Gavin McInnes thinks male violence feeds babies, explains to women what women think

Throw a little gasoline on the hipster sexism fire, folks — co-founder of Vice magazine* and “Godfather of hipsterdom,” Gavin McInnes threw a misogynistic tantrum on Huffington Post Live during a discussion about contemporary masculinity on Monday. Little known fact: Gavin McInnes is not only a scientist and knower of all facts, but he can SEE INSIDE OUR BRAINS, ladies. And what does he see? Misery.

McInnes drops so many truth bombs in the discussion that it’s hard to know where to begin, but his basic premise is that male aggression is natural and that feminism has made women miserable by forcing them to pretend to be men. You know how we all do that? Yeah. Well now we can stop. “You’re welcome” – Gavin McInnes.

It’s weird because I don’t have any babies and I hate doing chores, yet… strangely… I… feel… happy… what with my intact vagina, my ability to sleep in and the daily joy I experience when I don’t have to clean up another human being’s poo. I’m pretty sure McInnes would like to chalk me up to “anecdotal evidence,” if not for this little thing some of us like to call “history.”

Inside Gavin’s special little head, feminism has made women miserable. The problem with this argument is that, before feminism, women were miserable. And that’s why feminism was invented.

Let’s go ahead and assume that because one doesn’t need to actually read things in order to know ALL TRUE FACTS ABOUT EVERYTHING, Gavin has never heard of “the problem that has no name.” Don’t worry, little buddy. We’ll help you out on this one.

“The problem that has no name” is what Betty Friedan wrote about in her book, The Feminine Mystique. That book was published way back in 1963! (Seven short years before little Gavin would grace this earth with his omniscient presence.) Friedan surveyed women across America during the 50s (So that’s, like, fifty years ago, Gav. Way to stay abreast of cutting-edge research.) and found they were depressed and unfulfilled and didn’t know why. It was weird because they’d been told that fulfilling their “natural” roles as homemakers, mothers, and wives would bring them happiness. Turns out women had been fed a bunch of bullshit — coincidentally, the very same bullshit spewing out of Gavin’s mouth today.

As a professional scientist who knows all facts about everything, it’s odd that he would argue we go back fifty years and try something that already failed once, very badly.

Despite the millions of women around the world who aren’t supported by a male “breadwinner,” McInnes argues that men, indeed, are the breadwinners “in the majority of cases.” Lucky you, 10 million single mothers of the world! Lucky you, 15 million fatherless children in America! LUCKY YOU, EVERYONE! Gavin McInnes is telling the truth about REAL LIFE AND FACTS that fly in the face of history, statistics, and actual research. The courage it must take to blatantly lie in front of the entire world. *Swoooon* Ahem, I mean *blow jooobs*

Since only men run businesses and since men are naturally violent, it’s only reasonable to conclude that violence is necessary to make a living, which one needs to do in order to feed one’s families. ARE MEN SUPPOSED TO JUST LET US STARVE? That they do is beside the point. Also shush, Gavin is explaining science. Male violence is “crucial to our survival” and, as we all know, men are very, very concerned with women’s lives. Hence all the women murdered and beaten and raped by their loving husbands every day.

As we all know (but were afraid to cop to until Gavin McInnes liberated us just right this second), IT’S BEEN PROVEN that women are all miserable, thanks to what else but feminism (Making Women Miserable Since 1920™). It’s weird how he knows so much about what women think and need and feel, as a man. What’s even more weird is that he doesn’t even need to listen to the actual words that come out of women’s mouths in order to be able to see inside their pretty pink brains and know exactly what they want (spoiler: it’s to grow babies and clean Gavin McInnes’ house).

He exhibits this further by calling Mary Anne Franks, another panelist and a professor at the University of Miami School of Law, a “fucking idiot.” Okay girls, who spilled the beans? Next he’s going to figure out how much we love nonconsensual sex and being put in our place. SECRET’S OUT.

Franks points out that statistics show that both men and women are happier when they accept that there is no such thing as innate “femininity” or “masculinity.” In other words, there’s no such thing as a “male brain” or a “female brain.” Men aren’t “naturally” successful or aggressive just as women aren’t “naturally” passive homemakers.

Panelist, Micheal Addis, author of Invisible Men, aptly points out that what Gavin is doing (besides pounding his fists on the cave floor) is how masculinity works. Men are told they must behave in _____ way otherwise they will be called wimps, faggots, or (worst of all) “girls.” It’s those who define “masculinity” in a particular way who bully others into conforming. “This is called the policing of masculinity,” Addis says.

McInnes, of course, denies doing any of this (NO, NO, STUPID EVERYONE, HE’S DOING THE OPPOSITE) and claims we are simply “ignoring the vast majority of how people naturally behave.” Which is funny because it seems that, actually, Gavin is the one who is ignoring the vast majority of everything that’s actually true, scientifically proven, and statistically correct.

“You’re the ones doing the enforcing!” angry Gavin cries, before taking all his toys and stomping out of the room.

“You’ve got guys whose wives won’t even take their last names, who stay at home while the wife makes money… When you swing the pendulum so far away from the natural world, you all look like a bunch of fools.” Because, as we all know, in the “natural world” a lady orangutan’s father will walk her down the aisle in a white dress before sending her off into a life of domestic bliss as Mrs. Ape.

Gavin’s “gut” has told him that the “majority of women like being domestic and shaping lives,” and if anyone knows the real, inarguable truth about what women “like” it’s Gavin McInnes’ gut.

All joking aside, this guy is the whiniest, most childish, cry baby, bully asshole I’ve encountered in some time. I feel so fucking sorry for his wife. If he behaves this way in public I don’t even want to imagine how he behaves behind closed doors.

 

 

*McInnes left Vice in 2007 because of “creative differences.” Good fucking riddance.

 

 

 

Meghan Murphy
Meghan Murphy

Founder & Editor

Meghan Murphy is a freelance writer and journalist. She has been podcasting and writing about feminism since 2010 and has published work in numerous national and international publications, including New Statesman, Vice, Al Jazeera, The Globe and Mail, I-D, Truthdig, and more. Meghan completed a Masters degree in the department of Gender, Sexuality and Women’s Studies at Simon Fraser University in 2012 and lives in Vancouver, B.C. with her dog.

Like this article? Tip Feminist Current!

$
Personal Info

Donation Total: $1

  • cg11

    I watched this segment, and the whole time he was ranting about how big and strong and powerful and fighty men are, all I could think was “dude, I’m pretty sure I could kick your ass.”

    • Scott

      That’s because Gavin and his ilk (Greg Gutfeld comes to mind) are all insecure and projectionists. They want to blame everyone else for their own failings.

    • Henke

      🙂 Kicking his ass off this planet would be a nice thing to do.
      I get pretty uneasy emotions with me when listening to this kind of attitude, it always brings back the attitude the bullies had that was onto me during a few of my schoolyears. It will never go away.
      So even if he does not act like they do his attitude is pretty much the same and it triggers my senses and thoughts.

      • Rick

        “Kicking his ass off this planet would be a nice thing to do.”

        Jesus, why? Because you disagree with him? Because he expresses his opinion that’s different than yours?

        You want him off the planet for that?

        Really?

        Who’s the bully here? Who’s really acting like a fascist?

        • SN

          Spoken like a man… There’re opinions, Rick, and then there’s out and out pigheaded misogyny. A few less misogynists in the world wouldn’t be a bad thing.

        • Liz

          *snort*

  • It must be rough, having it pointed out that you are an abusive jerk, and with such panache. Bad women, making fun of poor Gavin! You probably ruined his WHOLE MINUTE.

    Back to your kitchens, all of you. lmao.

  • What a funny fellow!

  • Aims

    I love how he uses “his gut” as evidence, then rudely dismisses the “anecdotal evidence” of the other guest’s wife being happy as a professor of medicine. Gavin’s gut knows better than any real-life woman!!!

    • Meghan Murphy

      Right? His “gut” is more right about women’s thoughts and lives then actual women’s thoughts and lives.

  • The “scientific” justification of sexism has a very long and ugly history. One would hope it would have been abandoned by scientists by now, but they have not purged their ranks of that nonsense. Otherwise the likes of Mr. McInnes, and Steven Pinker, and Larry Summers would not get any respect from their colleagues. On the contrary, at least Summers is highly respected by the last two Democratic Presidents.

  • Nikola

    Maybe you helped him succeed in what he was trying to do.
    Maybe some people are just out there to get a rise and rant out of you.
    Maybe you played into his silly game.
    People love shock value and some people make a living from it.
    Probably you’ve created more awareness of Gavins career.
    Probably making him more money in the end.

    As much as i dont agree with everything he says he is entertaining.
    Thank you for keeping the Gavin train chugging!

  • Canaduck

    ““You’ve got guys whose wives won’t even take their last names…”

    QUELLE HORREUR

    Any guy who allows that to happen must be a giant vagina who actually respects his wife’s right to make incredibly basic decisions about her identity. What a freakin’ girl!

    • Morgan

      The outrage at that made me laugh so much. Hey dudes, if the WORST thing you have to “deal with” is women NOT taking your last name?? YOU’RE WELCOME, because clearly feminism hasn’t done nearly enough to shake the power base.

      Gavin, we’ve got so much more planned for you.

  • lizor

    Hilarious blog post Meghan. I think Vice was the first place I saw American Apparel ads and I associate the beginnings of the magazine – I think it was a sort of neo-capitalist vertical integration enterprise that went alongside selling overpriced skateboard duds and gear – with the emergence of AA.

    … McInnes and Charvey leading the new wave of Keepin’ The Ladeez Down!™ (also known as the BJs On Tap Movement).

    How do dudes like this get in on these discussions? It seems like being a loudmouth idiot (with some coin and a penis) = credentials to discuss power differentials. I. do. not. get. it.

  • Fuck gavin, his schtick is old by two decades, but what is up with this sentence: “It’s weird because I don’t have any babies and I hate doing chores, yet… strangely… I… feel… happy… what with my intact vagina.” Maybe someone needs to spend some more time reading Our Bodies, Ourselves. Women who have had babies have intact vaginas.

    • Meghan Murphy

      Most women tear during childbirth. Vaginas heal, but what I was alluding to was the toll reproduction takes on women’s bodies.

      • vouchsafer

        I thought the intact vagina thing was out of line as well. Some. Some women tear during childbirth. A feminist blog is a strange place to be othering them over it. The malestream does that enough.

        • vouchsafer

          Besides, only a Virgin is intact.

        • Meghan Murphy

          I hear and respect that criticism. That said, honestly one of the biggest reasons I don’t want to reproduce is that I don’t want to go through the pain of childbirth. The idea of a baby coming out of my vagina seems nightmarish to me. And that was what I meant by that line. No one talks about the toll child birth takes on women’s bodies (well, women do, among themselves I suppose) — society seems to take it for granted that women should have to go through all that pain and distress and make it out to be some kind of magical experience (which, I’m sure it is for *some* women — but for most it is very painful). For me, the idea of a third or fourth degree tear is a deterrent. It isn’t *just* that I don’t want a baby living in my house.

          • vouchsafer

            I hear and respect that too, and recall that same fear, but honestly, childbirth is really, really not that bad most times. I think the fear comes from movies and tv shows, disgusted observers recoiling in horror, crazed mamas acting deranged with the pain. All of it a completely over the top misrepresentation designed to make women appear dirty or animalistic.
            And it does get intense, in real life, but there is empowerment in that moment as well, the power to give life, to create. Its no surprise that the patriarchy’s media seeks to render that moment ridiculous when it’s anything but.

          • Meghan Murphy

            That’s good to know. Thanks for sharing your perspective/experience. As someone who has never gone through childbirth before, it’s always just seemed terrifying to me. But your point about feeling empowered by the process is actually something I’ve heard from many of my friends who’ve given birth, so that’s a good point/reminder.

          • cg11

            At the same time I think it is an important part of radical feminism that we acknowledge how extremely dangerous and painful childbirth is for most women. I think it is incorrect for someone to come on here and state that MOST women don’t experience these horrors in childbirth because in fact MOST do and a lucky FEW do not.

  • Missfit

    Haha! That was funny. Two calm, clever and articulate people debating this infuriated, insulting man who’s only argument was shouting ‘nature’. Define nature: how I want the world to be. Oh, and his other argument: his gut. The thing with these guys is that you can present them 50 women saying they’re happy working and would not want to be a housewife versus one woman who says the contrary, they will reject the testimony of the 50 women as anectodal and hold the other woman as an irrefutable proof of what they say (‘see: nature!’).

    I would not want to go back to the 50s. I work, I like being financially independant, and I am a mother on top of that. One reason I feel miserable sometimes is having to deal with everyday sexism, violence against women, living in a porn culture. I need more feminism!

    And when he says ‘you’re going against thousands of years of evolution!’, I would correct that by thousands of years of patriarchy. We actually want to evolve!

    • Meghan Murphy

      Hilarious right? And his arguments about “nature” don’t even hold up. I wish these morons would stop getting platforms but his legions of idiot fans show that he isn’t the only one who wants desperately to believe this garbage/cling to the past. Gross.

  • rara

    P.O.S

  • Joe

    It’s funny when guys shout “NATURE”, “EVOLUTION” or “OUR PAST” when trying to justify sexism.These men seem to completely ignore non-European cultures. Many of the First Nations people of North America were MATRILINEAL. Many tribes/groups had WOMEN as chiefs. In Wendat culture, when a couple united, the man went to live with the WOMAN and her family. The “male dominance is NATURE/GOD’S way” argument is ridiculous and patently false. Choosing to acknowledge ONLY the evidence that supports your opinion is intellectually dishonest. On behalf of men everywhere, I offer my apologies to women for this McInnes guy.

    • Meghan Murphy

      Word. Not all cultures everywhere and always have been patriarchal.

  • sporenda

    “Vaginas heal, but what I was alluding to was the toll reproduction takes on women’s bodies.”

    The physical damages incurred during pregnancy and delivery don’t necessarily heal. Some definitely don’t, several of my friends who had children were suicidal after giving birth, the baby blues is not a myth; one of them jumped under a car, fortunately she survived.
    Another has to pee every hour due to some damage to her bladder, and I am not even talking of the hard time shedding the weight, the flab and folds around the waist etc.
    Being pregnant changes your body forever, and not for the best.
    A guy I knew when I was young said something that stuck in mt mind: this dude was a journalist (in a Leftwing newspaper), quite a bit older than me and he proposed that we have sex, thinking he would make his case stronger by revealing that he and his wife had 4 kids, but he no longer felt any desire for her, because the pregnancies made her flabby and old looking.

    Needless to say, I turned down this creep, but he taught me a lesson: pregnancies wear you out, and then to most men you are just an old bag that has fulfilled his role and must be discarded like a kleenex.
    I already knew that I did not want any children then but that confirmed my decision.

    Having children is not only fulfilling a function absolutely essential for the continuation of society as it is (therefore in a way the continuation of male dominance over women), it means also unfortunately being reduced to this reproductive function by society.
    In other words it is being instrumentalized, being defined by the services you can provide, just like a cow for the milk or an appletree for the apples.
    It should not be that way, but it’s still that way.
    Also it’s bringing into this world a new batch of the very people–men–that are responsible for your oppression.

    Whether for the pain and degradation of body, for the instrumentalization for bringing into this world more of my oppressors, or for the discrimination of women who have children in the workplace (the mommy tax), I can’t be so blind to my own self interest as to accept to give birth.

    When I was a kid, I tried to figure out why women were treated as inferiors by men–it seemed odd to me because in my experience women were just as intelligent as men if not more and in any case, they had more common sense and were far less crazy and destructive.

    I came to the conclusion that it’s for reasons:
    – inferior physical strength
    – having kids

    Having kids is not only physically trying, patriarchy uses it against women to keep them down (barefoot and pregnant is the really way it want them to be).
    Imagine the power women could gain if they went on reproductive strike and decided they would not have any more kids until they got equal rights.
    Maybe we could get what we want quite a bit faster then…

    • Meghan Murphy

      I just love how men impregnate us, force us to bear and raise their children, and then deride us for being ‘old and flabby’ after the pregnancy changes our bodies. GOOD TRICK GUYS. I am so into this reproductive strike idea.

    • vouchsafer

      I can’t even believe what I”m reading.

      “shedding the weight, the flab and folds around the waist etc.
      Being pregnant changes your body forever, and not for the best.”

      What, so you’re going to assign female worth value based on women’s bodies now, sporenda, and discount those that don’t measure up to the masculinized ideal of flat abs? And then you got the nerve to talk about “Who’s internalizing the patriarchy??

      if bearing the marks of childbirth renders women somehow less than human in your mind, and you want to avoid babies so that you can keep your nice trim abdomen so that you can “get what you want from guys a bit faster,” and if this seems like a good idea to the rest of you, then maybe I’m on the wrong fucking site after all.

      Has Femen taken over the Feminist Current???????

      Peace y’all. Thanks for the fucking memories.

      • Meghan Murphy

        Well my point was not that bearing the marks of childbirth ‘make women less human’ but that men want us to bear their children and then reject us and dehumanize us when we do…

        • Me

          I think the contrast if us men did the opposite couldn’t be starker. Women alone can’t change the social and cultural meaning and function of childbearing and rearing (unless it’s by abstinence). That’s not to say I don’t value very highly the women who are able to impart a kind of women and life affirming outlook on their children and families.

      • Sabrina L.

        Um, you missed a key part of the comment you were quoting:
        “AND I AM NOT EVEN TALKING of the hard time shedding the weight, the flab and folds around the waist etc.
        Being pregnant changes your body forever, and not for the best.”

        She was not talking about the superficial “marks of childbirth.” She was talking about bodily damage, as in damage to an internal organ namely the bladder. As for the abs you’re talking about…I am far from the flat abs of the idealized male gaze, but it freaks me the fuck out, the idea of the abdominal muscles separating (diastasis recti). There are very real physical changes that happen due to pregnancy and childbirth, both temporary and lasting, and it is ridiculously delusional to pretend any of it is an any way beneficial to the physical body of the mother. Even if it were to be only minor cosmetic changes that happen, having my body change so dramatically so quickly is a terrifying prospect. I have a friend who gained massive amounts of weight fairly rapidly not due to pregnancy…it was due to a tumor on her pituitary gland. In other words, never mind the cosmetic and social implications of the weight gain…it indicated something was horribly horribly wrong.
        I’m glad you like being a mommy and don’t wish the think of your magical pregnancy as anything but a realization of your inner earth mother goddess, the fruitful life-force bringing new life into the world. Mazel tov on your offspring. Someone’s got to do it, I suppose, and I’m glad you weren’t forced into it. Or maimed because of it. Or suicidal as a result of it. And had the resources to have safe options for the ordeal, should anything go awry.
        But to shut down women talking about the dangerous and traumatic realities of pregnancy and childbirth? Mistaking women’s fear of giving their bodies over to a purpose that serves someone other than herself for …I don’t even know…wanting a cute bod so she has value in this patriarchal society? Yeah you’re on the wrong site.

    • Henke

      “…and then to most men you are just an old bag that has fulfilled his role and must be discarded like a kleenex…”

      All I can say regarding this is to hell with such men. They are a disgrace for the humanrace.

    • Missfit

      I care less about what my mid-thirties post-delivery body looks like than when I was in my twenties with a body more in tune with the patriarchal ideal. I have radical feminism to thank for decolonizing my mind. I think the best way to rebel against the patriarchy is not by avoiding what patriarchy devalues, but by valuing what it devalues. I read recently about something called ‘mommy makeover’, which is supposedly gaining in popularity… Not caring, that would be truly rebellious! Imagine, women, all in it together, not caring!

      When guys like Gavin talk about the glory of motherhood, it is for two reasons. First, by emphasizing motherhood, they are not talking about parenthood, leaving women with the task of caring after children. Because men don’t want to be bother with this; they have more important things to do. All the while claiming that raising the next generation is the most important thing there is… Secondly, they don’t value motherhood for the sake of motherhood because if that was the case, they would support all mothers, the single ones, the working ones. They value motherhood in the context of the traditional nuclear family, again not for motherhood’s sake, but for the power it gives individual men over women and children.

      I know we are talking rhetorically, but I don’t think a reproductive strike would ever work because men can, and would, impregnate women by force. We need to truly value motherhood, truly support mothers. Feminists are in the best position to bring changes through that direction.

      As for raising our oppressors… I have a daughter so I don’t personally have to deal with that thought. But I read Phyllis Chesler’s ‘With child: a diary of motherhood’. Her son signed the preface and he wrote that he identifies as a radical feminist. Everything is possible.

      • Meghan Murphy

        “When guys like Gavin talk about the glory of motherhood, it is for two reasons. First, by emphasizing motherhood, they are not talking about parenthood, leaving women with the task of caring after children. Because men don’t want to be bother with this; they have more important things to do. All the while claiming that raising the next generation is the most important thing there is… Secondly, they don’t value motherhood for the sake of motherhood because if that was the case, they would support all mothers, the single ones, the working ones. They value motherhood in the context of the traditional nuclear family, again not for motherhood’s sake, but for the power it gives individual men over women and children.”

        YES! Gavin and his ilk “value” mothers/motherhood so long as motherhood reinforces patriarchy, but certainly when if motherhood exists outside a paradigm that leaves mothers dependent on men/without real autonomy.

      • Scott

        I wish you had written something like “Because he thinks men …” rather than “Because men don’t want to be bother[sic] with this”.

        What you wrote reads like the sort of generalization that I believe led to the apparently common idea that feminists hate men, and thus to the sad state of affairs that so many Western women will declare that they don’t identify as feminist. Ideally, everyone who does not believe either that women should be subservient to men or should fulfill only certain roles in society (e.g., primary school teacher, nurse) would freely identify as feminist.

  • Rob

    Pregnancy and childbirth are products of patriarchy?

    • Meghan Murphy

      No, but the way women are treated to due to the fact that they reproduce/can reproduce is.

  • Rob

    I can understand that, but is a “reproductive strike” really the best way to gain equality between us in terms gender roles. I mean, obviously we all know that pregnancy/childbirth is a biological function rather than a social one, and patriarchy is a function of society, so how would every woman on the planet benefit from a reproductive strike? Don’t get me wrong i know that traditional patriarchy is/has treats women like walking baby factories/child rearers, but let’s look at it from the other side, i’m a male and i have absolutely zero interest in having kids – ever; not because of the obvious pain and physical hardship that a women goes through gestating that fetus for 9 months and giving birth (although, i consider that a damn good reason for a woman to choose not to have children), but because i don’t want to burden MYSELF with the emotional/social/financial cost of bringing a child into this world. Let’s face it, there are lots of men out there that FORCE their wives/girlfriends to have abortions even if the woman herself WANTS to keep the baby, some women have even been murdered because of it. Don’t get me wrong, i have zero issues with a woman choosing to terminate her pregnancy, but the choice should be her’s alone to make.

    The reason i choose to post was because something sporenda said struck me as very odd: “also, it’s bringing into this world a new batch of the very people-men-that are responsible for your oppression” – but surely she realizes that about half of those births would be of girls, and even if that child was a male wouldn’t he be lucky to have a mother that could instill feminist values in him? Again don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to attack Sporenda for her opinion, nor am i trying to compare my desire to not have children with your desire to not have children; for you it’s the burden/pain of gestation and childbirth, for me it’s because i like to have free weekends.

    However, regardless of the reasons why some of us as individuals rightfully choose to not be parents, you can’t reasonably deny the fact that childbirth, however painful for females, is absolutely necessary for the continuation of the human species – obviously. In other words: I don’t believe it would be just men that would suffer from a “reproductive strike” No doubt there are many men that desire to keep women “barefoot and pregnant” as a form of subjegation; unfortunatly I’ve come into contact with more than a few, but I’m not going to take issue with women that choose to give birth, and perhaps more importantly, attempt to instill in those children some sense of social responsablity.

    I understand this is a sensitive subject,and that there are legitimate concerns with the whole “but it’s my choice dammit!” attitude of many of us liberals, (and just to be clear I consider myself a liberal, not a radical), but is there a general consensus among radical feminists, that women who choose to have children are actually internalizing patriarchy?

    • Meghan Murphy

      I don’t think that women who choose to have children are choosing to internalize patriarchy… Women like children and families, too… BUT women get the short end of the stick because of the fact that they are the ones who must bear the children and men aren’t. We have a lot of power in that regard and men know it. Which is why they have done everything in their power to ensure women have no financial independence and aren’t able to survive, with their kids, without male “support.” It hasn’t always been like that in other cultures (and still isn’t like that in all cultures) as communities/families help raise/take care of kids.

    • marv

      @Rob. I have yet to see a strike that is permanent. So our species would continue. Climate change may cause our demise though, brought on by male power and its economic institutions. It is also obvious patriarchal rule has lead to overpopulation via marriage, overvaluing fertility, enforced pregnancies and births and engineering classes which creates economic inequality (poverty). The strike would lower the population and result in real social gains for women if the uprising was not suppressed by men. As a bonus other species and the environment would benefit from a smaller human presence, especially if the strike reduced the number of high consuming affluent men (who are typically caucasian). Anyway the discussion is academic, sadly, since such a strike is remote.

      Furthermore, fathers are the ones responsible for instilling feminist values in their sons not the mothers. Males are obligated to educate the males, and to stop placing the burden on women to do it.

  • Rob

    -wait, weren’t we supposed to be talking about how much of a douche Gavin McInnes is

  • Rob

    but seriously though, even though I’m a fan of VICE, McInnes is a douche for complaining about traditional gender roles, just sayin

    • Meghan Murphy

      Vice has actually improved since his departure. Which isn’t to say that there isn’t still all sorts of misogynist shit in there, but they have far better content than they used to (on top of the misogyny). The Ghost Rapes story was amazing, for example.

  • sporenda

    “The reason i choose to post was because something sporenda said struck me as very odd: “also, it’s bringing into this world a new batch of the very people-men-that are responsible for your oppression” – but surely she realizes that about half of those births would be of girls, and even if that child was a male wouldn’t he be lucky to have a mother that could instill feminist values in him? Again don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to attack Sporenda for her opinion”

    What always struck me as very odd is that without women, men would not exist.
    Women are the only oppressed class that breed, nurture and raise their own oppressors.
    It’s so obvious that nobody sees it, nobody ever talks about it.
    And yes, half of these births are girls–actually not quite because more girls than boys are aborted due to the fact that girls are seen as less desirable. But what if women decided to abort male fetuses instead of females, for a change?

    And mothers alone can’t instill feminist values in their male children against a whole deeply misogynistic society:
    firstly because they are themselves formated by the patriarchal society they live in. Women in patriarchal societies have to become enforcers of patriarchal rules if they want to survive; it’s women who abort female fetuses, who organize forced marriages and who excise little girl’s clits.

    Second because boys quickly realize that power is on the male side and choose to betray their caring and nurturing mothers to claim their right to male power.
    In fact, betraying the mother and siding with (the values of) the father/patriarchy is the turning point in the process of becoming a real man.

    Regarding this guy, McInnes, I don’t watch Vice so I can’t really comment.
    Just one remark: I noticed that the men who are the fiercest defenders of male power are the ones who have no other asset than the mere fact of possessing a penis: not very smart, not highly educated, not very good looking, not athletic, not terribly successful professionnally etc.
    Wether this dude fits this description to a tee or not, it looks like deep down, he thinks so little of himself that, if society was not rigged in favor of males, he believes females would take over.

    Also, from what I have read, McInnes has made quite a few racist comments. Racism and sexism often go hand in hand.

  • Rob

    “what always struck me as odd is that without women, men would not exist”

    Now, i’m not a reproductive biologist but i’m pretty sure men play some role in human procreation.

    Again Sporenda, i’m not trying to sound like an asshole, but the exact opposite of what you said is also true; speaking strictly in a biological sense; without men, women wouldn’t exist. However you’re exactly correct in saying that many of those cute male babies grow up and betray their mothers by doing misogynistic shit, but what’s the solution? You mentioned the fact that in many societies pregnancies which result in female offspring are often aborted because females are seen as less desirable than males, and wonder out loud what if women started aborting only their male fetuses for a change? it’s a legit question to ask I think. I mean if there are people who abort their female fetuses because their “less desirable”; shouldn’t a woman be able to do the same to her male fetus?

    Sporenda, you mentioned the fact that women are the only oppressed class that breed, nurture, and raise their own oppressors; but what if it didn’t have to be that way? Thanks to genetic engineering we can now create offspring with our desired genetic traits, including sex. Now i don’t believe this technology is yet legal, but it certainly exists. So if a woman had the means of controlling the sex of her offspring would that offset the obvious physical/emotional trauma of pregnancy/childbirth, at least from a feminist perspective?

    I realize i’m a dude and this is a feminist blog which means it’s not about what i think (no shit), but would i be wrong in saying that patriarchy is, fundamentally, the result of how men perceive women (and their associated biological traits) rather than those physical traits themselves? So wouldn’t the solution to patriarchy be changing what men do socially(to women) rather than changing what women do (or are) in a biological sense? i know that women shouldn’t be defined by their ability to bear children, but i also realize that a women who chooses not to have children, or even engage in hetero sex, has to live with certain biological reminders of the fact that they can (menstrual cycles).

  • sporenda

    “Now, i’m not a reproductive biologist but i’m pretty sure men play some role in human procreation.
    Again Sporenda, i’m not trying to sound like an asshole, but the exact opposite of what you said is also true; speaking strictly in a biological sense”.

    I don’t see you as an asshole.

    Men play a very minor role in human procreation.
    Whereas women’s bodies are necessary (so far) to create (incubate) babies, men’s bodies are not.
    Only their sperm is. So one could very well imagine some sort of scifi scenario where, like in animal husbandry, only a few selected males would be kept to breed. Which is the case to an extent in a number of primate species in the wild.

    But that’s not my point: what I wanted to underline is the absurdity of the fact that women give birth to their own oppressors, a totally unique situation when it comes to oppression.
    Think about it: women breed men, men enslave women, women want to free themselves from the tyrants they themselves created.
    Breeding (men) is completely against women’s best interest; and men’s behavior as a group is grossly unethical: major biting the hand that feeds you.
    But nobody seems to mind, women keep having babies, men suck up women’s energies, treat them very badly for it and women keep supporting and loving them nevertheless. Stockholm syndrome as the cornerstone of society.

    • T.

      “Men play a very minor role in human procreation.”

      Actually, you should really revisit that assumption. I’m pretty certain sperm is needed to procreate.

      “Someone could very well imagine some sort of scifi scenario where, like animal husbandry, only a few selected males would be kept to breed.” You still need male sperm in this scenario to complete the process, even if the sperm is from a select few.

      Certainly this “breeder” scenario is the case for a few species in the wild but I’m pretty sure none of those species are primates, let alone mammals. Perhaps you should compare like species to like species, not primates to insects.

      Secondly, men do not “enslave” woman. There does not appear to be force, intimidation, duress, or threats of violence to keep woman doing…what exactly? The whole point of enslavement is to get the slave in question to accomplish goals and complete tasks. What exactly is the enslavement and oppression meant to accomplish here? Making sandwiches? Is the whole of contraption of patriarchal oppression of woman is to…what? Breed? If that’s your point your problem isn’t with men, it’s with nature. Men didn’t design the uterus. Men didn’t “invent” the vagina or sexual reproduction. Men didn’t nefariously instill woman with eggs or sexual desire.

      That’s all mother nature.

      • marv

        For someone who is so self righteous in defending males’ essential role in nature you discredited yourself by using the sexist descriptor, “mother nature”.

  • Pingback: Does aggression define manhood? | Violent metaphors()

  • The lack of logic in these comments kind of sums up everything “sexists” are saying. You are all mad in every sense of the word. You don’t want women giving birth to men? Uh, how exactly is this going to work out? As with the sound problems at Lilith Fair concerts, you guys are accidentally proving the opposite of what you’re setting out to prove.

    • Me

      Haha, clicked on his link. Might be just a wee bit triggering for many, but really speaks for itself. He’s flattering himself calling himself “sexist.”

  • sporenda

    “You don’t want women giving birth to men? ”

    Nobody said that.
    Clearly, you have not understood a word of what was said above.
    You are incriminating the lack of logic of these comments, it’s your own lack of basic capacity to get the meaning of simple words and sentences you should incriminate.

  • T.

    Actually, I think the man has a point.

    Violence protected and propelled the species to the station it enjoys today. If it wasn’t for the aggressive tendencies of the male of our species, it is highly likely humanity would not have thrived to the degree which it has.

    There appears to be few, if any, matriarchal hunter/gatherer tribes (defined here as woman being the primary hunter/warrior class) which has stood the test of time. If there were, there’s a reason why we don’t know about them – they were most likely erased from existence.

    Further, I’m extremely concerned by neo-femisim’s apparent rejection of biological and Darwinian science. Neo-feminism continues to devolve into ivory-tower naval gazing, issuing indictments not only of cultural male biases, but now science itself.

    • Scott

      I think the evidence for your assertion about violence is tenuous at best, and so too the notion that the useful violence was based in a uniquely or even predominately male aggressive tendency.

      Even if we decide that the evidence of history indicates that natural male aggressiveness and patriarchal organization of society have promoted human progress on the whole, does accepting this require that we continue to support and even celebrate such social organization, subordinating female to male and feminine to masculine, as obviously the superior form for all contexts, regardless of technological, psychological, or philosophical development?

      I find that both sides in the panel – especially McInnes and Franks – would generalize in the extreme – McInnnes that women are forced to pretend to be men, Franks that McInnes insists things have to be a certain way. Both of them constructed straw man arguments. I wish Franks and maybe the others had more directly addressed McInnes actual assertions – for instance, that feminism (I assume that was the target of McInnes’ accusation) forces women to act like men.

      There have been and are matriarchal societies, but in recorded history certainly patriarchal organization has dominated. The victor gets to record the history: maybe patriarchal organization leads to and promotes military innovation and discipline more than matriarchal or egalitarian organization does. Does that make patriarchy more natural, or “better”, for the species as a whole?

      I’m not sure what you’re attacking with your criticisms of “neo-feminism” – who has indicted “science itself”, and how have they done that – first, within this comment thread, then, in other fora? I don’t see that any comments here express rejection of human biology or Darwin’s theory of evolution based on natural selection. Please enlighten me.

      • marv

        @T. In reality McInnes’ whole life is pointless. Here is what you should have said:
        “Further, I’m extremely concerned by” neo-patriarchy’s “apparent rejection of” feminist cultural critiques and sensible science.
        Neo-patriarchy “continues to devolve into ivory-tower naval gazing, issuing indictments not only of” feminism, “but now science itself”.

        Patriarchy is no more natural than feudalism, slavery and colonialism. Your pseudo science and social analysis completely undermine your credibility. It puts you in the same crackpot category as climate science deniers.

  • Pingback: If prostitution isn’t about lonely, undersexed men, what is it about? (Or, Justin Bieber doesn’t need to pay for sex) | Feminist Current()

  • Wand-Princess

    As a “male” I see nothing but hope and inspiration from the Feminist movement so villainized by the patriarchy of “mainstream” America. All the ugly mudslinging in the world will never diminish the courage the Feminist Movement inspires in me.

    Growing up in a sexually-abusive, trans-phobic environment, Feminism challenges me to leave the victim-mentality and see the bigger picture of amazing Women and Girls all over the world overcoming the worst of adversities and turning that pain into triumph, strength and EMPOWERMENT.

    To me, there is no such thing as “too radical” of Feminism. The patriarchy is the instrument of oppression for all who don’t belong to the 1% of monied swine who stir up a pig-pen for the rest of society with their Golden Phallus.

    I see feminism as THE most important civil rights movement in all of OURstory (history is a prism of lies and propaganda with a blatant patriarchal tone)

  • “Because, as we all know, in the “natural world” a lady orangutan’s father will walk her down the aisle in a white dress before sending her off into a life of domestic bliss as Mrs. Ape.”

    I take issue with the fact this made me spit tea all over my keyboard and sent me into a fit of snort laughing while my colleagues looked in bemusement.

    Great article, five stars, would read again, would recommend to a friend.