Fuck the Libertarians Episode Three: Freedumb

This episode of Fuck The Libertarians is going to be a short one, but I feel like the argument needs to be addressed. It's just so exquisitely stupid. Let's get right to it.

Basically, the rational person will claim that free market capitalism is deeply flawed, in part because it allows corporations to employ workers in unsafe conditions that might be hazardous to their health. Further, it opens up the door for slave wages that no human being could ever hope to live on. Essentially, an unregulated capitalist system fucks over a lot of people, and that's not okay. We need strong regulations to protect the rights of workers, so that nobody, you know, fucking dies.

The fuckwit libertarians will then assert that there is no need to regulate how companies can treat workers, because the workers have the freedom to leave the position. If a business mistreats its employers, no one will apply for jobs there, and the business will go under. See? The system works!

Well, sure, the system works, but only if you're a childish asshole who is allergic to nuance. To further illustrate my objection with the argument, I want to look at a little thought experiment. Libertarians have concocted a fantasy world in their heads already, so it shouldn't be too hard for them to do this with me.

Let's imagine a small child in South America. He workers in a sweatshop for seventeen hours a day, making computer parts for a giant corporation which shall remain nameless. *Cough-Apple-Cough.* Conditions in his factory are hellish, and he only makes about sixteen cents a day. With that money, he can buy a single rotten apple. It isn't much, but it keeps him alive.

The alternative is to starve completely and eventually die.

Do you see what I'm getting at here? Anybody will work a shitty job if they have no other way to survive. And yes, you have the theoretically option to leave, but if that will result in your death, then it isn't really a choice at all. You are effectively trapped in Hell if you work in an area with a low number of job openings.

Fuck that argument, and fuck the libertarians.

Fuck the Libertarians Episode Two: Biological Determinism

I know I said that episode two of this series wouldn't go up until next Monday, but I recently encountered a self-described libertarian who spewed fourth so much bullshit that I just had to write about it. Consider this a bonus episode of the series. I am so fucking generous, you guys!

Anyway, this stupid asshole was again pushing that dumb narrative that their are certain people, in this case whites, that are just better than others, in this case blacks, at occupying leadership roles. Therefore, it's totally fine that most of Congress and the Supreme Court is white, because that's the natural way of things! Changing the status quo is for faggots!

Now, I like to think of myself as at least somewhat intelligent, so naturally I disagree with this point. I believe that the reason most powerful people in America are white is because black people have not been afforded the same opportunities as their Caucasian counterparts. I mean, the Civil Rights act was only passed in 1965. That means that, even on paper, black people have only been equal for about fifty years. Contrast this with the hundreds and hundreds of years of white people being on top.

But even if you assert, as this fellow did, that racial inequality is a thing of the past, well, you're still wrong. I could go into why for hours on end, but luckily, someone already did that for me! I'll just leave this here. http://www.thecoli.com/threads/cracked-5-studies-that-prove-racism-is-still-way-worse-than-we-think.274657/ Give that article a look, then reconsider your position.

What really baffled me about that guy is that he does nothing to fix the problem he pointed out. Like, if there is a group of people that is just naturally dumber than another, which is what you believe, shouldn't we spend more time educating them and taking steps to mitigate that natural disability? By your logic, we should get rid of all wheelchair ramps, because people who cannot walk are just naturally worse than those who can. Obviously they don't deserve access to buildings.

Now, if there really is a natural disability inherent in being black, or female, or whatever, the way you fix that is to fund universal education. You would give impoverished an easy way out of their predicaments, and the idiots could improve their minds.

But that would require government intervention, which is tyranny, of course.

Fuck this guy, and fuck the libertarians.

Fuck the Libertarians Episode One: Taxation

Hey, all, this is the first in a new series, which will probably last for three episodes! The title says it all, really. Libertarians are fucking stupid, and I'm not going to sugarcoat it. If you really subscribe to the genuine free-market capitalist ideology, you're an idiot. It's jut that simple.

But as much as I'd love to just dump on libertarians in this angry, vague way, I think it behooves me to tackle some of the actual arguments. Here we go.

Firstly, taxation is not theft. This seems to be the cornerstone of the philosophy held by those antigovernment types. They claim that because the definition of 'govern' is 'to control by force,' that means that the process of collecting taxes is a violent one. They also state that because taxation is never truly voluntary at all times, so therefore it's theft.

The above argument seems to be predicated on not knowing what the word 'theft' means. Theft implies that someone takes something from you without offering something else in return. Theft is not mutually beneficial. But taxation helps to pay for things like roads and public schools. You could argue that these things are underfunded and that our tax dollars are misused, sure. But even then, the fact remains that you're still getting something back. Thus, it isn't theft.

That's basically all I have to say on that issue. Episodes of this series will go up every Monday until I have systematically eviscerated every Libertarian wingnut out there. See you next time.

Closing the Wage Gap

One of the most common criticisms of feminism I hear is that it's too nebulous. Opponents will claim that feminists spend all their time whining about their problems, but they aren't actually taking steps to fix them. According to these people, feminists don't have any stated goals.

I think that's an incorrect assertion, but fair enough. Today I'd like to take you through my plan to fix one of the biggest issues facing women today. The wage gap. And yes, MRAs, the wage gap does in fact exist. I proved it in episode 22 of my series Men's Rights Memes. There are sources and everything. Go check it out before you scream at me in the comments.

Now that all the rational people have determined that the wage gap exists, we can get to work on fixing it. I have a few ideas about how to do that, so we're going to talk about them today. Buckle up, motherfuckers.

Real quick, I just want to point out that I am one person, and this is a complex issue. I don't have all the answers. With all that out of the way, let's get to it.

I suggest that we do more to address and combat discrimination in the workplace. I think we need to foster better, more comprehensive conversations about gender roles and sexual harassment. Right now, most sexual harassment manuals recommend that women cover up or take similar measures. I think we ought to place the onus on potential perpetrators, rather than potential victims. We need to grant women agency and freedom in the workplace, and that includes loosening dress code standards. Obviously, I don't think people should come into work naked, but less restrictions are definitely necessary.

I also propose that we improve wages in female-dominated jobs. In most cases, there's no reason for them to pay less in the first place. For example, it takes roughly the same amount of education and experience to become a nurse as it does to be an engineer, but engineers tend to get paid more. Check out that episode of Men's Rights Memes for sources on that.

Finally, I think it's a good idea to avoid discriminating against people who wish to start families, especially considering that our society often pressures women to become mothers. If we're going to keep perpetuating those antiquated gender roles, we must institute measures like paid family leave for both mothers and fathers.

I know that those points aren't perfect, but this sounds like a good place to start.

Just something to think about.

Reaching Out to the Men's Rights Movement

So, season one of my series Men's Rights Memes just wrapped after twenty-two episodes. In it, I took down several common arguments made by, of course, Men's Rights Activists. I stand by everything I said in those episodes, but I do want to respond to one common criticism that I, or rather the series, has received.

Put simply, I was kind of a dick. I referred to Men's Rights Activists as 'petulant children,' 'dumb neckbeard fucks', and a host of other extremely witty names. And, again, I stand by that, but other people said that my tone was too harsh, and that MRAs would be less likely to take me seriously when I was insulting them. All right, then. I see where you're coming from. I think that debates can only work if both parties make a conscious effort to be civil. I was making an attempt at comedy with that series. If I did offend any MRAs, I apologize. It's not my fault you're all despicable misogynistic assholes. Oh, shit, I did it again.

Anyway, I'd like to take the opportunity to extend an olive branch to the MRM.  In an effort to atone for my sins, I want to propose a plan that would make your movement legitimate. That's right, I'm going to help Men's Rights Activists. Please, don't click away from this post. I assure you this is not the Twilight Zone.

This will primarily deal with the MRA canard that there is a bias in family courts. Now, that's a false claim, as proven in Episode Four of my series. But if they're going to keep whining about it, I might as well give them some pointers. If you really care about granting custody to fathers, here's what you have to do.

First, stop aligning yourself with the Pick-Up Artists. For those who are blissfully unaware, PUAs are a special kind of fucked-up. Their entire movement, if it can even be called that, revolves around putting women down and tricking them into bed. Part of that involves ditching her if she becomes pregnant. You heard that right. Pick-Up Artists are literally advocating for deadbeat dads.

That doesn't exactly match up with the stated goal the MRM, now does it?

Next, come up with what I call Positive Parenting Action Plans. Essentially, devise a template. Write and publish a list of things that men can do to make their lives and their homes more conducive to child-rearing. That way, they can go to a custody court and demonstrate to the judge that they have taken steps to be a capable father.

Maybe focus on that instead of calling your ex-wife a whore on Facebook.

Kim Davis

The Internet is all abuzz with talk of Kim Davis, the Kentucky clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples on the basis of her religious beliefs. Now she is in prison, and people have ripped her apart. I think they were right to do that, and I joined in the fun along with them.

Basically everything that could be said about what she did has already been said by much stronger minds than mine. I don't really have anything new to say in regards to her actual conduct, though I would like to point out that she was not jailed for her beliefs. She was jailed for, again, her conduct. There is a huge fucking difference, you guys. You can believe whatever arcane bullshit you want about gay folk, but you have not right to dictate how we live our lives. You cannot limit our freedoms.

What I want to focus on here is the treatment of Kim Davis' number of marriage. I know that we only ragged on her because she was a hypocrite. She defended her bigoted actions by bringing up the sanctity of marriage and the importance of the sacrament. She's also been married four times, and those two things don't really mesh. I think it's perfectly fine to talk about her marriages in the context of religious hypocrisy, but the number of partners you've had says nothing about the content of your character.

I think there's also a lot of bullshit surrounding Kim's appearance. I've seen some shit on Twitter that makes it seem as though she is a lesser person for being conventionally unattractive. Not only is this untrue, it is also terrible debate strategy. If you level personal attacks against your opponent, it signals that you cannot compete with them on an intellectual level. Attack the argument, not the arguer.

Just something to think about.

Men's Rights Memes Episode 22: Mind the Gap

Hello and welcome to episode 22 of Men’s Rights Memes, the show where I subject myself to the idiotic rhetoric of the Men’s Rights Movement, because apparently I hate joy. Without further ado, here is this episode’s offending image.

As Season One of Men’s Rights Memes draws to a close, it is only natural that we would find ourselves facing down the most pervasive MRA myth out there. Frankly, I’m surprised it took us this long.

The idea that the wage gap is some evil feminist conspiracy is one that I’ve heard over and over. That's the real zombie in that situation That's the myth that just won’t die. Well, today I’m here to shoot it in the head.

 The generally accepted statistic is that women make only seventy percent of what men do, and while the reality is a lot more complicated than that, a pay gap does still exist. It varies by industry, and in some cases there is a gap that favors women. But those are few and far between, and the bottom line is that the wage gap is both real and biased against ladies. 

(NOTE: I will be periodically referring to statistics and studies and whatnot throughout this episode. All the relevant info will be linked below, in the further reading section).

Now that I’ve prematurely dealt with all the ‘sources, please,’ douchebags, we can begin.

To start us off, I’d like to look at the literal amount of money made in the US. According to the US Census Bureau, in 2010, women made eighty-one cents for every dollar that a man made. So it is demonstrably the case that women do make less money than men. But the thing that a lot of people leave out is that these numbers don’t take into account things like skill, job choice, education, experience, number of hours worked, and so on.

For example, it’s been argued that women care more about balancing work and family than men do, and often they have to due to having children. Thus, many of them take lower-paying jobs that provide the flexibility necessary to facilitate that balance. Also, a 2008 survey concluded that women on average have less work experience than men, and the pay gap fluctuates depending on the industry and the age and the marital status of the person involved.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, or BSL, women who work as bakers or teachers make more on average than their male counterparts, though it’s worth noting that these are both traditionally feminine roles. Further, women in their twenties experience a smaller wage gap than older women, or sometimes none at all. This has a lot to do with the fact that women are graduating college at a higher rate than the previous generation.

So what we need to do is find out how much a woman with the exact same qualifications, occupation, marital status, experience, etc is making compared to a man. Luckily, a lot of folks have already explored that. The US government did a study in 2003 which controlled for experience, education, hours worked, and occupation, and found that on average, women are still making twenty percent less than men.

Another study concluded that starting salaries for female college graduates are less than they are for men in the same fields. And while I did mention a couple of industries which favor women monetarily, they are the exception rather than the rule. And while, again, women tend to have less work experience than men, many studies have found that a year of work experience pays off at a higher rate for men.

Even when you control for work experience, studies still find that there is a significant portion of the wage gap that remains unexplained. Also, jobs dominated by women, such as nurses and secretaries, tend to pay less than those primarily controlled by men, like construction workers and engineers.

According to a testimony before congress by economist Randy Albelda, “Economists have explored the gender pay gap for many decades, and produced hundreds if not thousands of articles and reports to explain the reasons for the gender pay gap. No matter how sophisticated and complex their models, they always find that some portion of the wage gap is unexplained...”

The fact of the matter is you find no good study or report that claims that women make the same amount of money as men for doing the same job. That’s just not the truth. Overall, there’s somewhere between a ten and twenty percent gap in pay, even when you take into account things like occupation and family status.

Now for the fun part: talking shit about MRAs on the internet. I’ve seen entirely too many  articles where people claim that the wage gap isn’t a big deal, because women still make eighty to ninety percent of what men do. That’s fucking ridiculous. Even if ninety cents is better than seventy, and it is, that’s still not fair, and it’s certainly not acceptable.

And even if you claim that the gap is still the result of choices women make, we have to think about why they make those choices. I think society’s overall attitude towards women comes into play here. What is that attitude? Well, many studies have shown that society on the whole considers women less competent than men. For example, one study showed that women were less likely to be replied to by an employer than a man, even if they had identical resumes.

Still another study showed that men received significantly higher customer satisfaction scores than women even if their performance was roughly the same.

As psychologist Alice Eagly puts it, “Perceived incongruity between the female gender and leadership roles leads to two forms of prejudice. (a) perceiving women less favorably than men as potential occupants of leadership roles and (b) evaluating a behavior that fulfills the prescriptions of a leader role less favorably when it is enacted by a woman.”

So basically women who act ‘feminine’ are looked upon as less competent than men, and women who are more assertive are penalized for not acting ladylike enough.

But clearly sexism is dead, and the wage gap is a myth.

Further Reading:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male–female_income_disparity_in_the_United_States

http://www.gao.gov/products/A83444
http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/?a=Files.Serve&File_id=628256f8-9525-403e-84fd-a57b44799736
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/myth-pipeline-inequality-plagues-working-women-study-finds/story?id=9868961
http://econ2.econ.iastate.edu/classes/econ321/orazem/blau_wages.pdf
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/23/health/research/23perc.html?ref=science
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/12/07/no-its-not-your-imagination-were-biased-against-women/

Men's Rights Memes Episode 21: White Knights

Hello and welcome to episode 21 of Men's Rights Memes, the show where I tell the assholes in the Men's Rights Movement to fuck off, only with logical arguments. Without further ado, here is this episode's offending image.

Okay, here's the thing. I think this meme has some merit to it. There are a whole lot of male feminists who seem to be in it just to score some pussy, or however you want to put it. You need only to listen to the experiences of lady feminists for proof of this. However, I think that these gross, sleazy fucks are definitely in the minority, and that the argument made by MRAs is total bunk.

Basically, the practice of White Knighting is exactly what I described above. White Knights don't actually care about helping women or even discussing feminist theories. They just see women as things to stick their dicks in. Sounds a lot like most MRAs to me, if we're being honest.

The problem arises when MRAs assume that all male feminists are White Knights, and that none of them actually give a shit about women's rights. I myself have been accused of being a White Knight. The fact that I'm gay doesn't seem to matter to these guys.

See, I think that when MRAs assert that all male feminists are only in it for the potential sex, it says a great deal about their own sense of morality. It shows that they see women as nothing more than objects, and they simply can't wrap their heads around the idea that someone might thin differently.

That's really all I have to say on that topic. Thanks for tuning in.

Men's Rights Memes Episode 20: Running With Scissors

Hello and welcome to episode 20 of Men's Rights Memes, the show where I challenge the asinine statements made by the reactionary bigots who populate the Men's Rights Movement. Without further ado, here is this episode's offending image.

I've been waiting for this one, because I think it showcases a rather nefarious tactic that is often utilized by MRA fucktards. When feminists bring up the practice of Female Genital Mutilation, MRAs will often jump in with cries of "What about circumcision? Why do feminists hate men? They never talk about circumcision, so they must hate men!"

Well, no. They are plenty of reasons why feminists choose to focus on FGM, like the fact that the movement is primarily concerned with helping women. But that's evidently not enough for you, so let's dive into this a bit deeper, shall we?

(NOTE: This episode is rather graphic, given the subject matter. Not for the faint of heart).

First of all, male circumcision is nowhere near as bad as female genital mutilation, or FGM. When MRAs make this point, it is often an attempt to derail the conversation about FGM. But there are very important and distinct cultural and medical reasons why the two are not the same. Male circumcision is not done to degrade or undermine the sexual impulses of boys, whereas that is the case with FGM. You could argue that circumcision does in fact result in those things happening, but it is not the intention.

Furthermore, the science suggests that there are actual medical benefits to the removal of the foreskin. Those being the reduction in the potential for Urinary Tract Infections and possibly the transmission of sexually transmitted diseases. There are also instances of boys being born with foreskin that is too tight, which makes urination very painful. In those cases and others, the practice is medically necessary. Again, there is no occasion upon which FGM is ever medically necessary.

For those who don't know, FGM entails, at the very least, the removal of the clitoris, and almost always takes place without any sedatives or sterilization of the equipment. It sometimes involves the removal of the entire outer genitals, and the sewing up of the vaginal opening. This only allows for a very small hole through which to urinate and release period blood. The hole is almost never large enough, causing urine and period blood to back up into the system. Very serious medical problems can stem from this.

There are also a a host of psychological and mental problems that come from having your fucking genitals hacked away at. This might be a result of male circumcision as well, but never on the same scale. As an aside, there are many feminists, such as myself, who are against the removal of the foreskin when it is not medically necessary. Most feminists are pro-freedom-of-choice, which involves waiting until the child is old enough to make that decision for himself.

But most MRAs just flat-out ignore that last bit. It doesn't fit into their narrative of feminists being evil, conniving bitches. Might that be because that's a fucking false narrative? You be the judge!

(HINT; Yes, that's totally the reason).

Men's Rights Memes Episode 19: Egalitarian Diversion

Hello and welcome to episode nineteen of Men's Rights Memes, the show where I do my best not to kill someone after reading the harebrained bullshit spewed forth by the Men's Rights hate group. Without further ado, here is this episode's offending image.

Ah, yes. This old chestnut rears its ugly head once more. Many MRAs and antifeminists in general have this idea in their head that feminism is a movement that is concerned with establishing the  supremacy of women. After all, the prefix 'fem' calls to mind a group that is concerned only with women. Even when you point out the many ways in which feminism has helped men, they still can't seem to move past that bullshit semantic argument. "If it were really about equality," they scream, "Wouldn't it be called egalitarianism?"

Well, no. That's dumb. Here's why.

Before we begin, I would like to make it known that I am completely in favor of egalitarianism of the philosophical sort. Everyone deserves equal opportunity. That's something we can all agree on.

The problem arises when you try to put egalitarianism into practice as a movement. See, philosophical egalitarianism, the belief that everyone deserves to be equal, is necessary to achieve equality, but it is not sufficient. In fact, I would argue that practical egalitarianism is a diversion created to maintain the status quo.

As a case study, let's look at the Black Lives Matter Movement and it's corresponding All Lives Matter response. The All Lives Matter movement is problematic for the same reason that gender egalitarianism is problematic. To illustrate my point, I've included a thought experiment below.

Imagine that you are sitting down to dinner with your family, and while everyone else gets a serving of the meal, you don't get any. Naturally, you protest, saying, "I should have my fair share."

As a direct response to this, your father corrects you, saying, "Everyone should get their fair share."

Now, that's a wonderful sentiment. Indeed, everyone should get their fair share. In fact, that was kind of your point in the first place. You should be a part of everyone. You should get your fair share also. However, Dad's smart-ass comment just dismissed you and didn't solve the problem that you still haven't gotten any food.

The problem is that the statement "I should get my fair share," has an implicit 'too' at the end. "I should get my fair share too, just like everyone else. But your father's response treated your statement as though it meant, "Only I should get my fair share." That's something of a straw man argument, don't you think? After all, that clearly was not your intention.

The end result is that the egalitarian statement that "everyone should get their fair share" only serves to ignore the problem that you were trying to draw attention to.

The exact same problem occurs when you dismiss feminism's focus on issues that affect women, and insist that the egalitarian approach, which focuses on no one in particular, is the appropriate one. The result that comes from this kind of thinking is that issues that do, in reality, uniquely affect women get dismissed since you reject any focus on one particular group.

That is the mechanism by which the assertion of egalitarianism in an environment of preexisting inequality upholds that inequality. That's why egalitarianism is little more than a diversion that seeks to prevent real change from being made. It upholds inequality to the benefit of the privileged group, in this case men.

That's why egalitarianism is a diversion, and that's why feminism is still necessary.

Men's Rights Memes Episode 18: Masters of the Patriarchy

Hello and welcome to episode eighteen of Men's Rights Memes, the show where-okay, look. I don't want to do this episode. I've talked about this topic a thousand times on this blog. I've said all that needs to be said on this subject, at least thus far. I don't feel like I can do anything new with this angle. Bringing it up again would just be, well, boring.

But, as is usually the case with MRA jerkwads, they just won't let me go. They keep creating these bullshit memes that hammer in misinformation like Paul Bunyan on speed. Case in point, this piece of shit:

Oh, my God. THE FUCKING PATRIARCHY. Literally the entire reason that men are held to those admittedly unrealistic and unhealthy body standards is because the mostly male ruling class has decided that men should be these emotionless, heroic meat-bags, like every role Arnold has every done. Masculinity has become warped from a protector role and into something more akin to the Hulk. The obsession with so-called 'gym culture,' is born out of desire to be seen as anything other than 'traditionally feminine,' whatever that means. And, given that most of the United States is controlled by males, it's literally impossible that women or feminists are to blame for this phenomenon.

There. That's the last time I will ever talk about the patriarchy in the context of Men's Rights. I promise.

Unless I find a really stupid meme.

Men's Rights Memes Episode 17: Pulling the Trigger

Hello and welcome to episode seventeen of Men's Rights Memes, the show where I challenge MRA rhetoric from the relative safety of the Internet, mostly because I can't imprison every Men's Rights Activist in the molten core of the Earth. Without further ado, here is this episode's offending image.

Here's yet another uninspired talking point regurgitated by nearly every MRA or antifeminist on the Internet. They are under the impression, somehow, that trigger warnings are meant to stifle debate or 'protect' people from some of the harsher truths about life. They express this viewpoint by harassing women on the Internet. Hey, guys, quick tip. If you want people to take your movement seriously, maybe don't threaten to rape someone because they said a thing you disagree with.


Anyway, the hysteria these people feel over the concept of trigger warnings seems to be predicated on not knowing what the fuck they're talking about. Spoiler alert: that's frighteningly common in these circles. Trigger warnings do not exist so we can shelter people from 'harsh truths,' or however you want to put it. They are not intended to be markers so that everyone can avoid whatever you've attached the warning to. They are not shields, and anyone who says otherwise is either being intentionally dishonest or just plain stupid. I'm not sure which I'd prefer, to be honest.


Also, I'd like to quickly address the claim that it's impossible to contract PTSD from online harassment. This does tie into the larger point, so just bare with me for a minute. I actually do think that it's hard to contract a serious mental disorder from something like Twitter. It's not impossible, but some of those claims might be exaggerated. But that's not what trigger warnings are about. Their purpose is to prevent people who already have mental disorders from relapsing. That's it.


Their real purpose is to help people who have already experienced negative things. If someone has been the victim of rape or something similar, it can have adverse effects on their emotional well-being. Trauma is a common occurrence. Those people typically don't want to experience those emotions all over again, particularly in fiction. That's who trigger warnings are for. It's about preventing people from reliving awful experiences.

If you have a problem with that, well, I don't know what to tell you, other than "Go see a therapist."

Sorry this episode was so repetitive. This idea really gets my goat, and I felt I just needed to hammer my position into everyone who perpetuates it.