Over on Reddit, Men’s Rights subreddit regular 0bvious_Atheist has offered the most, well, inventive explanation for the Newtown school shootings I’ve seen thus far. Apparently channeling the old Man Boobz troll NWOslave, he argues that they were the result of … Title IX.
The only good news here is that this theory was too weird and opportunistic for even the Men’s Rights subreddit, and 0bvious_Atheist’s post got many more downvotes than upvotes.
When confronted with the simple fact that men hold the overwhelming majority of positions of power in the world – in government, business, culture, and pretty much everything else – MRAs like to pretend that the actual gender of those in power makes no difference because, well, the men in power are probably a bunch of manginas doing the dirty work of the women who really run the world. Or something like that.
Indeed, some MRAs have even managed to convince themselves that the very basic historical and sociological fact that men in power, by and large, tend to represent men’s interests more than women’s interests is some sort of locical fallacy – something that they’ve labeled “The Frontman Fallacy.”
Now A Voice for Men contributor and YouTube videoblogger TyphonBlue has done these guys one better in terms of sheer antifeminist loopiness. In the comments on one of the Warren Farrell protest videos I recently wrote about, she argues that men in power don’t really push male interests because … they probably don’t even think of themselves as men.
Here she is, writing under her other nom-de-net Genderratic:
I don’t even know what to say to this. I mean, WHAT?!
PROTIP: You’re not going to convince anyone you’re a great ally of trans* people if you refer to them as “it.”
In yet another discussion of Arthur Goldwag’s latest post on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Hatewatch blog (looking at MRAs bad-mouthing the men who lost their lives protecting their girlfriends in the Aurora shootings), longtime Men’s Rights Redditor Liverotto offers this intriguing take on what he sees as Goldwag’s motivations for criticizing the Men’s Rights movement:
Yeah, a dude actually wrote that, and a couple of people actually upvoted it.
I’m trying to understand the logic: Goldwag is growing older and more homosexual (do men usually become gay as they age?). But gay men age badly, which makes them mad at their “suitors.” So therefore Goldwag has come to hate the (mostly straight) men of the Men’s Rights movement?
Another highlight of the discussion: The r/mensrights regular who thinks I’m Paul Elam. No, really.
Sally Ride, the first American woman in space, died last week, as most of you no doubt know. On The Thinking Housewife, Laura Wood uses the occasion as an opportunity to bash lesbians, feminism, and Ride herself. Wood begins her most unusual eulogy by quoting Gloria Steinem, who once said of Ride:
“Millions of little girls are going to sit by their television sets and see they can be astronauts, heroes, explorers and scientists.”
Wood scoffs at the very notion, suggesting that
Steinem’s real point, in keeping with her intense dislike of women, was that women should want to be astronauts and there was something wrong with them if they didn’t.
So we’re off to a great start here. Wood then offers this patronizing assessment of Ride’s life – which nonetheless turns out to be the nicest thing she says about the legendary astronaut.
We’ve already seen some unusual perspectives on the Aurora theater tragedy courtesy of The Spearhead and the Men’s Rights subreddit. Over on whiskeysplace, the manosphere blogger (and sometime Spearhead contributor) who calls himself Whiskey throws some racism into the mix.
In Whiskey’s view, the whole thing just shows … just how badly treated white men are in America today. And, he suggests, unless we change our evil white-man-hating ways we should expect even worse massacres to come. His basic thesis:
[T]hat an (admittedly crazy) 24 year old White guy with an extremely high IQ would paint his hair red, carefully position his beat up old pickup truck against one emergency exit door, enter through the pre-arranged opened other door, and kill (again as of this writing) 12 people while wounding 58, many seriously, shows how out of hand Obama’s America has become. …
Who is at fault? In no particular order, Obama, the entire Affirmative Action establishment, Jessie Jackson, feminists, the media, and the American people for taking the easy way out and not removing the former from public life through a hard, brutal political struggle that costs time and effort and more.
The feminist utopia. (Franz von Stuck, “The Battle over Woman,” 1905)
So over on the Men’s Rights subreddit the resident dudes (and small but statistically significant population of dudettes) were getting all worked up at the notion of men standing up for women, and getting into fisticuffs over them, and all that sort of thing.
You know that’s the feminist ideal. You see it blatantly in radfemhub, but I’ve seen more moderate feminists swoon over the idea. Sometimes I wonder if they’d have us living in some wasteland fighting on another over the scraps to survive while occasionally taking one of us, the strongest, hostage for breeding. …
That’s why when some drunk asshole or something comes over to me and tries to start a fight while there are other people around I try to avoid it. I do so because I know somewhere there could be a feminist watching who would be rubbing her hands together over it and getting wet panties of seeing two men duking it out blow for blow while daydreaming about her utopia.
This just in: I am a woman! Again. At least according to a blogger calling herself miliefisathand, who recently wrote a post about that “are nice guys sociopaths?” post I wrote a while ago.
Her evidence? When writing her response to me, she repeatedly found herself referring to me using female pronouns — so therefore I must actually be a woman.
Yes, that’s actually her argument:
While editing my article I lost count of the number of times I had to change “her” or “she” to “him” and “he”. I don’t normally make gender pronoun errors so I have a deep suspicion that the author is a woman impersonating a man. I’m spiritually sensitive to such things.
Hate to break it to you, but your guy-dar is way off. Protip: I post under my real name, and if you google that name, you will find ample evidence that I am, in fact, a real, living dude.
In the case of MRA dudes who misgender me as a woman, it’s clearly the result of their misogyny. In the case of miliefisathand, a self-described Smartassed Burmese Transwoman, I don’t quite understand what exactly is going on.
She also misses the point of my post, and the comments from regulars here that offered some pretty sensible criticisms of what I wrote, but at this point it’s not exactly a shock to see a Man Boobz critic arguing against things I didn’t say rather than things I did say.
Here are a couple of, well, let’s just call them very intriguing questions asked of me by a Men’s Rights Redditor. Since I can’t respond to them on the Men’s Rights subreddit — I’m banned — I thought I’d respond here:
Mr. Levelate, allow me to answer your serious questions with some equally serious questions of my own:
I’ve wondered for a long time how people like you react to the men’s rights mantra of ‘all women are wombats’, when you see a woman who isn’t a wombat, how do you explain this?
Also, many MRAs advocate turning all squirrels into bologna, what makes you think squirrel bologna would taste better than regular bologna, and what would the world do with all those extra uneaten nuts, were it ever to come to that?
Here’s the thing, Mr. Levelate: those things you think feminists believe? FEMINISTS DON’T ACTUALLY BELIEVE THEM.
That “all men are rapists” quote from Marilyn French you guys like to pass around? That was from a character in a novel.
The number of radical feminists who seriously want to get rid of men, or a significant number of them, you could probably count on your fingers. I’m not sure how many MRAs want to make squirrel bologna, but the numbers are probably similar. And, fyi, there are actually more than a few MRAs who fantasize about breeding certain types of women out of existence, like this dude on The Spearhead, and a small army of MRAs and MGTOWers who pine for the imaginary future where babies are gestated in artificial wombs and women are all replaced by sexy sexbots.
Listening to MRAs talking about feminism is a bit like sitting in on a book club in which no one has read the book.
Is Mr. Sookdeo trolling here? Over on Bronysay, where I found this, someone claiming to know him says he was serious, just a bit “confused.” The questions seem sincere to me. Ugh.
Yep. They may be rarer than unicorns, but Men’s Rights Bronies (MRBs) do indeed exist. For proof, see this post on the Men’s Rights subreddit, in which an MR Brony calling himself Bullywar tries to convince fellow MRAs (and MRBs) that the My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic season two finale (of which the video above is an excerpt) is some sort of grand antifeminist statement from the show’s creators. (Oh, SPOILER ALERT for everything that follows.)
You don’t have to be a brony, or even care for MLP at all to get this – just hear me out. If you don’t care to watch the 44 minute episode, I’ll summarize: an impostor shapeshifting queen disposes of a bride to be in a high-profile wedding and plans to use the groom’s magic against him in a lust for power. The linked song will pretty much get the whole episode’s plot across succinctly enough.
The song juxtaposes the heroine’s desire to complement her groom, and the villain’s desire to subjugate him; even though that (until the climax of the episode) everyone sees the latter as the former. It even references one of feminism’s battle cries for the last lyric in the reprise. Watch the whole episode on Youtube to get a closer look.
To see a wildly popular show aimed at girls, conceived and written by a woman, giving such a message to young girls today strikes me as nothing less than resounding vindication for our cause.
Because feminists are all about marrying dudes and exploiting them?
Happily, other Bronies with less of an ax to grind came along and put Bullywar straight.
CrawdaddyJoe, a critic of MRAs who usually gets downvoted on r/mensrights, garnered himself a few upvotes by noting that
Um…. feminists aren’t plotting to marry you and take your money. That’s not even remotely what feminism is about, and most feminists would find such behavior abhorrent and demeaning. Don’t be a paranoid twit.
Drinkthebleach, an actual MR Brony and Pokemon fan, asked:
Isn’t Lauren Faust [the show’s original Executive Producer] a pretty outspoken feminist? Also you left out the part where they talk about how important it is to have a male influence in your life, when she talks about how much she loves/misses/needs her brother.
RotoSequence, who doesn’t seem to regularly post in r/mensrights, offered a more nuanced analysis of the episode:
This is a ridiculous argument. The entire point of This Day was to illustrate that Chrysalis only wanted posession of Shining Armor because by manipulating his emotions, it gave Chrysalis tremendous power. Cadance and Shining Armor, on the other hand, love each other so much that they want to start a family together while the manipulative, evil Queen plans to take that away from them as collateral damage so that Chrysalis can conquer a land that isn’t hers. If anything, the lesson to take home from the finale is “we’re stronger together than we are apart,” and the corny stalwart “love conquers all.”
At least I assume that’s a more nuanced interpretation. As a non-Brony, I really have no idea.
