We Hunted The Mammoth
Today, some Deep Thoughts about men, women, children, empathy, mini-vans, and patriarchy, from the inimitable Men’s Rights activist and proud misogynist Rob Fedders, whom I found being quoted with approval and even some relish by MGTOWer elder MarkyMark on his little blog today.
Some epic we-hunted-the-mammoth ranting from the Men’s Rights subreddit.
I should note — before some angry MRA does — that the thread I found this in is devoted to an outrageously hateful and over-the-top “kill all men” rant someone posted as a comment on Pharyngula. Naturally, no one there agrees with “Etienne,” nor do I. Indeed, I don’t allow those kinds of comments here, but the plain fact is that I never, as in literally not once that I can remember, get comments like that from feminists. I do get plenty of violent comments from MRAs, though; in the past week alone I’ve censored comments from people who gave themselves the usernames rapeabitch, RapeMan, and Woman Beater.
Uh oh! It seems that some woman is offering some opinions about Tolkien!
Over on Time.com, Ruth Davis Konigsberg has a brief personal essay reflecting on the almost complete lack of female characters in the new Hobbit film, and in Tolkien’s ouvre generally. As she notes, it’s not until about two hours in to the nearly three-hour movie that “we finally meet someone without a Y chromosome,” namely Cate Blanchett’s Galadriel — and she was added into the originally all-male story by the screenwriters. Blanchette’s is the only female name out of 37 named in the cast list – though there are a couple of unnamed female characters who make brief appearances.
Until recently, Michael Calleri was a movie reviewer for the Niagara Falls Reporter. Indeed, he’d been reviewing movies for the weekly paper for more than 20 years. But then the paper got sold to a new owner, and Calleri found that many of the reviews he sent in weren’t making their way into print. He contacted the new publisher, who was also the new editor, and after several surreal conversations and a number of emails, he received this explanation from his new boss:
i have a deep moral objection to publishing reviews of films that offend me. snow white and the huntsman is such a film. when my boys were young i would never have allowed them to go to such a film for i believe it would injure their developing manhood. if i would not let my own sons see it, why would i want to publish anything about it?
Yeah, I think we can all see where this is going.
snow white and the huntsman is trash. moral garbage. a lot of fuzzy feminist thinking and pandering to creepy hollywood mores produced by metrosexual imbeciles.
I don’t want to publish reviews of films where women are alpha and men are beta.
where women are heroes and villains and men are just lesser versions or shadows of females.
i believe in manliness.
not even on the web would i want to attach my name to snow white and the huntsman except to deconstruct its moral rot and its appeal to unmanly perfidious creeps.
i’m not sure what headhunter has to offer either but of what I read about it it sounds kind of creepy and morally repugnant.
with all the publications in the world who glorify what i find offensive, it should not be hard for you to publish your reviews with any number of these.
they seem to like critiques from an artistic standpoint without a word about the moral turpitude seeping into the consciousness of young people who go to watch such things as snow white and get indoctrinated to the hollywood agenda of glorifying degenerate power women and promoting as natural the weakling, hyena -like men, cum eunuchs.
Dude,”eunuch” is not the preferred nomanclature. Mangina-American, please.
Oh, but the new boss made clear that he was open to some sorts of reviews from Calleri:
If you care to write reviews where men act like good strong men and have a heroic inspiring influence on young people to build up their character (if there are such movies being made) i will be glad to publish these.
i am not interested in supporting the reversing of traditional gender roles.
i don’t want to associate the Niagara Falls Reporter with the trash of Hollywood and their ilk.
it is my opinion that hollywood has robbed america of its manliness and made us a nation of eunuchs who lacking all manliness welcome in the coming police state. …
In short i don’t care to publish reviews of films that offend me.
if you care to condemn the filmmakers as the pandering weasels that they are…. true hyenas.
i would be interested in that….
So, yeah, apparently the Niagara Falls Reporter is now being edited by a barely literate misogynist who seems like he just stepped out of the comments section of The Spearhead.
You can read the rest of Calleri’s story over at the Chicago Sun-Times.
(Thanks to several alert Man Boobz readers for pointing me to this story.)
Over on A Voice for Men, the paramount meeting place for the brave warriors of the Leading Human Rights Movement of the 21st Century, a commenter calling himself Laddition has some uncharacteristically kind words to say about feminists (in this thread). Well, “kind” may not be the right word for it. But Laddition tells us that as awful as the awful feminists are, they’re not quite as bad as are … the rest of the world’s women. Sorry, the “rest of the fem-herd.” He explains:
Naturally, the readers of A Voice for Men greeted these pearls of wisdom with upvotes.
Oh, and while we’re on the topic, can someone explain GirlWritesWhat and TyphonBlue and the rest of AVFM’s little FemMRA, er, herd to me again? What exactly draws women to hang out with, and make 45 minute-long videos on the behalf of, dudes who not only hate women but who offer new proof of this hatred on a daily basis?
More thoughts on the election from the Manosphere. These are from the comments section of Chateau Heartiste, in response to that little manifesto from Mark Minter we talked about the other day, and which Minter also posted at the Chateau.
Here John Salt suggests that “force” works better than voting. And, oh yeah, he’s also as racist as Hitler.
Here Sidewinder offers some “optimism” for the future:
You’ll notice that no one there voices opposition to any of these sentiments.
Leave it to the Men’s Rightsers to come up with an even more ingeniously loopy explanation for Romney’s defeat than even Karl Rove has managed to come up with. According to the anonymous blogger behind the Christian Men’s Defense Network blog, on the far-right fringe of the already pretty fringey Men’s Rights movement, the thing that brought Romney down was “the slut vote.”
Up all night. Too tired to scan the manosphere for weird reactions to Obama’s victory.
But here are some scenes from last night as a couple of backwards white dudes attempted to come to terms with the new demographic realities that enabled Obama to win the election despite getting a smaller percentage of the white vote than Michael Dukakis did in 1988.
Karl Rove, on Fox News, responded to the new realities with good old-fashioned denial, arguing with the number-crunchers for Fox after they called Ohio as a win for Obama. Rove must have thought he’d bought the election good and square!
Bill O’Reilly, meanwhile, responded with, well, there’s really no other word for it than racism:
Also, while we’re talking demographics, here’s a nice pithy breakdown of the gender gap, from ABC news:
Women favored Obama by 11 points while men backed Romney by 7; the gender gap has been bigger just once, in 2000 (when men were +11 Bush and women were +11 Gore). Add in marital status and the gaps become garish: Married men for Romney by 60-38 percent; unmarried women (younger, more Democratic, more aligned with Obama on social and role-of-government issues) backed the incumbent by 67-31 percent.
Grouchy entitled white dudes, get used to it.
There’s an interesting piece over on Collectors Weekly about those anti-Suffragette postcards I sometimes use to illustrate my posts here. (Thanks to Jezebel for the link; I’m not exactly a regular reader of Collectors Weekly.) Lisa Hix puts the cards in context, offering a sort of mini-history of the suffragette movement in the process, and notes that the cards present some of the often contradictory “arguments” still used against feminism today.
