I just saw this video put out by A Voice For Men: it’s a bunch of drunk guys insulting Amanda Marcotte and Jessica Valenti while doubling over in laughter at their own “jokes”. I am dumbfounded that they thought this was worth recording, and then at the amazing cluelessness that led them to think it would be a good idea to put it on youtube for all to see.
Hint: Obey the sign.
It was posted by Paul Elam, with this comment:
Look, it is just some men having non PC fun. If you find it offensive or a “bad thing” for the men’s movement, you can blow it out your ass.
He’s collecting comments on youtube.
SJWs Please keep those comments coming. I am doing a follow up on this based on your comments. Great lesson in PC and in your own hypocrisy. There is already enough here to work with, but if you want to add gravy…… all the better.
Yes. Because shouting “your pussy stinks” at women is “non PC” bravery. Read Marcotte’s post — she’s got these yahoos pegged, and no amount of bluster is going to get them out of the hole they have willingly dug for themselves.
I think Marcotte has nailed it. AVM guys seem to think like the baddies in Scooby Doo…”and I would have gotten away with having sex with those women if it weren’t for those meddling feminists.”
For a group that claims to be about the welfare of men, they sure seem to not like talking about the welfare of men.
Men’s Rights Movement: Focusing more on women than all the feminists of the past century put together.
Reading some of the language they’re using, I wonder if they ever pause for a second and think, “….. are we the baddies?”
Non PC fun always means “furiously hateful and transparently bigoted”. Always….
You know, i think they actually realise to some extent that they are the baddies, but their concept of masculinity is so toxic that they actually think being the baddies is what makes them manly men.
What a sad, sad, saaaaaaaaaaaad bunch of pathetic, little boys….
And yeah, that just screams human rights movement, doesn’t it?
Now, Key and Peele know how to talk about women in an “un-PC way” and yet be amazing and hilarious about it. *
These guys have not even the tiniest inkling of the difference.
*NSFW. So, so, so NSFW.
Dammit! That was a video about making mochi I was watching earlier. This is the one I meant to link to.
Loved one of the comments on Jessica Valenti’s Twitter feed:
But ye gods! overall, this is depressing. That a bunch of ostensibly sentient men (I mean, they seem to be able to dress themselves, and walk upright) could participate in something like this, and not be mortally embarrassed, baffles me.
The stupidity, it hurts us, it hurts us…
That they are dressed is, in the rest of the given context, fairly weak evidence that they dressed themselves.
morality aside, i’m constantly struck between the difference in intelligence, creativity, and overall caliber between our side and theirs. what’s it called in evolution when a species evolves from occupying a broad ecological niche to a highly narrow, specialized ones (like the blind fish in caves, not a bad analogy when you think about it) – because that’s what’s happening to the GOP.
relatedly: https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xlt1/v/t1.0-9/12019814_894975807249298_8345950463519460485_n.jpg?oh=44f0bffb640a7a0e1ed25d8eff1ab812&oe=566B89E2
hillaryrettig: much as I like the analogy, it is worth remembering that unlike blind cave fish that evolved in a lightless environment, the GOP has chosen to ignore the available sources of illumination.
Oh, poor victims.
Everyone is out to get them. Now it looks like it’s the FBI, too. The persecution never stops, does it?
In the same way the Confederacy screamed state’s rights movement.
@9
Dehumanizing and utterly incorrect. Nice.
It’s funny… I’ve never particularly considered myself to be pro-PC. I generally don’t care about being politically correct, but I do value factual correctness, and I dislike being needlessly unpleasant. It kind of seems to me that, in most cases when someone advertises themselves as “non PC”, what they’re actually saying is that they’re opposed to factual correctness and in favour of needless unpleasantness. So why don’t they just say so? The honesty of it might actually make up, at least a little, for the patheticness of their performance.
Tsk. Pathetic little boys. How many of them have crawled through caves 20 cm high to discover a new species?
Funny; I just noticed that “Elam” = “backwards male”.
chrislawson: excellent point.
@theophylact
Nominative determinism!
Goodness, it’s Al Bundy and No Ma’am.
Well, I thought of that, but then I thought …. who else do they have to do it for them?
Lead screeders for the Poo Flingers.
there was a time when “politically correct” was just a verbose euphemism for “polite”, or “non-offensive”,
EG: “physically challenged” is PC, while “handicapped” is not. With little, or nothing, to do with Politics. As in, it is NOT: “conservatism = incorrect”, vs. “liberalism = correct”. Conceptually “politically” is derived from “polite”, not “politics”.
Thus to claim “non-PC” is essentially “non-polite”, as in “rude and/or offensive” (and “insulting”). To claim PC is anti-‘free speech’ is to totally misunderstand the concept of free speech and “politically correct speech”. Free speech is not some inalienable right to be rude and offensive outright. One’s speech may offend some who disagree, but to do so deliberately is counterproductive. Expressing opinions to communicate rather than to insult is the point.
This video, presented by the OP is a prime example of misunderstanding the concept of free speech. So, they don;t like to be polite. Good to know they be rude people of malehood. Excuse me, well then, not welcome.
From the link in the OP;
It always warms the cockles of my heart when a bigot is hoist with their own petard.
You are correct. “PC” is just another way of saying “not being needlessly rude.”
The only reason it rose to popularity as a term is that people who enjoy being factually incorrect and needlessly unpleasant are also huge cowards who don’t want to deal with the social opprobrium that comes with publicly announcing yourself as a giant jerk. So they starting using “PC” to try to make people think that their rudeness and bigotry was just because they’re so cool and edgy, not like those silly uptight people who actually take the feelings and desires of other people into consideration on a routine basis.
I’m not too young to remember in the mists of the past when “PC” meant, literally, “politically correct,” as in, there was some sort of ideological or political imperative that you were transgressing. “Women don’t deserve equal rights to men,” “black people are intellectually inferior to whites.” You know, patently offensive, but they at least have the virtue of relating to ideas and positing something people can actually argue about.
I don’t know when “non-PC” became “Rosie O’Donnell is a fat hag,” and “your pussy stinks.” As if people refrained from insulting each other out of some sort of doctrinaire adherence Hillary’s Little Red Book.
Everybody hates Eric Cartman, except when he’s being antagonized by Sheila Broflovsky. Some people might think that, as long as they’re hated by the Sheila Broflovskys in the world, they’re doing good.
@Gregory Greenwood #23:
Aptly put, given the nature of a petard!
But really that “ideology” and “politics” are window-dressing for being able to treat women and people of color like trash. Just post hoc justification for society-level assholery.
@23 The irony makes it hurt to laugh.
Back in the ’70s and ’80s, “Politically correct” was used on the left, by leftists, to twit those among them who put party lines before reason or compassion.
It got co-opted in the ’90s by conservatives, who used it mainly for well-poisoning.
These dudes just use “un-PC” to mean “being an incoherent jackass,” and “sour grapes.”
Fellas, tell us some more about how you don’t want those blow jobs nobody offered you.
Jamie Hardt @ 25
When I was a teenage conservative back in the early 90s, “political correctness” was about more than just silly-sounding euphemisms like “differently abled” and “person of color.” It was supposedly a strategy by the insidious Left (particularly in Academia) to frame any and all conservative beliefs and opinions as racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. as a means to silence freedom-loving, God-fearing, entrepreneurial Americans and usher in the vanguard of Marxists, feminists, homosexuals, radical minority ingrates, and other enemies of liberty.
Oh, it’s always been like that. Back in college, I wrote for a right-wing school newspaper where the opinion editor wrote a piece that openly used the word “nigger” to describe blacks in the wake of the OJ Simpson verdict. When the university’s minority community responded, did we apologize? Hell no! We doubled down, invoked our right to FREEZE PEACH, and cried foul about the ‘campus thought police” trying to shut us down! We had the right to publish whatever we wanted no matter how offensive it was to our hated enemies, the liberals. If it hurt their feelings, bonus!
Jamie Hardt @ 25
When I was a teenage conservative back in the early 90s, “political correctness” was about more than just silly-sounding euphemisms like “differently abled” and “person of color.” It was supposedly a strategy by the insidious Left (particularly in Academia) to frame any and all conservative beliefs and opinions as racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. as a means to silence freedom-loving, God-fearing, entrepreneurial Americans and usher in the vanguard of Marxists, feminists, homosexuals, radical minority ingrates, and other enemies of liberty.
Oh, it’s always been like that. Back in college, I wrote for a right-wing school newspaper where the opinion editor wrote a piece that openly used the word “n*gger” to describe blacks in the wake of the OJ Simpson verdict. When the university’s minority community responded, did we apologize? Hell no! We doubled down, invoked our right to FREEZE PEACH, and cried foul about the ‘campus thought police” trying to shut us down! We had the right to publish whatever we wanted no matter how offensive it was to our hated enemies, the liberals. If it hurt their feelings, bonus!
Sorry for the double-post. I reposted after I realized the slur wouldn’t get past the filter.
Somehow in my naivete I imagined MRAs as frat boys or twenty-something lost boys. That they are bitter old men is just … sad. And gross. Definitely gross. But sad.
When young fellas act like dorks it’s annoying but you can hope that they’ll grow out of it.
Someone didn’t read the stop sign a ways back there.
I think that mra’s take problems of men’s rights same way as the creationist take the problems of evolution on the textbooks. They don’t want anyone to fix them because it’s more convenient to refer them as a problem. Like they have some other agenda to run and these issues are merely rocking horse for them instead of them actually caring about these issues as they seem to say.
carlie @6 — Bhahahahahahahahaha that’s hilarious!
Seconding “get that b*tch some chocolate!”
…and now I want chocolate.
You know, these folks’ laser-sharp focus on issues that commonly affect men – like prison rape, custody issues, discrimination for not following traditional gender roles, worsening grades in schools – really demonstrate their invaluable worth as a men’s rights movement. Or maybe that would be non-valuable.
Careful with this. While this guy is a compleat ass and actually maybe dangerous in certain respects (incitement), the FBI et al regularly cook up these situations, leading and pushing people along until they do something vaguely incriminating (mostly doing far worse things themselves). Not that both the FBI and Goldberg can’t be simultaneously and horribly wrong, but I would wait out any actual facts to come out of that story before using it as much of a jab, although it clearly does show what sorts of trolling he is willing to be a part of.
Nah, they’re all about the real issues. Like men not getting automatic dates for remembering to wash their balls, or the inalienable right to gnaw on a stranger’s leg.