Men's Rights Memes Episode 25: Kill All Idiots

Hello and welcome to episode 25 of Men's Rights Memes, the show where I murder antifeminists. Not with weapons or anything, but rather with unassailable logic and actual facts. Without further ado, here is this episode's offending image.

Okay, let me back up. This image itself contains nothing offensive. Not to me, anyway. What I want to argue against here is how some people react to these tweets and the ideas contained within. Namely, the false equivalence fallacy. I'm surprised it took us this long to get to this one, to be honest. Basically, the entitled, whining assholes on the Internet really, really want to be oppressed. They will use tweets like those above to claim that the Left and the marginalized groups they support are just as bigoted as the right-wing reactionaries they claim to despise so much. If our universe were completely lacking in any kind of order or common sense, this might be valid, though even then it would be a stretch.

Here's the thing, guys. Power structures exist. White people and, yes, men, are the dominant group in power right now. This has, for the most part, always been the case. There is a tremendous difference between being able to pass laws that effect marginalized people and being mean on the Internet. Mustafa might be able to hurt your feelings, but she cannot pass laws that make it okay to pay you less for an honest day's work. There is an important power dynamic at play that people who make this argument seem to be blind to, and it's baffling.

Further, these kinds of things are simply jokes. I'm sure that statistically there are a few people who do take hash-tags like this seriously, but they are such a small section of the population that their not even worth acknowledging. I know that they're small because there has never been a murder based on Kill All White Men, whereas the number of racist hate crimes against black people is through the fucking roof.

The point is that Kill All Men was created for the express purpose of getting a rise out of reactionaries. It's about exposing them for the blithering thin-skinned idiots that they actually are. And, you know, you're not exactly proving them wrong here.

Men's Rights Memes Episode 24: Check Your Privilege

Hello and welcome to episode 24 of Men's Rights Memes, the show where I jump in front of an oncoming train. Well, no, I really just make rebuttals to the bullshit arguments that Men's Rights Activists make on a daily basis, but sometimes it feels like I'm killing myself. Without further ado, here is this episode's offending image.

Look, I agree that the actual phrase 'check your privilege' is often sanctimonious and unhelpful, but the principle is sound. Now, the person who made this meme seems to think that the aforementioned principle entails silencing dissenting opinions in order to further a narrative and create some kind of echo chamber in which you are always correct. This is a misunderstanding of the phrase, and a very simple one. I don't think you can fault the creator of the meme for not getting what this means, as this confuses a lot of people. It confused me at one point, too.

In order to illustrate my point, I'd like to take you on a little journey. A journey...of the mind. Let's say that there are two people. One of them is a layperson, confused about how open heart surgery works. He decides to ask the second person, a doctor, to explain it to him. Just as the doctor finishes up his explanation, a third person swoops in with a smug look on his face and proclaims that what the doctor said was wrong, and that he can accurately tell the first person how open heart surgery actually works. He is asked to prove his credentials as a cardiologist, and is unable to do so. In fact, he isn't a doctor at all.

So, the question remains. If a person who is not an open heart surgeon presumes to correct one who is, and both present their theories, which are you more likely to trust. If you said that you would place stock in the surgeon rather than the other person, you are a hundred percent correct. If you wouldn't trust a non-doctor to explain open heart surgery, why would you trust a non-marginalized person to talk about the experiences of marginalized people? Do you think that telling a non-surgeon to stop talking about how surgery works is akin to censorship? 

The bottom line is, only women can have true authority when they speak about women's issues, so listen to them. Think seriously about what they have to say, rather than dismissing them out of hand. Trust them.

Men's Rights Memes Episode 23: Affirmative Inaction

Hello and welcome to episode 23 of Men's Rights Memes, the show where I illuminate the trolls and general scumfucks that make up the Men's Rights Movement, and hopefully turn them to stone in the process. Without further ado, here is this episode's offending image.

Okay, I'm gonna level with you here. Affirmative action is a very difficult subject, especially when it comes to things like quotas. For a long time, I was vehemently against affirmative action. Then again, i was also an antifeminist right-wing asshole, so there you go.

Over time, I've listened to arguments from the other side, and done some actual research instead of just blindly swallowing the faulty rhetoric I'd been spoon-fed by family and culture. Sadly, there are still some people who have yet to do this, either by choice or because of ignorance. But I have seen the light, so I know that others can do so as well. I hope the following argument will help them do so.

One argument against affirmative action is that it is, in itself, a form of discrimination. Hell, the ideas inherent in affirmative action go by another name elsewhere: Positive Discrimination! Therefore, it must be bad, because discrimination is bad. People who make this argument often feel as though they've trapped people like me in the corner. We say that discrimination is bad, so it'd be a double standard for us to endorse things like quotas.

And, I suppose, they're technically correct. If a man and a woman apply to a STEM job with the same resume, the woman is more likely to get the job. But we have to consider that, for a very long time, the reverse was true. Men were favored for jobs in STEM and other fields, and in some cases, they still are. Thus, affirmative action for women and minorities does nothing more than level the playing field.

The counter to this is that it doesn't really matter who takes the job, because both the man and the woman have the same qualifications. People who make this argument claim to only give a shit about the quality of the work being done, rather than who does the work.

That's an admirable claim, really. But work does not exist in a vacuum. People do not exist in a vacuum. The bottom line is that there are certain groups of people who are oppressed in the world. Ignoring that fact, or choosing not to believe it, does not make it untrue. When you give people the opportunity to educate themselves, you allow them to exit the poverty they might have grown up in. But even then, you do not guarantee that they will get work in their chosen field. That's where Affirmative Action comes in. When you give, say, a woman the opportunity to be a scientist, you show other women, and even young girls, that it is possible to follow in her footsteps.

Affirmative Action is only about giving people something to look up to, about inspiring them to do their best. Frankly, I don't see how anyone can be against that.

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.