We Hunted the Mammoth: The FAQ-ening
Q) A mammoth, huh? What’s this blog about?
A) Misogyny, not mammoths.
Specifically, this blog focuses on what I call the “New Misogyny,” an angry antifeminist backlash that has emerged like a boil on the ass of the internet over the last decade or so. These aren’t your traditional misogynists – the social conservatives and religious fundamentalists who make up much of the far right.
These are guys, mostly, who range in age from their teens to their fifties, who have embraced misogyny as an ideology, as a sort of symbolic solution to the frustrations in their lives – whether financial, social, or sexual.
Some of them identify as Men’s Rights Activists, trying to cast their peculiar struggle against what they see as the excess of feminism and the advantages of women as a civil rights issue of sorts. Alongside those who explicitly label themselves MRAs we find a great number of antifeminist and antiwomen activists we might call Men’s Rights-adjacent – like those in the Skeptic and Atheist subcultures who still haven’t gotten over an offhand remark Skepchick founder Rebecca Watson made about a dude in an elevator a couple of years ago.
Others proclaim themselves Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW), declaring a sort of independence from women – while spending much of their time on message boards talking endlessly about them.
Still others see themselves as Pickup Artists (PUA), or masters of “Game,” espousing elaborate “scientific” theories of male superiority while trading tips on how best to pressure or manipulate drunk women into bed. This misogynistic wing of the PUA subculture has a considerable overlap with a subset of traditionalist and far-right blogs. Many of those in what has come to be called “the manosphere” — hey, don’t blame me, I didn’t come up with that name — don’t simply embrace misogyny; they also proudly embrace “scientific” racism and other bigotries.
Still, while some of the New Misogynists see themselves as conservatives, even “neo-reactionaries,” many identify themselves as libertarians or even as liberals. Theirs is a backlash that frames itself as a step forward.
That said, there are numerous posts here that don’t have anything to do with MRAs or MGTOWers or PUAs or any of their ilk. Sometimes I like to post cat pics.
Q) Ok, but you still haven’t explained the mammoth thing.
A) This is a reference to a quote I once posted from a dude who felt women weren’t sufficiently appreciative of what men had supposedly done for them over the ages. Here’s the quote, in all of its weird glory:
We men built a nice safe world for you all the the coal-mines of death, roads, railroads, bridges and tall office buildings. Its $1,000,000 spent per death of a man on a large dangerous project on average now you can just 9-5 it and call it a day in air-conditioned and heated safety. Forget about the wars we died in and the sacrifices made just ignore history or is it now hersorty? You are accruing the benefits without ever having to pay the price you still don’t have to sign up for the draft and who will protect you? The Sex and the City girls will fight off the North Koreans with their Manolo Blahniks?
Men gave you this modern world now you take it for granted we hunted the mammoth to feed you we died in burning buildings and were gassed in the trenches but that was just for fun right?
How quick and conveniently you forget who made this possible.
We gave you Leonardo da Vinci, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy not to mention countless others, Jonas Salk saved half the world from death and you just piss on it all.
This quote is such an amazing clusterfuck of misogyny, entitlement and unwarranted self-importance – not to mention historical ignorance – that the bit about mammoths became a catchphrase around here, neatly conveying pretty much everything this blog is against. And so I decided to make it the name of the blog.
Q) And who exactly are you?
A) David Futrelle. I’m a freelance writer and blogger living in Evanston, IL, and the guy behind the Confused Cats Against Feminism blog. For more on my illustrious career, see the David Futrelle FAQ.
Q) You’re against the Men’s Rights movement. Are you against men having rights?
A) Of course not. As hundreds of posts on this site show pretty clearly, the so-called Men’s Rights Movement is a hateful, reactionary movement driven largely by misogyny and hatred of feminism. It doesn’t help men. It encourages them to scapegoat women and stew in their own bitterness.
Q) Are you secretly funded by the international feminist conspiracy?
A) No. I’m not funded by any organization. Some readers have very kindly given me donations. You can too, if you wish.
Q) What’s with all the cat pictures?
A) I like cats.
Its misandry I say!!
MISANDRY!!
Wait, Gianni isn’t a Poe?
Manboobz – the only site where people troll the FAQ so often that it’s hard to keep track of who’s doing it seriously and who’s a poe.
Thing is, there are MRA talking points that are pretty fucking stupid, but usually those talking points merely summarize actual MRA verbiage; the actual MRAs are longer and more circumspect.
I don’t know much about MRA’s (I have only just heard about them). But there are A LOT of misandrist feminists out there. Feminism has been unchecked for most of it’s existence and they do have the media and journalists behind them, the most power someone can have. If MRAs can provide counterpoints it can only be a good thing IMO. Every group needs outside criticism. Why do feminists get so up in arms over them?
Your not a mra? Yeahhhh rightt. I have never met any non mras who think that feminists control everything secretly. xD
@jumbofish
you are overlooking schizophrenics, but to be fair, they can’t help it and it shouldn’t be held against them.
Uhh someone can believe in conspiracy theories and not be schizophrenic you know.
you are overlooking schizophrenics, but to be fair, they can’t help it and it shouldn’t be held against them.
But you don’t have any evidence to show that these aren’t just fools who believe in conspiracy theories… lots of non-schizophrenics believe in them.
there are A LOT of misandrist feminists out there. Feminism has been unchecked for most of it’s existence and they do have the media and journalists behind them, the most power someone can have. If MRAs can provide counterpoints it can only be a good thing IMO. Every group needs outside criticism. Why do feminists get so up in arms over them?
Unchecked? Where? The people who said the suffragettes were making mountains out of molehills.
The feminists of the 50s were “homewreckers”. The feminists of the 60s were communists. In the seventies there were man-haters. In the 80s they were super-manhaters. From there on it’s been mostly people saying they were redundant.
And if you look at the presss, it’s not as if the Phyllis Schafelys and Anita Bryant and Sara Palins and the like of the world are being denied a forum; nor are they marginalised: Anita Bryant was all over the airwaves; until she changed her tune a bit… then she disappeared. Schafely was invited to the White House, IRRC by not less than two presidents.
It’s not a question of outside criticism, it’s a question of valid criticism. The MRM doesn’t do that, rather it spouts that women want to be “sluts” and “tease” men, without, “facing the consequences”, or that men ought to have the final say in taking a pregnancy to term (or that if they don’t get that say, they can have a, “paper divorce” and leave the child’s care completely to the mother. She, after all, chose to fuck, so she is responsible for what happens. They, somehow, don’t have to pay for the occasional results of fucking).
Women are, per the MRM, liars about being raped. They do it on whim, and are always believed.
They, “provoke” men to abuse them. If they defend themselves it’s “unreasonable”, because they could always just leave. Men who say women ought to be beaten, or mutilated (cutting their vocal chords is one of the ways they suggest) are, “responding to years of abuse at the hands of feminism”, but any woman [be she feminist, or not] who so much as laughs at a man’s suffering is being unreasonable; proof that all feminists hate all men.
Et cetera.
That’s the difference.
No. There are zero. I’ll concede that there are probably some feminists who would be, given the chance, but in the real world you can’t really disadvantage men for their maleness.
what. Do you know history at all?
They can’t. I mean, they can flail and try and whine, but actually valid counterpoints? Nah, not really.
Do you know how many anti-abortion bills passed this year in the USA alone? ‘the most power someone can have’ is the power to actually decide on legislation.
Yeah, it’s not like feminists don’t deal with fools who think they’re god’s gift to logic whining about how we’ve gone too far all the time *eyeroll*
Because they’re misogynist, heterosexist, cis-sexist, and racist jackasses, almost to a person.
that’s a big if, and one the illiterate, privileged crybabies of the mra havent come close to meeting yet
If MRAs just wanted to address some criticisms of feminism through arguments, I wouldn`t be so opposed to that. I would probably disagree with them on almsot all points, but I wouldn`t be so vehemently opposed to them.
Unfortunately, this is not the type of criticism or rhetoric that comes from the MRM. Mostly, it`s shit like
“Women who get raped are stupid bitches who were begging for it”
or “Giving women the right to vote has greatly contributed to the downfall of Western civilization”
or my personal favorite, “If you don`t do as we say, there will be widespread violence of apocalyptic proportions and lots of people will probably die. I`d hate to say that happen, wouldn`t you?”
And lest you think I`m strawmanning, I can point you to the sources I`m very closely paraphrasing here.
MRAs are providing a counterpoint to the radical “women shouldn’t have acid thrown in their faces” position by taking a pro-acid position. The truth must lie somewhere in the middle.
“I don’t know much about MRA’s … Why do feminists get so up in arms over them?”
Maybe try knowing something about that of which you speak before you speak? The answer to your question though — “Because they’re misogynist, heterosexist, cis-sexist, and racist jackasses, almost to a person.”
Try reading some before acting like you have a Radical! Unique! New! Idea! please.
“you are overlooking schizophrenics, but to be fair, they can’t help it and it shouldn’t be held against them.”
Wtf does schizophrenia have to do with anything? Assuming it has to do with conspiracy theories and is thus relevant, actually you can hold it against them — killing because of a delusion or hallucination is still murder for example — it’s just that arguing with a delusional believe is, by definition, pointless. You can certainly argue with the premises and/or conclusions of that delusion and attempt to minimize harm though.
For the record, since this is the FAQ, feminists aren’t really cool with shaming the mentally ill, please don’t do it. That means treating people with schizophrenia like people, not everything they say is purely based in false reality, and even the things that are false are real to them and thus should be taken seriously.
Wait, wait, troll thinks that every group needs a counter-point?
And then wants this site to stop counterpointing the MRAs?
…logic! It fails!
Is there anyone who whines about “misandry” that isn’t an MRA? Or was I the only one that was unaware that the word existed before reading MRAs’ whining?
I’m here to whine about “misandry.” But I don’t mean the imaginary concept, I mean the word. It’s f*cking ugly, man. I mean ooglay. And it’s hard for me to say, like, physically. Dude, I could whine about this all day.
Men claiming to be owed respect based on the actions of their ancestors is both interesting and amusing. Are we to claim the bad as well?
Was your dad arrested for stealing bread, part of a war crime, or a convicted rapist? Surely we’re as responsible for the negative as well?
Dear Futrelle
Have you ever done a piece on the crazies in feminism before? I know they’re out there, and I believe that your blog is supposed to document the idiots on both sides.
I would really love to read something about feminism. I’m pretty sure you can find most of them on Tumblr or something. Thanks!
What part of the banner is unclear to trolls? “Misogyny: I mock it”.
First they ignore you,Then laugh at you, and hate you Then they fight you Then you win.
I’d say we’re at the “Laugh at you and hate you” stage right now. But the truth is, even if some MRA’s are over the top, as are radical feminists; there still are issues of discrimination against men.
Any reasonable person would agree that sexism cannot only be a one way street, only affecting women. Discrimination against men does exist, as does misandry.
Does anyone on this thread really believe that misogyny can exist, but not misandry; that women can be discriminated against but not men?
If so, do you believe it so strongly that you would reject any evidence to the contrary?
Excellent point by Rutee – why not expose both sides? Surely radical feminists come up with some derision worthy material as well as over-the-top MRA’s.
They’re more into transphobia/classism/general ignorance of intersectionality than misogyny, though. We mock misogyny here. It’s in the header.