"If we liberate men’s sexuality, the war against women can end"

Submitted by Mastodon on Sat, 2015-01-17 01:34

Article here. Excerpt:

'Men's rights activists and the wider manosphere both venerate the alpha male, but a look at their websites shows that they're going for men and boys who feel unsuccessful at life, and, particularly, young people who feel sexually deprived.  In a recent post, Futrelle said:

"The anger of many younger MRAs seems to have a similar psychosexual source. These are the young men who rage against “friendzoning” and wax indignant about “false rape accusations” and “yes means yes.” In their mind, women are the “gatekeepers” of sex, and this frustrates and sometimes enrages them. ...
...
... Some, I suspect, think that there’s no way they can actually “get” sex without cutting a few corners, consent-wise, and resent feminists for making this harder for them."
...
... civil rights research group Southern Poverty Law Centre tracks some of them as misogynist hate sites. ...
...
As feminists, we rightfully put the interests of women first, and we are sceptical of ostensibly feminist arguments that appeal to men’s interests. Solidarity should motivate the privileged in their struggle for change, not self interest; to make an analogy, it would be offensive and misguided to ask the black leaders of the Ferguson movement against police violence to tout the benefits of anti-racism to white people. Likewise, feminists should not be obliged to sell feminism to angry men. But I would offer another analogy: when we combat fascism, it behooves us to offer an alternative to those that fascists would recruit. We may not be able to reach the most hateful misogynists, but feminists must directly attack the false ideology of men’s rights. We must offer a real answer for men consumed by anxiety, and especially those who feel a sense of sexual frustration.

... Where radical feminism would call me a traitor to my gender for serving men’s needs, intersectional feminism would emphasise what sex workers have in common with all the workers of the world; a complex structure of interwoven consents and coercions.

Learning about intersectional feminism changed my life, and brought me back into politics.  It has done the same for thousands of other gender and sexual outlaws who felt excluded by the feminist identity, and we should support it for its own sake.  But we must also end the debate between moralists and libertines in our ranks for an essential strategic reason.  If feminists do not abandon their moralism, men's rights activists and their growing penumbra of supporters will continue to paint us all with the same brush.  They will continue to distort our views, telling their audience that we are all moralists, and channeling the frustration of men towards their hateful ends.  And, for millions of boys growing up, misogyny will continue to make more sense than feminism.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

Entertainment value.  Really, after all the horse$hit of 2014, we needed a good laugh.

So in essence, she says by allowing men with BDSM kinks to PAY her for the service (which I'm sure she feels is the same kind of taxing *work* done by others such as her clients) of tying them up, etc., and doing whatever else (calling them diminishing/insulting names, etc.) and then fulfilling further requests she might *allow* them to pay her for, she is in essence doing wimminkind a favor in some way.

"Mistress Margaret", go work another corner, honey.  Do you really think anyone can take you seriously or fail to see through your thinly-veiled attempt to scare up some business?

But what I don't find funny is her classic feminist attitude around placing women's interests categorically above men's.  Whether she includes this line:

"As feminists, we rightfully put the interests of women first, and we are sceptical of ostensibly feminist arguments that appeal to men’s interests."

merely to try to increase her questionable feminist cred or actually believes it herself matters less than the fact that it's precisely what a feminist would say, or what a non-feminist would say in an attempt to gain cred among feminists, or just to appear to be one.  That's because it is in fact what feminists believe.

I ask any men reading this who self-identify as feminists to let her statement and its implications sink in.  It pretty much lets the kitty out of the pouch.  It's a degree of candor rarely seen from feminists, but occasionally, they forget themselves and just put it out there.  Feminism is not about "equality"; it's about interests.  Those interests definitely do *not* include men's well-being in any significant sense.  Even a prostitute like herself who regularly   (fill in the blank)  s her male clients has, if she's a feminist, no interest in their well-being.  She views men as a means to an end (i.e., making money), and perhaps no better than wild animals one must throw meat at regularly to keep at bay.  Only in her case, she charges these wild animals for the trouble of tossing the meat their way.  (On second thought, do wild animals stop to pay for the meat before eating it?  So my analogy seems flawed.  More apt analogies are that of a drug dealer or pre-WWI arms dealer selling to men they know or could reasonably suspect are addicts or who are about to go to war after the dealer also has been selling arms to the "other side".  I think those'd be better analogies.)

She can call it "intersectional feminism" all she likes, what she does already has a far more accurate name: prostitution.  At least "gender feminism" (i.e., modern feminism) is clear in its aims: "Destroy men.  Failing that, subjugate them for our use -- over and out."  In that, there's honesty about the goal (though they try their best to deny/hide it, it comes through) and no "fraternizing with the enemy" is tolerated.  But a person like her is only lying to herself while rushing to belittle others (men) in an effort to make herself feel better about herself.  These same people whom she belittles, she also gleefully uses as her source of income while pretending to suffer the "difficulties and indignities" associated with h@ving to deal with them.

Last thing I'd say to this lovely piece of work is this:

Hey "Mistress Margaret": GO_FUCK_YOURSELF!

Over and out.

MANN regulars, I included the link to the SPLC list of "Misogyny" sites in the posted item because I've noticed they haven't updated it since 2012.  Hey SPLC people: Please, guys, you need to stay on top of these things!  Haven't there been literally 10s of 1,000s more misogyny-filled "hate sites" created since then that you're failing to honor by listing?  What, they're not *radical* enough for you?

And that's another thing, SPLC:  the MANN entry is *lame*.  It reads:

'MensActivism
This website tracks news and information about men’s issues from around the world, with a focus on activism — and outrage. Par for the course are lurid headlines like this one: “Pakistani wife kills, cooks husband for lusting over daughter.” The site also runs stories like the one it headlined “Australia: Girl, 13, charged after taxi knife attack” that involve no abuse accusations, but are merely meant to undermine what the site claims is “the myth that women are less violent than men.”'

Is that all?  What, no accusations of rampant misogyny and random threats of violence, no accusations of false fact production, no accusations of widespread faulty (or no) reasoning in use, or of rampant, seemingly arbitrary censorship of members' comments, etc.?   Well, if you were actually listing feminist hate sites, you could include those as criticisms, I suppose.  But instead, the basis for MANN's presence on the page is that sometimes we'll have the unmitigated audacity to run an item describing how a woman knifed a taxi driver to death.  No mention though of stories about this or that woman who cut off her husband's penis and to note that the "critical" response to that was at most a nervous snickering from the media/public at large, and *maybe* a relatively light jail sentence (possibly suspended, too) from the legal system, and how that was pretty solid evidence that our society doesn't take the genital mutilation of men seriously, even if done out of malice instead of ignorance (as with circumcision).  Funny how they missed those in their mention.

Please SPLC, look through the site some more, I'm sure you can find a 4-letter-word-strewn rant in there someplace.  Heck, this one should suffice, and undoubtedly you'll find a few more posted by myself and others.

News stories. Hell, I'm almost embarrassed.  It looks like MANN doesn't have the same kind of "edgy street cred" other sites do.  Damn, need to up my game!  OK, here goes:

HEY SPLC, UPDATE YOUR FUCKING 'MISOGYNY' HATE SITES LIST AND WORK HARDER TO FIND SOMETHING MORE OBJECTIONABLE ABOUT MANN THAN WHAT YOU HAVE!!  YOU'RE FUCKING UP MY GODDAMNED *EDGY STREET CRED*, YOU FUCKING IMBECILES!!  SHOW A BROTHER SOME FUCKING LOVE, GODDAMMIT!!

Well if that doesn't get their attention, nothing short of buggering a sheep on their front door steps in broad daylight at high noon on a regular work-a-day, clear-skied, balmy Monday in the fairest of springtimes will do it.  Behhhheeehhheeehhheeehhh... :)

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Matt on Sun, 2015-01-18 11:11