in 1997, doing it now just makes you seem like an ass.

NickNameNick
NickNameNick
8 years ago

@Jarnsaxa

No, it’s two movies and multiple TV shows, one of which already had a woman Ghostbuster. Your proper timeframe for a complaint was in 1997, doing it now just makes you seem like an ass.

Not to mention that the comics had female Ghostbusters as well, so this weird idea there’s no precedence for female Ghostbusters is pretty silly. Then again – it’s ridiculous to assume someone can’t do a job due to gender, or race, or a number of other things that don’t directly effect one’s ability for an activity.

Comicbook fans were mad that the new Hulk is Korean-American, nevermind that the character – Amadeus Cho – has been connected to that character for a while now. Ever since one of the character’s best story-arcs in fact, “World War Hulk.”

But, for some odd reason, The Hulk can’t be Asian. Even though, technically, anyone infused with enough Gamma radiation can become a Hulk…

Bryce
Bryce
8 years ago

It’s bad enough setting a Ghostbusters film today. But unless women suddenly start itching to get into the extermination trade, the joke has no premise.

..because women couldn’t conceivably work in the extermination trade, or any trade for that matter… nice argument there.

If you had the slightest bit of concern for men your first priority shouldn’t be feminists saying mean things, but the reforming US (in)Justice System:

Paradoxical Intention
8 years ago

Three Guns | February 14, 2016 at 3:56 pm
Former feminist turned MRA here.

Wait, wait, wait! Let me guess: You were one of those Male Feminists who tried to mansplain feminism to women and tried to use it to get laid, and now you’re mad that it backfired on you, so you threw off any guise of “No really I want to help feminism!” and now you’ve gone full MRA.

Look, dude, if you were so easily turned off by Feminism, chances are you were in it for the wrong reasons anyway, and we’re so much better off without you.

Let’s see if I’m actually allowed to post.

Ah yes, the self-victimizing of someone who hasn’t read the comments policy to know that all first-time posters get put in moderation.

Yes, please smack yourself harder and tell us how we’re victimizing you by making you follow the same rules as everyone else.

Which thousands of years? For thousands of years, men were expected to die for the women in their lives. They were expected to either work themselves to death, or be ready to be killed for her. In return, women assumed domestic roles they quite enjoyed.

“For thousands of years, other men taught men that they need to die for the women in their lives because reasons. They were told by other men that they are expected to either work themselves to death in jobs that other men operated and ran, or be ready to go to wars that other men waged to be killed, and this is somehow protecting ‘their’ women. In return, women did all the heavy lifting at home by taking care of children, cooking, cleaning, taking care of farms, sewing, washing clothes, and being told that they were somehow lesser than men and being told they had to die to give birth to their sons.”

Fixed that for you.

Yup, we feeemales liked our domestic roles! That’s why we fought so hard to cast them off and to be accepted in the workforce alongside men!

Wait.

Why stop at thousands of years? Why not tens of thousands. Hunter-gatherer show we’d been doing this exact same thing since we started existing on the planet.

Ah yes, “We hunted the mammoth to feed you!”.

But, you know, never mind the fact that just because we’ve always been doing something (even if it’s not necessarily true, and we don’t know if it is or not, because all this is is just guessing from evidence, and we’ve been proven wrong before, because we’re very much fallible), doesn’t mean it’s always going to be the best idea. You know, appealing to tradition and all that.

Meanwhile, historically, if a man beat his wife, he was tied to a pole in the public square, reserved exclusively for wife beaters, and flogged. The last man flogged for wife beating in America was in the mid 50s.

And this is actually factually correct, good for you. Though, I would like to see some sources next time please.

But if a man was beaten by his wife, he was tied to a donkey backwards while the community threw things at him. Feminism doesn’t have an explanation for this.

And you’re partially correct for this as well. However:

In post-Renaissance France and England, society ridiculed and humiliated husbands thought to be battered and/or dominated by their wives (Steinmetz, 1977-78). In France, for instance, a “battered” husband was trotted around town riding a donkey backwards while holding its tail. In England, “abused” husbands were strapped to a cart and paraded around town, all the while subjected to the people’s derision and contempt. Such “treatments” for these husbands arose out of the patriarchal ethos where a husband was expected to dominate his wife, making her, if the occasion arose, the proper target for necessary marital chastisement; not the other way around (Dobash & Dobash, 1979).

Emphasis mine. You’re still blaming women (or in this case, Feminism) for problems that men caused. Men ran this shit, men defined masculinity. Not women. Women were second class citizens.

How’s that for a fucking explanation?

Egalitarian. You’re going to be seeing that term a lot more.

Let me guess: Because you severely over-estimate the amount of people who support your “movement” that pretty much consists of a platform of “Those evil feminists need to be harassed and yelled at because they don’t think that we should be able to be awful to women!”

No offense, but I hear all the time from you manospherian types about how all men are going to soon see the truth you proclaim and come rushing to join you, and it has yet to happen.

So…yeah. Not buying it.

Why do most Men’s Rights advocates call themselves Women’s Rights advocates. 🙂

Name one MRA that calls themselves a “Women’s Rights Advocate”. Please fucking do.

Because most of them, if not all of them, actually advocate for women to have less rights, not more.

Hell, we had a post about a FeMRA, Janet Bloomfield, just three days ago where she said that she doesn’t think women should have the right to vote.

“Meninism” is a joke to sell t-shirts. I don’t think any MRA would support a Meninist movement. And you’re not mad at us for having a Meninist movement. You’re mad at us for supporting men’s rights. Huh.

No, I’m “mad” (if you can call some pity and scorn “mad”) at MRAs because they’re advocating for the “right” for men to be shitheels to women without repercussions.

Abandoning your children (that can be proven to be yours) and raping women aren’t “rights” that men should have. Men shouldn’t have the “right” to hit women. Men shouldn’t have the “right” to force women “back in the kitchen where they belong”. Men shouldn’t have the right to have sex with women without their consent.

These are all things I’ve seen MRAs claim that are “rights” that they’re fighting for.

And I have seen them claim to care about male victims of domestic violence, rape, and abuse, but only as a cudgel to try to silence feminists.

There are legal rights women have that men lack. Name one that men have that women lack.

Well, I know WWTH has the bodily autonomy thing covered, but how about this:

Men are more likely to have their health concerns taken seriously.

Men are frequently given more pay than women (especially if they’re white).

And I know you’re going to jump and go “I said legal rights!” but allow me to point this out: People (this includes humans of all genders) are supposed to have the rights to equal pay and health care. However, sexist bias inherent in the system is preventing these laws from being enforced properly. So, I would say that falls under the category of “legal rights”.

Actually, the idea that all men are rapists was very much a feminist tent pole during early second wave. And we’re still seeing that with the teach men not to rape movement.

Feminist: “We need to teach men what consent actually is so they understand what it means, because men are not mindless beasts, and are perfectly capable of understanding what “no” means. They already understand what the word ‘rape’ means and that it’s bad, but our definition of ‘consent’ is what the problem is.”

MRA: “Men are just like that! It’s like holding a steak in front of a hungry lion! Men are just going to rape women! Women should protect themselves better!”

Yeah, we totally think all men are rapists, right? [/sarcasm]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, sure. I’m less convinced that’s how the term was meant when it was introduced by the Deluth Model. But YouTube up Karen Straughan’s talk “Toxic Masculinity and Toxic Femininity”.

No, we’re not going to waste a half hour of our lives listening to someone who loves the sound of their own voice because someone refuses to listen when we try to explain shit.

Nice try though.

No, it just underwrites the basic joke. The Ghostbusters are exterminators. From their jump suits to their working class attitude. Late night 70’s and 80’s tv in New York was littered with B-movies and poorly made commercials for business start ups. The joke is what if one of these exterminators hunted Ghosts.

It’s bad enough setting a Ghostbusters film today. But unless women suddenly start itching to get into the extermination trade, the joke has no premise.

“Yes, please mansplain Ghostbusters to us, even though many of us watched and loved the original movies and the cartoons and comics!”

– Said no one on this blog ever.

It’s literally just iconic movie with male cast, so now must be female because feminism.

Bill Murray was the one who suggested the all-female cast, and he’s not a feminist that I know of.

But it’s still all our fault, u guis. Because femmucommunazi conspiracy.

Try to imagine an iconic female role, particularly some kind of kick ass character, being replaced with a male. Who’s angry. You guys. Huh.

Yeah, we’re totally stealing these parts from someone, you guys! It’s not like white, cishet men get all the roles in Hollywood anyways, and it’s not like women actors get paid far less than their male counterparts, and it’s not like people don’t already try to dude-wash roles in theatre (someone else mentioned this earlier, so no link on that), and it’s also not like people try to give trans roles to cis people.

So, it’s more like this:

The guy is getting three scoops of ice cream, and is mad when a woman gets one.

Everyone has the right to defend themselves,

Full stop.

See, this is my question: Why is it when MRAs or other manospherians think of “equality” they think “Does this mean I can hit women/be violent to women now?”

Do you go around hitting men? No? Why not?

I’ll answer that for you because no one should be hitting anyone. You learned this when you were a child.

By all means, please do defend yourself, but also understand that there’s a fine line between “self defense” and just “beating someone up because they hit you first”.

I can’t even. What?

Can’t even handle your own hate directed back at you? There, there. There, there.

I think they were saying that nothing you said made any sense. It’s not a “gotcha”, you’re just mostly incoherent.

Keep pretending though. Whatever helps you sleep at night, pumpkin.

Three Guns
Three Guns
8 years ago

Ok. Got a whole page of responses. Happy Valentine’s Day to me. Fun fun! Let’s dig in!

@Imaginary Petal

It’s cute when MRAs think we’ve never heard the most common MRA arguments before.

I guess it’s an easy mistake to make when the response to these arguments is……….

It’s also cute when they pretend to be “former feminists”.

Huh. I wasn’t aware I was pretending for ten years. That’s a good job pretending I did.

Before that I was a fundamentalist. It always amazes me. You tell a christian you’re a former fundamentalist, their first reaction is not “Why are you a liar.”

Feminism has become so cultish, it can’t even conceive of the idea of people leaving it. That’s one of the reasons I left.

Three Guns
Three Guns
8 years ago

@ Scented Fucking Hard Chairs

Well, there’s one way to let everybody know you didn’t read the comments policy.

I did actually. I just have reason to doubt integrity here. So thank you, Mr. Manboobz for proving me wrong. I vow to not misgender.

weirwoodtreehugger
8 years ago

I guess it’s an easy mistake to make when the response to these arguments is……….

Holy crap! A 10 dot ellipsis! Is that some sort of record? Remember when MRAs did 2 and 4 dot ellipses. Those were the days.

Three Guns
Three Guns
8 years ago

@weirwoodtreehugger

It’s also cute when trolls

Nope. Incorrect.

Women have always worked. This is true even if you’re arguing that housework is not real labor. Life is not an episode of Leave it to Beaver. It was never the case that all women were stay at home moms until the ebil feminism came along.

It’s spelled with a “v”. And sure, in times of great famine and war, women were expected to work outside of the home. And… so what?

Also, if women universally enjoyed being a housewife, how come we had feminism in the first place?

When the Declaration of Sentiments came out of Seneca Falls, it was so abhorrent to women, that women founded the strongest groups in opposition to it. Such well remembered luminaries as Emma Goldman were a part of these groups.

It wasn’t simply the vote these women opposed. It was feminism and it’s demonetization of men.

The vote was going to happen. The writing was on the wall for that and had been for a good while. And there was already a strong movement for universal suffrage which was well underway.

Feminism, by simply being so vile with regards to men, turned public opinion against the cause of universal suffrage, pushed it back for decades, while through a virtual miracle securing the vote for themselves alone.

Women can insult men in a long, poorly written screed, and men will respond by giving them power. That’s the lesson of history. Because the culture hates women. Or something.

Cleary a lot of women don’t “quite enjoy” being forced into gender roles.

Eh. Pick one. Either they were in traditional roles or they weren’t.

Oh, you hunted the mammoth for us, did you?

No. I wasn’t alive.

I don’t understand the title of this website. Is that something an MRA is supposed to say? It sounds like something a PUA might say when decrying how physically weak men have become. And the punch line would be that he wants men to be stronger so they can make women feel safe and protected.

Because every man you see loves women. We can’t help it. It’s why Dave does what he does here. It’s why I do I what I do elsewhere.

Again, you should probably stop getting your historical knowledge from 1950’s and 60’s TV shows. Hunter-gatherer cultures are not like The Flintstones.

Oh and here I thought I took several classes. I mean I still have the textbooks… Or maybe I just got really high while watching the Flintstones… I can’t remember now.

There are still hunter-gatherer cultures around today, you know. And in all of them, women work hard.

Absolutely they do. Sun up to sun down. But it’s all domestic. And it’s not a physically intense or potentially lethal as hunting… say, a mammoth, why not?

I’m not aware of any evidence that women were never involved in big game hunting,

We have plentiful evidence of that. Much of it though direct observation of nomadic bands. That’s not in question.

but even if they only did the gathering portion of obtaining food,

Oh, backing out of that statement quick. Ok.

in most hunter-gatherer cultures, they get more of their food from the gathering than the hunting.

And the food women gathered was nutritionally vital, particularly for young children. Meanwhile, the meat the men killed contained protein which is the basic building block of life. And without knowledge of how to obtain balanced proteins from plant sources, most bands relegated to gathering died quickly of illness. This is why bands chased the herds.

Also, their dishwashers were dinosaurs and dinosaurs were sentient so they were all horrific slave masters.

We’ve seen that term plenty, sweetie.

Woah. I’m your sweetie? This is unexpected.

At worse the people who label themselves that are actually anti-feminists and not egalitarian at all.

Because feminism is egalitarian?

Is that why feminists have been spearheading attempts to silence speech both online and off? Is that why feminists are pushing for gender quotas and increased education spending for women and girls at a time when man and boys are struggling more than ever before? Is that why feminists are continuing to push on about a wage gap that has everything to do with personal choice and nothing to do with discrimination, to the point where women are starting to be paid more for the same work?

Because I don’t see any of that as egalitarian.

At best, they’re willfully ignorant to the fact that some groups are more privileged and powerful than others in our culture.

No. We just don’t hate those who are privileged by virtue of the fact that they are privileged.

Oh, that would be Asians. By far the wealthiest population with double representation in congress to their population size. They are killing it over whitey right now, and their doesn’t seem to be anything slowing them down.

Let me put it in terms you will begin to understand. When you say privileged, what you’re actually saying is other. Literally other. That’s your version of other. When I say privileged, I’m saying who knows. Maybe they can do good for society maybe they can’t.

Bodily autonomy.

My penis is mutilated. It happened when I was a small baby. I had no choice in the matter, and there was no medically necessary reason for it to be done. Complaining about it is seen as strange. A mutilated penis is seen as normal.

No one tries to tell cis men what they can do with their reproductive bits.

You’re right, they didn’t try. They just did it. They just cut into me.

But in my country, there are hundreds of new laws restricting abortion rights passed each year.

Well, then you’re probably not living in the first world. Did you know that the vast majority of MRAs are pro-choice? We might be able to help you with that, much in the same way we oppose the taharrush rape culture, if feminists weren’t dogging us every second of every day.

There’s also the fact that while discrimination based on gender is technically illegal, the standard of proving that it happed is made almost impossible to meet so effectively, discrimination is legal.

Yeah, you definitely don’t live in the first world. All it takes is one call to HR to get a company sued into the stone age.

But if that’s your way of saying we need a guilty until proven innocent standard, I’m going to again say that sounds lacking in egalitarianism.

You might want to think this statement through a little big more because it does not actually make much sense.

I’ll try, but I don’t know how to think something only a little big.

The reason feminists are all about teaching that consent is good and ignoring lack of consent is bad is that we don’t believe men are inherently prone to rape.

Oh yes, that does make so much more sense.

If men were inherently prone to rape, teaching affirmative consent would do no good because men are just naturally going to rape no matter what you do.

Well, you’d have to take that one up with Dworken. But this is some crazy mental gymnastics and you know it.

You teach someone how to drive a car because you believe if you put them behind the wheel without that training, they will inherently have an accident. You believe you need to teach men how to not have “accidents.” That for us, rape is like oops! Oh if only someone could have told me how to avoid this horrible accent. Because, apparently, I’m stupid and lack functional empathy. You think men are deficient.

That is what you think. It’s also the founding idea of this whole site. That and it allows feminist men to show how “well trained” they are.

It’s you MRAs who believe that teaching consent is pointless that are taking the position that men can not stop themselves from raping if they’re horny or drunk or the victim led them on or got too drunk/high to consent.

What! No one, least of all MRAs are saying that. Maybe PUAs. Though usually that’s you guys misinterpreting them when they talk about last minute resistance.

We believe that men rape because of rape culture.

Oh, like what’s presented in best selling novel Fifty Shades of Grey, written by a woman, enjoyed exclusively by women? Because that seem pretty darn rapey to me.

You’re not talking about taharrush or any actual rape culture. So what are you talking about?

We believe that men rape because rape because of unspeakable trauma that broke them.

You believe that rape culture is a myth and rape is a part of male sexuality.

Yes to the first, and wow that’s a horrific thing to say to the second.

It is you who is the misandrist. Not us.

How do you figure that one?

OTD? I thought you said you were going to stop trying to get us to watch honey badger videos?

Is that somebody you know. or is OTD some slang I don’t know.

weirwoodtreehugger
8 years ago

Wow. You managed to squeeze every MRA talking point into one post. I’d say it was an impressive Gish gallop if it weren’t so dreadfully boring.

Three Guns
Three Guns
8 years ago

@katz

Feminism doesn’t have explanations for lots of shit you just made up.

Um, no, actually feminism doesn’t have explanations for all the cites I can bring up if you want um.

Sometimes I feel like Al Gore. But with style. And I have sex. So, basically I never feel like Al Gore.

weirwoodtreehugger
8 years ago

Sometimes I feel like Al Gore. But with style. And I have sex. So, basically I never feel like Al Gore.

Al Gore is an incel?

Seriously. This is a really odd boast.

Three Guns
Three Guns
8 years ago

@weirwoodtreehugger

Wow. You managed to squeeze every MRA talking point into one post. I’d say it was an impressive Gish gallop if it weren’t so dreadfully boring.

Well, you don’t have anything of value to say in response. So ten ellipsis dots to House Weirwood.

1 3 4 5 6 7 10