Categories
Uncategorized

Reddit’s halfassed hate speech takedown ignores the blatant misogyny of the MGTOW subreddit

Collage of posts from the MGTOW subreddit

By David Futrelle

On Monday, Reddit announced what looked like a massive crackdown on hate, banning some 2000 subreddits guilty of hate speech and/or harassment, including The_Donald, once Reddit’s main hangout for Trump trolls and a vast virtual storehouse of hate.

But the closer one looks at Reddit’s actions the less dramatic they appear. The vast majority of the newly banned subreddits were tiny and/or inactive. The_Donald itself had been moribund for some time as its inhabitants, expecting an eventual ban, had long ago moved offsite. And some of the most hateful sudreddits out there remain intact — the misogynistic havens of the Men Going Their Own Way subreddit and the assorted “Red Pill” subreddits.

Yep, they launched a crusade against hate speech that simply ignored the extreme misogyny of the site’s MGTOWs and “Red Pillers” — exactly as I worried they would in a post here last week. Sure, Reddit took down the small and only semi-active AgainstWomensRights subreddit and seems to have cleared out some even tinier incel subreddits. But somehow they overlooked r/MGTOW and TheRedPill, each with a massive audience of its own.

Let’s consider r/MGTOW, perhaps the most egregiously hateful of the surviving subreddits. Were the higher-ups at Reddit fooled by the assertions of some MGTOWs that their movement, such as it is, has nothing to do with misogyny and is really about men celebrating life on their own terms? Because that’s complete bullshit; MGTOW men spend so much time slandering women they barely have time to cook themselves dinners.

Take a look at this selection of posts from r/MGTOW over the past several years and see if you can detect any hints of misogyny.

Huh. Seems to me that this might just be some sort of hate subreddit. And these are just the headlines. What happens when you click on the headlines and look at the actual posts in question? This is the sort of thing you get.

There is nothing wrong with being disgusted by female nature. (self.MGTOW)

submitted 3 years ago * by mgtowguynow

Potentially new MGTOW who are on the fence, do not give into the manipulation tactics that browbeat you into accepting and chasing after the modern-day entitled parasite.

Women are meant to extract your time and energy for their own selfish gain. That's how they work, they are parasitic in nature.

Accept their nature, but do NOT accept the delusion that you have to chase them or give them YOUR time. Embrace your rationality, chase your dreams, most importantly don't think with your dick, and live the life you know damn well you can live without needing to worry about what women think. Leave that task to the SIMP.

They are not entitled to your attention and time.

There are plenty more examples in the archives here. And even if you’re not convinced by the misogyny, there’s no way to get around the other forms of hate that run rampant in the MGTOW subreddit, including racism and antisemitism and all the other hatreds popular amongst the alt-right.

Reddit’s new rules claim that “communities and people that incite violence or that promote hate based on identity or vulnerability will be banned.” It’s clear that the MGTOW subreddit is in constant violation of the rules for its promotion of hate against women — and that no reform of the subreddit is possible, as hatred of women is in fact the central tenet of MGTOW ideology. There’s no denying the obvious: if Reddit’s new rules are to mean anything the MGTOW subreddit should be banned immediately.

If the things MGTOWs say about women were said about any other group no one would have any trouble classifying them as hate speech. I don’t know why misogyny is so often given a pass when it comes to discussions of hate speech, but it shouldn’t be. Ban r/MGTOW now.

Send tips to dfutrelle at gmail dot com.

We Hunted the Mammoth relies entirely on readers like you for its survival. If you appreciate our work, please send a few bucks our way! Thanks!

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

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

49 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Naglfar
Naglfar
2 months ago

I don’t know why misogyny is so often given a pass when it comes to discussions of hate speech, but it shouldn’t be.

I think the reason misogyny is given a pass is because it’s so heavily normalized, as I alluded to in my comments on the last post about this. It exists in literally every context so people just get habituated to it. Men are taught to perpetuate it and women are taught to tolerate it. As a result, it’s seen as “not a real issue” and pushed to the side.

Were the higher-ups at Reddit fooled by the assertions of some MGTOWs that their movement, such as it is, has nothing to do with misogyny and is really about men celebrating life on their own terms?

I don’t think they were fooled, I feel like they just didn’t care and were willing to turn a blind eye.

Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
2 months ago

Were the higher-ups at Reddit fooled by the assertions of some MGTOWs that their movement, such as it is, has nothing to do with misogyny and is really about men celebrating life on their own terms?

Doubtful, or why do all those links say “Quarantined” on them on a bold yellow background like a warning sticker?

Catalpa
Catalpa
2 months ago

I suspect that the reason why Reddit won’t ban misogynists is essentially the same reason why Twitter won’t ban people who use language attributed to right-wing terrorist activity; because if they did that, they would need to ban a very large portion of their user base.

Naglfar
Naglfar
2 months ago

@Catalpa
Indeed, in addition IIRC the reason Twitter refused to ban a bunch of neo-Nazi dogwhistles was because they would have to ban a bunch of US politicians.

Anonymous
Anonymous
2 months ago

@Catalpa

I think another part of it is that CEO Steve Huffman is one of those libertarians who think that even the slightest amount of speech regulation is censorship on par with Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union combined.

It must be nice to be able to ignore hate speech right until it starts hurting your profits.

rv97
rv97
2 months ago

They also believe that without capitalism and the state, anarchy would result and that it would be worse than the repressive regimes we have.

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
2 months ago

@Surplus

It was quarantined several months ago; maybe it’s been quarantined all this time or maybe it was released and re-quarantined recently, I’m not sure. But quarantine and banning are not equivalent.

Naglfar
Naglfar
2 months ago

@Anonymous

It must be nice to be able to ignore hate speech right until it starts hurting your profits.

This is an important thing to keep in mind when arguing with conservatives. They don’t respond to arguments about harm to others or the world because they don’t care. They only care (and swiftly respond) when something hits them where it hurts: their wallets.

@PoM

It was quarantined several months ago; maybe it’s been quarantined all this time or maybe it was released and re-quarantined recently, I’m not sure.

AFAIK it’s been quarantined the whole time. From what I’ve seen this serves 2 purposes:
1. It makes it look like they’ve done something while really they haven’t and business and the flow of money continues as usual.
2. It makes it harder for outsiders to stumble across it and see truly how bad it is, thereby downplaying it.

Rabid Rabbit
Rabid Rabbit
2 months ago

The more I dislike women the less sexually attracted to them I am

And for once, I’m pretty sure every woman in the universe can agree on a man they hope will keep disliking them more and more and more.

As for why they don’t ban misogyny… What everyone else has said. Partly being blind to the fact it exists (or at least how it manifests) because it’s so prevalent and normalizes, and partly because it’s so prevalent it would mean banning everyone, like all the countries that have openly admitted the only reason they won’t accept fear of gender-based violence as grounds for asylum is because their asylum systems would be overwhelmed.

Naglfar
Naglfar
2 months ago

@Rabid Rabbit

The more I dislike women the less sexually attracted to them I am

The man doth protest too much methinks.

And for once, I’m pretty sure every woman in the universe can agree on a man they hope will keep disliking them more and more and more.

One thing I find that is common across bigots is how much they overestimate their appeal to the people they hate. Many a homophobic straight person (especially men, but I’ve heard this from straight women as well) is concerned a gay person will want to have sex with them, every transphobe is convinced that trans* people are trying to “trick” them into sex, and misogynists are obsessed with how many women they think are drawn to them. The vast majority of people do not want to fuck people who hate them.

Rabid Rabbit
Rabid Rabbit
2 months ago

@Naglfar:

I wonder if somewhere, hidden in the back of their lizard brains, there might be a tiny synapse suggesting to them that their horror at the thought of being desired by a gay man (or whoever) is similar to how many of the people they’re attracted to react to the idea. For that matter, I wonder if there’s a correlation between those who think that way and those who are convinced they’re irresistible to the type of person they’re attracted to. “I like women, so clearly they all want me, but wait! That means I’m irresistibly attractive, right? Oh crap, logic dictates that the gayz are going to be after me too…”

I mean, it’s also a sign of how bigots are obsessed with the idea of sex and have no other framework within which to conceive of cross-gender relationships (hello, Mike Pence), but still.

Catalpa
Catalpa
2 months ago

Yeah, there are definitely folks out there who find it absolutely inconceivable that they aren’t desired by absolutely everyone. If I had a nickel for how many times I’ve been told “you just say you’re asexual because no one wants to fuck you”, I’d have about a quarter.

Those folks are still preferable to the pushy, rapey “I can change your mind” ones, though.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

I guess Jordan Peterson stanning is back in full force, because Twitter dudes are currently telling me to watch lots and lots of his videos.

This was in response to him defending Hitler.

Good to have that section of the interwebs back in action.

Sigh.

Kat, ambassador of the feminist government in exile
Kat, ambassador of the feminist government in exile
2 months ago

It’s okay, MGTOW. Hate me as much as you want. Just don’t come near me, dox me, or stalk me, and we’ll get along just fine.

Johanna
Johanna
2 months ago

Meanwhile, they did ban the sub r/blatantmisogyny which posted screen shots of you guessed it: blatant misogyny (often from other subs). And no, it wasn’t a TERF sub and it was very well moderated to prevent any form of bigotry. They haven’t even told the moderator why it was banned.

While I’m not exactly sad that they banned some of the bigger TERF subs, doing that while not banning MGTOW or redpill subs unfortunately gave them lots of ammunition for their new favourite argument that advocating for trans rights is men’s rights activism. There’s been an influx of TERFs in the feminist spaces like trollXchromosomes and WitchesVsPatriarchy complaining about it ever since the ban.

I’m also a little worried about one of my favourite leftist spaces, AntiConsumption. They banned the fascist counterpart, ConsumeProduct and we’ve had a lot of new users since then. And unfortunately, there is only a single moderator who has stated that he believes in open discussions and will only ban outright bigotry. I foresee a lot of fascist dog whistles leading to the sub being taken over by the fascists, unfortunately. I hope it doesn’t happen, but a single mod, 230k users and a policy that allows dog whistles and “open discussion” doesn’t bode well.

sunnysombrera
sunnysombrera
2 months ago

I’ve just stumbled out of a topic on r/worldnews about low rape reporting/prosecutions and it’s been brigaded to hell and back by misogynists. 80% of the comment section is screeching about false accusations. Comments that pushed back a bit got downvoted heavily. Reddit disgusts me sometimes. I’m so sick of the fact that, on front page subs at least, nobody can ever discuss an issue that mainly affects women without men crashing in to turn the spotlight back to themselves. And yeah, Reddit is awful for this.

Alok verma
2 months ago

Its happens all around the world women’s are struggling ignorance and hate speech due to their gender hope its will easy in future and womwn get more job opportunity

Naglfar
Naglfar
2 months ago

@Rabid Rabbit

I wonder if somewhere, hidden in the back of their lizard brains, there might be a tiny synapse suggesting to them that their horror at the thought of being desired by a gay man (or whoever) is similar to how many of the people they’re attracted to react to the idea.

I doubt it, I feel like that would require the tiniest bit of self awareness, which they lack. If the thought ever entered their head, they would immediately shove it away because it would imply they are similar to the gay men they despise.

@Johanna

Meanwhile, they did ban the sub r/blatantmisogyny which posted screen shots of you guessed it: blatant misogyny (often from other subs). And no, it wasn’t a TERF sub and it was very well moderated to prevent any form of bigotry. They haven’t even told the moderator why it was banned.

I would guess this was banned because it kept bringing up evidence of why Reddit needed to take action against misogynists, and Reddit didn’t like being confronted with that evidence so they shot the messenger because it was easier than fixing the problem.

As for the influx of TERFs in other subreddits, that is unfortunate. They’re also very upset on Twitter about this and Graham Linehan’s ban. The Twitter account left over for r/GenderCritical has suggested that they give the app a bad rating, as they seem to think this will bring back their subreddit. What I suspect that will actually do, however, is demonstrate to TERFs what a small minority they are and how most people do not agree with them.

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
2 months ago

I’m so sick of the fact that, on front page subs at least, nobody can ever discuss an issue that mainly affects women without men crashing in to turn the spotlight back to themselves.

r/TwoXChromosomes is a sub that frequently appears on the front page (at least in mobile) and invariably on a popular post complaining about some kind of issue, there are men posting that they don’t do this thing, basically asking for cookies for meeting minimum standards. The sub has no rule that men cannot post, which is fine, but it’s annoying to see men constantly try to re-center the conversation on their personal, individual behavior rather than the larger pattern in society. It’s like these men see women talking, and bull their way into the conversation despite having little to say about it, because they just can’t stand not being the topic themselves always.

Naglfar
Naglfar
2 months ago

@PoM

invariably on a popular post complaining about some kind of issue, there are men posting that they don’t do this thing, basically asking for cookies for meeting minimum standards.

This also happens a lot on Twitter (I’m way more active on Twitter than Reddit so I notice it there more). Women regularly post threads about something that men do that they shouldn’t, and every time there are a ton of men in the replies talking about how they would never do this and “not all men” (though usually not those exact words) etc. I’m not sure if men think this somehow makes it better or if they’re just trying to get attention.

Yutolia the Laissez-Fairy Pronoun Boner
Yutolia the Laissez-Fairy Pronoun Boner
2 months ago

I think part of the reason it’s given a pass in a way that racism, etc aren’t, is because of an illusion that women as a group are still “safe” in that we can, in theory, kill off all non-white, non-Christian, non-lgbt, non-able people and still be able to carry on as a species. So most people think, “oh misogyny is terrible” but they think of the deaths on an individual level and not on a group level. To them it “just doesn’t make sense that any man would really want to kill all women, how would we carry on as a species bla bla bla”. However, as someone who watches these guys and actually pays attention to them I, and most of the people commenting here, know there are people in these groups who would gladly do that once we figure out how to make sex dolls that are up to their standards. They think soon we’ll have the technology that will make women “obsolete”.

This is not all, but I think it is at least part of the reason it’s not taken seriously.

Shreyas
Shreyas
2 months ago

Why is that many of these internet companies like Reddit, YouTube, and others don’t properly regulate the dangerous and hateful stuff that comes out of them? I know many here have answered this question in one way or the other, but I’m genuinely confused as to why this happens.

Sorry if the question’s too obvious.

Cyborgette
Cyborgette
2 months ago

TBH I strongly question the idea that antisemitism and especially racism aren’t given a pass, at least in the US. “Normal” being dog-whistles instead of over-the-top slurs is still a pass – it’s a different kind of normalization, but it’s still normalization, and just like sexism it still perpetuates violence.

Naglfar
Naglfar
2 months ago

@Cyborgette
In addition, there’s no shortage of those in r/MGTOW or r/TheRedPill either. Even if Reddit won’t take misogynistic subreddits down (which they should take down), those subs are horrifically racist and antisemitic enough that they should warrant takedown on that basis as well, because where there’s one bigotry there will be others.

Yutolia the Laissez-Fairy Pronoun Boner
Yutolia the Laissez-Fairy Pronoun Boner
2 months ago

No, you’re right. I really wish I could delete comments here. I reread what I said, and wow, please everyone ignore me. It’s sounds… just super privileged. Sorry!

sunnysombrera
sunnysombrera
2 months ago

This also happens a lot on Twitter (I’m way more active on Twitter than Reddit so I notice it there more). Women regularly post threads about something that men do that they shouldn’t, and every time there are a ton of men in the replies talking about how they would never do this and “not all men” (though usually not those exact words) etc. I’m not sure if men think this somehow makes it better or if they’re just trying to get attention.

I’m fairly active on Twitter and I have seen this too. I struggle to explain their behaviour. Defensiveness? But then I’m sure a percentage of them are bad faith actors. Whyyyyyy are they so determined to defend their image from perceived attack instead of allowing women to have discussions?

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

I think my favorite (sarcasm) twitter guy is the one who responds to tweets by women about some sort of misogynistic behavior by replying fake jokey versions of that behavior.

For example, if a woman tweets about mansplaining and the replies are full of men saying

“Well actually… haha! Just kidding!”

So annoying.

I’m glad I’m a social media nobody, so I don’t get a lot of that.

Ohlmann
Ohlmann
2 months ago

I would say there is different size of pass.

Obviously country-dependant, but for example in France you can get away saying much worse things about Romani than about muslim, even tho you can say horrors on both. Just a little bit less horrible for muslims if you want to be considered polite and proper.

Whether it was any importance is another question. Reducing the size of the pass look like a working strategy, but I am not sure it’s actually a working strategy.

Naglfar
Naglfar
2 months ago

@Shreyas

Why is that many of these internet companies like Reddit, YouTube, and others don’t properly regulate the dangerous and hateful stuff that comes out of them? I know many here have answered this question in one way or the other, but I’m genuinely confused as to why this happens.

It seems to be because companies exist to make money. If they ban hate, that’s a lot less traffic and so they make less money. As a result, it generally takes something that gives them bad PR™like the r/Jailbait incident™to actually do anything.

@sunnysombrera

Whyyyyyy are they so determined to defend their image from perceived attack instead of allowing women to have discussions?

I think it’s because they feel attacked, so they think they have to make clear they are not doing the behavior. Just like how some white people in any discussion of race try to defend themselves and generally don’t look great in the process. They might also be surprised how the discussion isn’t about them, so they try to recenter it on them.

O/T: Graham Linehan update:
Now that he has been banned from Twitter, he now posts angry rants to YouTube multiple times a week.

epitome of incomprehensibility

The one saying women don’t appreciate the cities men build for them? Classic “we hunted the mammoth” moment. Like, only men build cities. For the sole benefit of women. 🙄

Obviously country-dependant, but for example in France you can get away saying much worse things about Romani than about muslim, even tho you can say horrors on both.

(from Ohlmann’s comment) Yeah, unfortunately, it’s similar in Quebec for “dogwhistle” comments against Muslims. Not against Romani people, maybe because there aren’t many here…though there’s an English word for cheating or short-changing someone that comes from “g*psy,” so it’s basically saying they’re cheaters.

I put a star in that word just to be safe – some people say it too is imprecise & has negative connotations – though a colleague at a summer camp where I worked (in 2010) used it for her own background. But then people teased her that her tears would magically cure wounds – apparently this is a legend?? – like Romani were unicorns or something.

…That was more like the “magical Native” stereotype than anything about being a cheater, but still pretty other-ing (if I can verb that like the academics do!)

Naglfar
Naglfar
2 months ago

@epitome

For the sole benefit of women.

That part reminds me a bit of Janice Fiamengo’s paeans to men and things they invented.

Vespertine
Vespertine
2 months ago

Reddit also left porn communities that focus on people who don’t consent, which is fucking creepy. I found out about them because I have a family member who’s apparently awful, but thankfully they only had access to swimsuit pictures of me and other family members, and while I’m skeeved about it, it’s not going to impact my career or anything. Not everyone is so lucky. Women routinely get punished for other people being creepy assholes.

What is WITH the pretended inability to distinguish normal nudes/lewds/etc from coerced or plain stolen content? Like, there’s just subreddits that are EXPLICITLY focused on revenge porn, and I don’t understand how Reddit is getting away with it.

Ohlmann
Ohlmann
2 months ago

I do believe Reddit do that out of laziness more than out of interest. It’s actually not very clear if they would not get more money out of kicking hate groups out of their services, but what is certain is that it would require major efforts on their part, which they are too lazy to do.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
2 months ago
Naglfar
Naglfar
2 months ago

@Ohlmann
In addition, to moderate hate takes effort and money, so they don’t want to expend the resources to do it.

Diego Duarte
Diego Duarte
2 months ago

It also looks like Facebook might be cracking down soon, but considering Zuckerberg is an ally to Trump, and a White supremacist as well, I very much doubt it.

Naglfar
Naglfar
2 months ago

@Diego Duarte
I gave up any hope of Facebook reform when Zuckerberg held a meeting with Ben Shapiro where Ben whined about being “silenced” while operating sockpuppets in violation of the terms of service.

Diego Duarte
Diego Duarte
2 months ago

@Naglfar

Was this before or after he held a meeting with Tucker Carlson, endorsed him as an important “thought leader” and hired his website to do fact checking on Facebook?

Naglfar
Naglfar
2 months ago

@Diego Duarte
Uncertain, this seems to have been happening around the same time and both were revealed in October. I became aware of the Shapiro thing first, but I’m not sure which happened first.

Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
2 months ago

OK … some explain to me why someone with a Jewish-sounding surname would be hobnobbing with white supremacists?

Naglfar
Naglfar
2 months ago

@Surplus
Zuckerberg is of Jewish descent, yes, but I think he figured he would look better to FaceBook’s more conservative users (think Baby Boomer conservatives who are into QAnon) by meeting with Tucker Carlson and letting the antisemitism of the latter slide. There also do exist conservative Jews like Shapiro who served as tokens for the alt right, so it’s possible Zuckerberg was trying to get in on that action.

rv97
rv97
2 months ago

@sunnysombrera

I like Tumblr precisely because misogyny is less of a problem there I think (although it does have a TERF presence which I don’t see that much, depends on who you follow)

@Shreyas

The idea that somehow offensive 19th century views about the world that degraded the lives of women, Black people and other people of color, the LGBT+ community, mentally and physically disabled people etc. should be counted as free speech, basically views that the paradox of tolerance warns about. That and money.

Cyborgette
Cyborgette
2 months ago

@Naglfar, @Surplus

IIRC Zuckerberg is friends with Shapiro.

But yeah, Jews who betray their own people were a thing during the Third Reich and they’re still a thing now. One famous example: this deceptively pretty creep, who Bibi Netanyahu seems to be emulating. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avraham_Stern

IDK what to call it a lot but it’s a complex I see a lot with Jewish Trump supporters – swapping loyalty to Diaspora Jews for pro-Israel ultranationalism, tikkun olam for an ideology of “protecting our race” by any means necessary. This is a very uncommon outlook among Jews in the US (most of us unsurprisingly vote left), but the ones I’ve met who followed these ideas have been memorably horrible.

Naglfar
Naglfar
2 months ago

@Cyborgette
Yeah, I also know my share of right wing Jews and really don’t get along with them. The worst part, though, is when conservative non-Jews point at Ben Shapiro or Dennis Prager and expect me to be receptive to them because they’re Jewish. This speaks volumes about how they see us.

Diego Duarte
Diego Duarte
2 months ago

@Surplus

OK … some explain to me why someone with a Jewish-sounding surname would be hobnobbing with white supremacists?

Appart from what Naglfar and Cyborgette said, because they are racist. A lot of Jewish people have European ascent, so they will ally themselves with White supremacists on that ground, just like a lot of Latinos will band with them based on misogyny.

As far as I’m concerned, Zuckerberg’s wife was making comments against BLM back in 2015. Zuckerberg himself is so far beyond that line that it would be disingenuous to pretend he isn’t overtly racist himself.

I’m part of some facebook groups showcasing how blatantly one sided bans are. The N-word and assorted bigotry, which range from mild racist references to threats of hanging and/or violence and rape will go unaddressed and not subject to any suspension whatsoever. However, even the mildest form of criticism towards White people or men will result in an autoban.

That is not coincidence, that is working as intended for Zuckerberg.

Naglfar
Naglfar
2 months ago

@Diego Duarte

A lot of Jewish people have European ascent, so they will ally themselves with White supremacists on that ground, just like a lot of Latinos will band with them based on misogyny.

As well, although most white supremacism includes antisemitism, some will put it aside for a bit if they think it will get more people on their side. Jared Taylor, for example, has tried to pander to Jews who are racist. The stereotype of Jews as shrewd and wealthy probably makes some white supremacists think they’re an asset.

Paireon
Paireon
2 months ago

@epitome of incomprehensibility – Oh hey, didn’t know you were a fellow Québécois! And yeah, Islamophobia is unfortunately alive and well in Quebec (just ask Alexandre Bissonnette, the perpetrator of the first actual mass killing of Muslims in a Western nation in decades, with six deaths – seven if you count the paramedic who committed suicide a few months later, it is surmised mostly due to her witnessing the aftermath of his massacre), though it usually takes the form trying to pass laws against overt religious symbols (it’s… complicated, but I don’t particularly approve of these attempts).

As for Roma people, most (French-speaking) people in the province’s experiences with them (if they can be called that) are limited to the Notre-Dame de Paris musical, or the Gipsy Kings musical group (as it’s the name the group chose to call themselves I’m assuming it’s not a slur in the particular context of naming it) which was popular in the late 80s/early 90s IIRC, although I did mention in a thread some time back an incredibly cringey anti-Roma rant by Ezra Levant (who’s actually Albertan) in which he mentionned said word for getting cheated as a good reason to discriminate.

Of course, Mr. Levant is also Jewish, but he gives other bigots a pass and is given one himself on the basis of shared Islamophobia IIRC.

(BTW sorry I’m late, work’s been busy)

Rabid Rabbit
Rabid Rabbit
2 months ago

@Paireon:

My “favorite” Québecois racist experience: standing in the express checkout lane at a grocery. It wasn’t going very fast. Just in front of me was a short stocky middle-aged Québecoise (as in, anyone who knows the province would have identified her as a pure-laine) getting increasingly irritated as the line kept not moving. The cashier at the time was a very nice hijab-wearing girl, who I’m pretty certain was born in the province, based on how she speaks (I’d heard her speak before on many occasions, this being my local supermaket).

Anyway, the short little Québecoise got progressly more short-tempered, grumbling more and more loudly about how much time this was taking. She eventually reached the end of her tether and moved over to one of the non-express lines, exclaiming to no one in particular, “Aye, plus que c’est foncé pis que ça porte des guenilles sur la tête, pis pus que c’est lent! Non mais c’est vrai!” (Translation for non-Québecois speakers: “Oy, the darker they are and wearing rags on their heads, and the slower they are! No, really!”)

To my shame, I have to admit that I was so stunned at hearing her that I didn’t respond. The gentleman who’d been in front of her, a very dignified man of Middle Eastern origin whom I’m pretty sure was an immigrant, did tell the cashier that the lady who’d stalked away had said some very rude things about her hijab, and that she ought to tell her manager. I did come up with the perfect response 15 seconds too late — namely, “Yeah, and apparently the shorter they are, the more racist they are” — but it was 15 seconds too late. I did express the extent to which I’d winced with the cashier, though. It seemed the least I could do. As she said, “Seriously, I’ve only got two hands.” (Plus, the person in charge of the express lane also has to deal with people buying lottery tickets or bringing in beer bottles, so really…)

The next time I was at the store and went by a checkout with the same cashier, I did check that the little racist hadn’t been back, which she hadn’t. I honestly hope she’s abandoned the store. To my great delight, moving to the next line didn’t get her through any faster. As a matter of fact, I got out of the store before she did…

Fred B-C
2 months ago

@Naglfar @sunnysombrera

Reading this thread, it made me wonder if it’s more of a selection bias. I know that everyone I know, no matter their background, definitely has had the feeling of wanting to butt into a conversation and offer their piece. That desire and the behavior around it is going to vary, but barring institutional racism/sexism/etc. it probably wouldn’t significantly vary along lines of race and gender and class and sexual orientation, etc. So some people in all these groups will be predisposed to want to get their two cents in, or try to reframe the conversation, or whatever else.

But… when you’re in a privileged group, you’re a) much more likely to have been told, implicitly or explicitly, that your group (say, “the West”) is the source of knowledge so you have some special wisdom and everyone else is just offering their touchy-feelie opinions (“I’m an engineer so I have science training so I can’t be biased”), b) much less likely to have been required by lack of having power to have actually listened to other people properly, and c) not as likely to have been trained to be collaborative and non-competitive in conversations. (Studies repeatedly find that men tend to view conversations as competitions while women tend to view conversations as collaborations, which leads to differing styles of interruption and speech). *And* those women, people of color, etc. who are the kind of people who in a world without institutional oppression may have been the kind of people who would dominate conversations are much more likely to have had that behavior resisted or ignored, and even if they’re the kind of formidable people who stick to their guns are much less likely to be signal-boosted or viewed as reasonable. (Men are loud, women are shrill. Etc.) Put all that together, and when men see something that’s trending publicly (so they are naturally predisposed to think it involves everyone – and again haven’t had the history of pushback where people have pointed out to them, with the power to back it up, that just because a topic is public doesn’t mean they have an equal involvement or any credibility to make a comment), they add their idea… which they are even more likely to think is relevant because they’re not predisposed to think women understand their own experiences better than they do.

Then you take into account that, by their very nature, jerks get to be louder, say pithy but wrong garbage, and cover a lot of grounds, while thoughtful people take longer to respond, are more likely to have to be reactive, and don’t offer something as memorable but irrational.