Leeching off a Tragedy is Not a Christian Thing to Do »« Racism is Live and Well

A Voice for Me! – A Response to an MRA question

We cannot be sexist. What about Janet Bloomfield and Karen Straughan? Why would women join us in our fight if we are misogynistic? Why do you ignore their existence?

 

It could be that they have swallowed “as it were” your red pill.

Or it could be a variety of reasons that are too long, too nebulous and too boring to list.

Frankly? Judging from their material? The two names mentioned are simply terrible people.

Oh no… we don’t ignore those people… Karen Straughan (AKA Girl Who Writes) has caused me to create one of the largest pieces on Freethought Blogs. So without further adieu.

Janet Bloomfield – AKA Judgy Bitch…>

http://freethoughtblogs.com/am…

Rape apologetics aimed at a minor

http://freethoughtblogs.com/am…

Defence of Paedophilia among Broadcasters in the UK. In particular? Jimmy Saville.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/am…

Quackery to defend the MRA’s misogyny from association with Elliot Rodgers.

As for Karen Straughan?

http://freethoughtblogs.com/am…

Making false claims about Afghanistan

We aren’t ignoring them mate. Just because they are women doesn’t mean their arguments are solid, valid or that they validate misogyny. The male MRA have also tried to defend the Indian culture of sexual harassment and downplay rape in India while Paul Elam has tried to make the claim that men have it worse than women in India because “Caste” hurts men more. Funny how last week two girls were killed and the police response that MAY have saved them was delayed due to caste.

So in response? I suggest you read your heroes thinking about what they are willing to do in order to satiate the misogyny within the “manosphere” and whether this benefits men at the cost of women or not.

Comments

  1. smrnda says

    I never really get this. Many bigoted organizations know that they can be more effective if they recruit a few tokens , dress up their bigotry with some intellectual sounding verbiage and then have an easier time denying the bigotry.

  2. says

    Why would women join us in our fight if we are misogynistic?

    Who says women can’t be sexist, misogynist, ignorant, or stupid, among other things. We believe they are equally capable as men in these things.

    These MRAs or whatever they are still don’t understand, among other things, that what feminists want is not about a zero-sum game of self-interest-only self-aggrandizing power politics.

  3. says

    From the OP:

    We cannot be sexist. What about Janet Bloomfield and Karen Straughan? Why would women join us in our fight if we are misogynistic? Why do you ignore their existence?

    This guy thinks he’s in some sort of fight. Wow.
    Feminism= battling for gender equality in social, political, and economic arenas
    Men’s Rights= opposing feminism, bc reasons (men wanting to keep their power and to continue oppressing women)
    Dude, you’re not fighting *for* anything. You’re fighting *against* something. Namely, full gender equality.
    As for the above idiocy, that’s like saying the GOP isn’t homophobic bc the Log Cabin Republicans exist.

    ****

    smrnda:

    Many bigoted organizations know that they can be more effective if they recruit a few tokens , dress up their bigotry with some intellectual sounding verbiage and then have an easier time denying the bigotry.

    Yup.
    Plus women swim in the sexism and misogyny as much as men do. They aren’t immune to its effects. It’s not surprising that some women participate in the manosphere (ok, maybe a wee bit).

  4. Z says

    Karen Straughan (AKA Girl Who Writes)

    Ummm, I think it’s “Girl Writes What”. That’s the name of her YouTube channel and Twitter account.

  5. Athywren says

    That question doesn’t even stand up to cursory logic. If women who buy into MRA bullshit disprove the idea that the MRM is harmful, misogynist nonsense, then surely men who buy into feminism should disprove the idea that feminism is anti-male, and the entire point of the MRM, assuming they were being honest about it of course, should collapse?

    Of course, the reality is that who buys into an ideology says nothing about the ideology – only the content can do that and, as noted in the main post, most of the content of the MRM, even from their paragons of womanly approval, is just utter shit.
    If I’m being honest, I think the MRM does more harm to the promotion of men’s issues than their strawman version of feminism ever could, because it mixes up the problems of prison rape, violence targeted at men, infant circumcision and the like with rampant misogyny. That is not an association that we need if we’re ever going to solve those problems.

  6. says

    Why would women join us in our fight if we are misogynistic

    Because there’s always a bit of cake to be had for those who serve the dominant group. Every movement for equal rights has said “we want the cake to be shared equally by all”. But those who serve the dominant group faithfully can get a piece of cake without having to turn the tables. It’s cake now instead the possibility of cake later.

  7. Jackie the wacky says

    Internalized misogyny is a thing. How many times does this need to be explained to these people before it sinks in?

    The Republicans have Herman Cain and the log cabin Republicans too. That doesn’t make the party any less racist or homophobic.

  8. Holms says

    That question doesn’t even stand up to cursory logic. If women who buy into MRA bullshit disprove the idea that the MRM is harmful, misogynist nonsense, then surely men who buy into feminism should disprove the idea that feminism is anti-male, and the entire point of the MRM, assuming they were being honest about it of course, should collapse?

    But but men only buy into feminism in order to get laid, because we are weak betas who ugly to get the attention of a woman by the standard means (trickery, date rape etc) and hence must suck up to them. Therefore… the women that buy into MRA / PUA crap must be… weak beta women too ugly to bag men? That’s what their own logic seems to suggest.

    Anyway, doesn’t this idiotic argument in the OP seem oddly similar to the old ‘but I have a black friend’ bullshit? Oh speaking of which, why don’t we apply this to race.

    “We cannot be racist. What about Herman Cain and Ben Carson? Why would black people join us in our fight if we are racist? Why do you ignore their existence?”

    Oh shit, with that same airtight logic, the Republican party is no longer racist because it has some black supporters. Nor is it homophobic as long as it has any gay supporters, anti-atheist, anti-poor, and so on and so forth. Hmm, what else. Ah, religion!

    “[Muslims] cannot be sexist. What about [numerous female muslims]? Why would women join us in our fight if we are misogynistic? Why do you ignore their existence?”

    Fun game. Very very infantile, but fun to explore [and laugh at].

  9. says

    Let’s try to paraphrase this:
    “How could we possibly be oppressive, when there are members of the oppressed class who prefer to join us rather than struggle against us and risk threats and violence?”

    Gosh, that almost answers itself.

  10. says

    Holms:

    But but men only buy into feminism in order to get laid,[...]

    I know you’re kidding here, but I wonder…for the people who are serious, how do they account for gay men who are feminists (I can think of a few, including myself)?

  11. Athywren says

    how do they account for gay men who are feminists (I can think of a few, including myself)?

    Well how else are you going to get your entourage of “fag hags”?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>