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.

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.

Men's Rights Memes Episode 16: Chivalry Is For Losers!

Hello and welcome to episode sixteen of Men's Rights Memes, the show where I correct the misinformation about feminism spread by the pathetic failures that make up the majority of the Men's Rights Movement. Without further ado, here is this episode's offending image.

Welcome to what is debatably the most common MRArgument. Heh. Do you like that pun? I do.

Anyway, the degenerate fucks in the MRM have a tendency to run their mouths off about how lady feminists call differential treatment of the sexes chivalry when it suits them and sexism when it doesn't. There are a couple of reasons as to why this is fucking stupid, and I'm going to tell you a few of them now. Down the rabbit hole we go!

Firstly, I'd like to tackle the most common example that MRAs bring up to support their assumption that chivalry is a female privilege. Namely, that of the Titanic, and more broadly the idea of 'women and children first.' It is true that women and children on the Titanic survived disproportionately to men, it is also the case that that people in the first class had a better survival rate than those in the third class. Thus, this issue probably relates to class more so than gender. Nobody's talking about that, though. It doesn't fit the MRA narrative!

But even in the context of gender, the MRAs are still incorrect. The study linked here suggests that the Titanic was the exception rather than the rule in maritime history.

Also, doesn't the very idea of 'women and children first,' and indeed chivalry in general, stem from the fact that women are regarded as the weaker sex? The only reason that men are expected to pay for dinner and do things of that nature is because of the outdated perception that women cannot take care of themselves. If feminists had their way, women would be on equal footing to men, and this idea would go away.

As for why women expect men to pay for dinner, well, I think it stems from the fact that the patriarchy has hammered the whole 'women are weak,' thing into our heads from birth. The idea is so culturally pervasive that it's difficult to escape or even notice it. The goals of feminism are to break down oppressive power structures, which would allow women to make more money and generally have more control over their own lives. How radical!

What I'm trying to say with all of this is simple: "Hey MRAs! If you want women to be less dependent on you, GET THE FUCK OUT OF THE WAY!"

Men's Rights Meme Episode 15: Do You Feel A Draft?

Hello and welcome to episode fifteen of Men's Rights Memes, the show where I take a sledgehammer to the arguments made by so-called 'Men's Rights Activists', or MRAs, where 'sledgehammer' is logic and 'arguments' are incoherent, paranoid ramblings. Without further ado, here is this episode's offending image.

Ah, yes. The draft argument. This archaic bit of tripe will be brought up by any MRA who is in a tight spot. Someone will have boxed them into an intellectual corner, and they will realize that they've got no way out. Then, given that most of them have about the same mental capacity as apes, they'll do what they do best: start flinging shit. This particular ball of verbal feces will often go something like this:

"ONLY MEN ARE ELIGIBLE FOR THE DRAFT. WOMEN AREN'T ELIGIBLE FOR THE DRAFT, THEREFORE FEMINISM IS EVIL. MEEH!"

The MRA will often scream his points, as if the volume of his voice is directly proportional to the veracity of his claims. This, unfortunately for simpletons everywhere, is not the case.

In order to argue this point seriously, you have to ignore an absolute mountain of evidence to the contrary. Luckily, MRAs aren't all too concerned with such trivial things as 'fact,' or 'historical data.'

But there's always the off chance that I'll get through to one of these fucktards someday, so let's go down the list of reasons why the existence of the draft isn't a valid argument against feminism.

First of all virtually every instance of any all-male draft in the history of the world has been voted on by a mainly or entirely male legislature, and has been enforced by a mainly or entirely male police force. It has also been conducted by a mainly or entirely male military hierarchy.

Yet somehow it's feminism's fault. Just try to wrap your head around that one!

Further, you'd have to just conveniently forget that it was feminists who argued against the draft on both sides of the Atlantic, and that feminists have argued against the barring of open homosexuals from serving in the military. This, too, has occurred in both America and Britain.

The implicit assertion made by the MRA is that only men die in wars, and that's why the draft is a bad thing. This is patently untrue. Many women also perished, especially after the industrial revolution flipped the ratio of military to civilian deaths. Even still, rape has been used as a weapon of war, largely by men against women.

But yeah, you crazy brave keyboard warriors keep clunking away.

Further reading:
http://male-feminist.tumblr.com/post/32522679726/why-using-the-draft-as-a-weapon-against-a
http://www.taphilo.com/history/war-deaths.shtml

Men's Rights Memes Episode 14: No Call For Equality

Hello and welcome to episode fourteen of Men's Rights Memes, the show where I expose the Men's Rights Movement for what it is. That is, a hate group made up of a bunch of whining assholes who will do just about anything to turn themselves into victims. How fun! Without further ado, here is this episode's offending image.

Oh, boy. Here we go with the old 'feminists are weak,' straw-man argument. This one is rather popular among some of the slower MRAs, by which I mean all of them. They claim that the feminist movement isn't really about equality, because they only call for change in the diversity of quote-unquote comfortable fields, such as politics, business, and STEM. According to these simpletons, this means that the feminist movement isn't really concerned with equality, just power. After all, if those dirty feminazis were really interested in furthering equality, they would encourage women to become garbage men or construction workers. Not only are they evil, conniving harpies, they're also too weak to perform the difficult, labor-intensive jobs! Checkmate, mangina!

In a world devoid of facts, history, or logic, that argument might actually make some sense. But we live in this little place known as reality, so this is not the case. Look, feminists do want power. The whole point of the movement is to empower women, for fuck's sake. That's why there's a call for more female CEOs, and more female politicians. The people who work in these fields have real clout. They can actually advocate for policies that elevate the standing of the female gender.

And, also, it's not particularly inspiring to see someone who looks exactly like you picking through trash all day. That's sad, and I'd very much like to have conversations about the relative powerlessness of the working class as opposed to the elite. But as it stands, there aren't enough women in  roles that people actually respect. The way to elevate the standing of a particular group is to put them in positions of power. That way, members of that group see that they, too, can succeed. Thus begins a self-sustaining cycle of equal opportunity.

That's what feminism is really about. It's about choice, and it's about opportunity.

It's got nothing to do with taking your fucking porn magazines away, you insufferable douchebags.

Men's Rights Memes Episode 13: Back to the Patriarchy

Hello and welcome to episode 13 of Men’s Rights Memes, the show where I sink my teeth into the twisted rhetoric of the reactionary children who make up the Men’s Rights Movement. I do that, so you don’t have to! Without further ado, here’s this episode’s offending image.

Now, this is one area where I actually find myself sympathizing with the Men’s Rights Movement. The suicide rate among men is substantially higher than that of women. That’s not something that the majority of people know, and I think it does need to be talked about more often.

The MRAs lose my support when they assert that feminism is somehow to blame for that being the case. Women are not evil harpies whose only goal is to make your life a living hell. I know this might shock the MRAs, but women are just people. In fact, that’s yet another problem that is caused directly by the patriarchy. I’ve written about this ad nauseum on this blog before, but I think it bares repeating here.

Almost from birth, men are taught that they must be these strong, stoic robots. Showing emotion is often considered a sign of weakness, and God forbid you cry. Then, you’ll be told to ‘man up.’ Repressing emotion is almost a prerequisite for being considered manly.

This, of course, results in a huge problem. When men or boys do have problems, they can’t talk about them. This results in them feeling as though they are trapped, and the only way out becomes suicide.

So if the Men’s Rights Movement really cared about helping men, they would advocate for a more open society in which discussing feelings is normal and accepted. But that’s the thing, they don’t care about men’s issues. Their ‘activism,’ and I use the term loosely, is nothing more than an excuse for them to harass women on the internet. It’s time we start treating them that way.

Men's Rights Memes Episode 12: Third Degree Burn

Hello and welcome to episode twelve of Men's Rights Memes, the show where I refute the paper-thin arguments made by misogynists on the internet, because I have a lot of time on my hands. Without further ado, here is this episode's offending image.

Okay, I've finished puking all over my floor, so I'm ready to take this thing on. This is a fairly common idea that I hear MRAs bring up. According to them, gender studies degrees are useless because there are no jobs that directly require you to have one in order to apply. That might be true, but I think the assertion that they are useless presents something of a falsehood. Even if there are no jobs specifically for gender studies majors, a degree in that subject does indicate to a prospective employer that you are less likely to make off-color jokes or sexually harass your female coworkers. It also signals that you have a good standard of English, given all of the reports required for classes. Those reports, by the way, necessitate a hell of a lot of research, and the interviewer will likely know that. Having a degree in gender studies shows work ethic on top of everything else.

All of those things sound like uses for a gender studies degree to me. Isn't that just so weird?

Also, there are plenty of people who go into fields completely unrelated to their university background. Education helps to deepen our understanding of the world, and there's nothing wrong with education for its own sake. Broadening our horizons is the most important thing we can do, and gender studies courses help in that regard. Frankly, it's not at all surprising that the MRAs haven't thought about this. They're not exactly known for caring about depth or, if we're being honest, reality in general.

Men's Rights Memes Episode 11: Slurring Your Words

Hello and welcome to episode eleven of Men's Rights Memes, the show where I subject myself to the insane bullshit spewed forth by the barely-human members of the Men's Rights hate group. Why do I do it? Well, my teachers always told me I could be anything I wanted, so I became a masochist. Without further ado, here is this episode's offending image.

That's right. In a first for the series, I'm featuring the same meme twice in a row. Last time, I used it to disprove the existence of a secret feminist cabal that runs the US government. But there's just so much more that's wrong with this, I can't let it go just yet.

There's a lot of misinformation about feminism contained within this meme, but I think the most insidious claim it makes is that feminists want to remove consequences from intoxicated women. No bullshitting here, reading that made me physically ill.

Feminists are not advocating that women have the right to drive drunk with no legal repercussions. What we do champion is the right for women to have fun at parties and not be sexually assaulted when passed out. Is that really too much to ask? That women not be raped?

So if you're ever looking for a way to judge the general character of the Men's Rights Movement, look no further than A Voice For Men literally blaming women for being raped. But remember, it's totally not a hate group.

For the slower members of my audience, who are more than likely MRAs themselves, that last bit was sarcasm.

Men's Rights Memes Episode 10: More Straw Than a Scarecrow

Hello and welcome to episode ten of Men's Rights Memes, the show where I introduce MRAs to the real world, as opposed to the paranoid delusions they've concocted for themselves out of red bull and cum-stained socks. Without further ado, here's this episode's offending image.

Wow, somebody's got an active imagination. If he turned his talents to writing, he'd fit right in with John C. Wright and the rest of the Sad Puppies.

This goes back to the long-held MRA talking-point that there's some secret organization of powerful females that run the world, and their only goal is to take power away from men. Apparently, this guy got hold of their clandestine agenda, and now he's releasing it to the world. What a hero! He's exactly like Edward Snowden! He's blown the lid off this whole crazy conspiracy!

Except, wait, no he fucking hasn't, because no such cabal actually exists. Let me prove that to you right now.

Here's the Supreme Court of the United States:

Notice how there are only two women currently sitting. That hardly screams massive conspiracy to me. But maybe the MRAS have a different definition. Let's keep going. Surely we'll uncover some evidence soon!

Let's look at the current roster of GOP congressmen. I have a picture of them right here, and somehow I doubt that it proves the MRAs point.

Nope, nope. I was right. There's only one lady in that picture. Damn. This really isn't going well for the MRAs, is it?

Well, maybe if we look even higher up, the trend will change. How about we examine the highest available office in the United States. If there were actually a secret female Illuminati controlling everything, every US President would be female, right?

See, no. They're all dudes, mostly white dues. It's almost as if women are an oppressed class, kept out of power, whether consciously or not, by the male ruling class. But even if that isn't the case, and everything is just a construct of the choices made by women, my point still stands. There is no anti-male conspiracy, or feminist infiltration of the government. Shocking, right?

Men's Rights Memes Episode Nine: Trials and Regulations

Hello and welcome to episode nine of Men’s Rights Memes, the show where I subject myself to the rhetoric of the Men’s Rights Movement, a group of people with moral compasses so skewed that they always point South. Since I can’t legally beat their heads in with a baseball bat, I’ve settled for eviscerating them with cold, hard logic. Without further ado, here’s this episode’s offending image.

Ha, ha, get it? Because women are gross! But no, we totally don’t hate women, you guys. It’s about equality! I know it might seem odd for me to harp on what was clearly meant to be a joke, and that the MRAs are just going to use this as ammo to reinforce their bullshit idea that political correctness is destroying comedy, but I can’t let this go.

First of all, the joke is shit. It doesn’t have anything interesting or insightful to say, it’s just spewing hate under the guise of humor. But also, I think it showcases a tactic that the MRAs are all too fond of employing when it suits them, and decrying when it doesn’t. Namely, the use of humor to undermine or invalidate the problems that women face in day-to-day life. Reproductive rights are under fire, but the creator of this meme doesn’t give a shit about that. He’s using an actual, negative experience as an excuse to be a dick to women.

Where else could this have come from but Paul Elam’s hate site, www.avoiceformen.com?

Wait, hold on. It occurs to me that this might not even be in jest. It probably is, but knowing how obtuse MRAs have been in the past, it’s entirely possible that this smug, entitled man-child doesn’t believe that there’s a war on women concerning reproductive rights. Stranger things have happened, after all.

There are a variety of tactics that anti-choicers have employed to stop women from having abortions, and none of them have been effective. After all, banning things doesn’t stop people from wanting or even obtaining them. If you believe otherwise, might I suggest that you research a little thing called the War on Drugs.

As an aside, I detest the term ‘pro-life’ even more than I hate the MRAs. Well, okay, that’s not quite true, but it’s close. If these people were really pro-life, they would vote to aid the impoverished and help fight racism. There are any number of things they could be doing to help people who are already living, ideally things that do not involve robbing women of bodily autonomy.

But back to the topic at hand. It seems fairly obvious to me that there is an ongoing attack on women's reproductive rights, particularly in America. The most recent example of this phenomenon is the effort by conservative politicians to defund Planned Parenthood, in the wake of a video that has since been labeled a hoax. That's not all, though. There are also these things called TRAP laws, which stands for "Target Regulation of Abortion Procedure." Basically, TRAPS are a collection of regulations that are imposed upon abortion clinics with the intent to have them closed down. More often than not, the laws have nothing to do with the actual safety of anyone involved. Mostly, it's about shit like the height of ceilings.

In light of all that, I think it's almost impossible to claim that sexism no longer exists in the Western world. There's an entire movement dedicated to taking basic healthcare away from women, for Christ's sake! 

See, what really burns me up about MRAs and antifeminists in general is that they always portray feminists as whiny, as if us talking about sexism is the problem, rather than, you know, the actual sexism itself. If they wanted as to stop ‘whining,’ as they put it, they could easily help advocate for reproductive rights and whatnot. If sexism were gone, we wouldn’t have to bring it up all the time. Everybody wins.

But no, by all means, continue to make sexist jokes.

Further Reading:
http://www.reproductiverights.org/project/targeted-regulation-of-abortion-providers-trap