The victims of anti-rape campaigns: Men on sexodus

Between the pulling of Grand Theft Auto V from Target Australia and the increasing number of women who want to be treated like humans, men are under attack like never before.

A widely-read article by Milo Yiannopoulos, published at Breitbart, recently decried the excruciating oppression facing men, who, with the advent of women’s right to work and vote, are no longer able to use “girls” to solve their problems. A travesty of the highest sort. The author quotes one man:

“[it] wouldn’t be so bad if we could at least dull the pain with girls. But we’re treated like paedophiles and potential rapists just for showing interest”

These men claim they are earning less money, have less retirement funds and now, have to deal with “girls” who expect to be treated with respect. It’s unthinkable, really.

These men cannot even shop safely at Target anymore, knowing their right to prostitute and murder women within their gaming world is being scrutinized. What’s next? Equal pay? This madness has to stop.

Yiannopoulos informs us that women, surely, are the driving force behind decreasing social mobility, political disillusionment, and the fragmentation of the liberal democratic system. Presumably women’s rights are also to blame for the melting of the polar ice caps and the declining number of wild bees.

Apparently if women had never started with this “right to vote” bullshit, none of this would have happened.

The author has surely confused “feminism” with rampant capitalism, advanced globalization and the dearth of state governance. Undeterred by his errors, the author presents his case for why men are the real victims of the systems they created in order to maintain their own supremacy.

I agree with him on one thing: the pale male purveyors of globalized capitalism have shat in their own nests. But it’s not because of women that the systems underpinning capitalism are crumbling from the inside out.

The global economic system and its political counterparts are in a crisis of their own making. Women rallying to end rape have very little to do with this.

Yet according to Yiannopoulos, they do. Those pesky anti-rape seminars at American colleges are ruining men’s willingness to rape and with it their entire lives and the social fabric of society. Ironic then that he accuses women of hysteria…

The idea that rape is a central feature of the broader economic system is actually an important one. Yet the author fails to engage with this in any meaningful way (obviously).

If we consider that rape in marriage was legal up until recent decades in most OECD countries, or that rape is a necessary product of the global sex trade, or that rape is a systemic tool in war, or that rape convictions are near enough to nil in most countries, then it should be clear that ending rape would require a massive shift in global relations.

Ending rape, then, requires a radical revisioning of the systems that govern society and an acknowledgement of women as co-creators.

The idea that women may no longer be passive recipients of male-centric political, legal and economic systems is likely to unsettle those men who pin their egocentric notions of self-worth on traditional power relations over women.

Men who’ve sat at the pinnacle of such power relations may be disillusioned by the growing complexity and diversity around them. Perhaps they are asking “Why are black people in my workplace?”… “How could this woman be my manager and why can’t I force her into sex?” Apparently, some men have found themselves directly confronted by the notion that men should not rape. In fact, the author goes to the extent of calling new anti-rape law “unworkable, prudish and downright misandrist.”

Unsurprisingly, Yiannopoulos fails to provide any actual data to back up his woman-hating rhetoric. First person narrative from his bros who can’t be bothered with “chicks” anymore is enough to justify his hysterical claims that the world falling to pieces because “rape law.”

As luck would have it, this freshly-laid pile of anecdotal excrement is well-received by thousands of readers, none of whom seem to notice the stark lack of substantive evidence.

This stands in contrast to any article ever written on women’s rights, which is immediately torn apart by commenter-turned-statisticians who question the limitations of methodology, the lack of strength in p-values and repeat the only thing they remember from the research methods course they took in first year — “correlation is not causation.” Strangely, few seem to care for empiricism when it is women’s rights under fire.

We live in a society so accustomed to misogyny that the slightest move in favour of women’s human rights is misinterpreted as female supremacy. If precedent is anything to go by, these new misandry-laden rape laws will still see only a very small percentage of rapists ever being charged — hardly female supremacy at work. And the removal of GTA from a few retailers does not actually censor the world of depraved gaming, it merely sends a message about social responsibility.

The fact is that sex crimes against women are on the rise in many countries, self-harm, suicide and eating disorders in girls are burgeoning, and sex trafficking of the vulnerable is a booming business. Young women are under more sexual coercive pressure from men than ever before. There is no male ‘sexodus’ and in fact research suggests quite the opposite. The idea that men are now somehow suffering because rape laws make them feel rejected is surely hysteria at its peak.

Next week Breitbarf [sic] has a special follow-up feature: “Why women are the biggest victims of women’s rights.” I can hardly wait.

 

Laura McNally is a psychologist, consultant, author and PhD candidate. Her current research examines the political and social implications of global corporate social responsibility. Find more of her work at lauramcnally.com.

 

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

  • derrington

    Girls arent under sexual coercive pressure as much as sexist coercive pressure. This mans article reads like the sound of nails dragging down the face of withdrawn privelege. For thousands of years men have told us we are too thick to educate, too dumb to drive, too frightened to fight for ourselves, too emotional to vote. Now that we are proving them wrong and fighting for our right to do as much as we can for ourselves, they are screaming at us that we are taking their need to protect us and dominate us away. It is they who need a disempowered, uneducated gender to make them feel adequate. Now is the time for a men’s movement that takes men aside and teaches them to like themselves, to work hard at education to get the qualifications they need in a global workplace and to take pride in treating other races and genders with respect rather than arrogance in order to achieve the sense of self worth they are seeking.

  • The Real Cie

    This is the same tired old argument used every time Dudebros are no longer able to treat women like objects with impunity. “Chivalry is dead thanks to feminists” is one of these old saws.
    Poor Dudebros. We have to feel their pain. Why, it’s getting so a guy can no longer drive down the street catcalling every woman he sees without being told he’s a douchebag. Why, the nerve! And if you grab a chick’s ass in a bar, you might just run the risk of getting thrown out of the place or even charged with assault because the bitch can’t lighten up. Geez! What is this world coming to?
    It’s as if these damn women think they’re actual human beings and not fuck toys! What’s a Dudebro to do?

    • Luisa

      First of all, catcalling and ass groping is not chivalry. Being chivalrous is being “considerate and courteous to women; gallant. Having or showing good manners; polite.”

      Second, Feminists believe any unwelcomed action or comment by men towards women in public spaces (supposedly owned by men) is street harassment. And that is not only catcalls, the official definition of street harassment includes “non-sexually explicit evaluative comments” (aka compliments). But it’s even more nonsensical than that: “At Hollaback!, we believe that what specifically counts as street harassment is determined by those who experience it.”

      It is basically anything a man can do or say in public towards the opposite gender. And if it’s harassment or not depends on a woman’s feelings, taste and mood.

      So yes, chivalry and romanticism are indeed being demonized, discouraged and put on the same level as catcalling, sexual harassment and stalking.

      On top of that, the various generalizing labels feminists have created have made men question their own personality/value and made them believe that there are only 3 types of men: “nice guys”, “bad guys” and “real men”. Feminists have convinced men that they need to fit this “real man” mold and its respective personality traits in order to be good enough and worthy of love. Quite ironic for a movement that claims to be for the liberation of gender roles and stereotypes. 🙂

      So it is no wonder that men are being oppressed. And these dismissive attitudes also prove that they are being silenced and that their distress is being ridiculed more than ever.

      Good job third wave feminists, your radicalism has screwed up the feminism movement beyond repair. But I’m not complaining. 🙂 More and more feminists are becoming post-feminists or identify as egalitarian instead due to an understandable overwhelming shame. Feminism is dying and we should be happy about it. The sooner it dies, the sooner we can actually be equal and stop pretending that women are powerless and inferior beings.

      • Meghan Murphy

        [Posted for the lols.]

        • amongster

          I didn’t know that “Luisa” was an unisex name. You learn something new everyday.

        • Morag

          So many LOLs to choose from!

          Beginning with the idea that “third wave feminism” is “radical.” Gosh, what would he say if he knew what radical feminism actually is?

          So many gems, like this one:

          “Feminists believe any unwelcomed action or comment by men towards women in public spaces (supposedly owned by men) is street harassment. ”

          The madness! When will it end? What is the world coming to when women insist that male street harassment is “unwelcome”? As opposed to regular harassment, which is, by definition, unwelcome. And, I mean, how can we know if the harassment was consensual? Some women get off on being evaluated, graded like meat, and told to smile. What about them, huh? Why should their rights be violated to protect prudes? Feminism is an assault against women’s rights!

          But, mostly, feminism is an assault against men. Some men have a sexual preference for harassing women, OK? This is a fact–they are out there (on the street) and they are proud! Better get used to it, ladies. Are these harassment-loving men to be denied consenting partners? I mean, come ON, people! This is about equality, about rights. Something you feminists only pretend to care about.

          Here’s the thing: a man can never be sure whether a woman, who is nothing but a stranger to him, is consenting or not (i.e., whether she is in “the mood” for being harassed on the street). This uncertainty about a woman’s appetite for harassment is a form of oppression against men that gets very little attention.

          The street-harassing-orientated man lives with daily confusion, uncertainty and the anxiety, perhaps, of being censured or even arrested for his natural preferences. All those micro-aggressions against his sexual identity really add up. Street harassers have more heart disease and stroke, and die earlier than non-street harassers. Does anybody care?

          Feminism is to blame for everything.

          • Luisa

            So you treat a simple “hello” and “good evening” as street harassment/rape because it’s unwelcomed/non consensual? Of course anything between strangers is non consensual. That doesn’t make it harassment or rape lol. “Yes it does!” #allrapeisrape

            You talk about about men complaining that chivalry is dead then use catcalling as an example of chivalry? What I’m telling you that men (who AGREE with and SUPPORT feminists) are afraid to do or say anything to women in public because they know anything they do/say can literally be interpreted as street harassment. And you retort again with the same examples.

            Most men agree that catcalling and treating women like sexual objects is wrong. But I’m talking about greeting, helping or simply asking a question. Yes, a lot of men are more and more afraid of doing these basic social things. And some are even afraid to be nice and polite towards women because they are told that being nice means they come off as desperate and manipulative. So these men are stuck in a “you’re damned if you do, you’re damned if you don’t” predicamment.

            Men who respect feminism are terrified of approaching and interacting with women in public. But men who have no respect for women, in other words the very “dude bros” you are trying to tame or repel, are the ones who are going to continue catcalling, sexually harassing and stalking women in public because they simply don’t care about feminism. Do you understand what I’m saying? Good men who respect women are being repressed, not dude bros/douchebags/jerks.

            A few years from now, women will only be in contact with pickup artists and players instead of being in contact with normal men who won’t treat them like crap or view them as a “pickup”. And the result of that is that women will feel even more uncomfortable and threatened in public due to their increased paranoia and their ever decreasing trust/faith in men.

            What I’m telling you is that our daughters needs to believe in the good men are capable of. And you do not achieve this by scaring the good men away.

          • Brilliant, Morag.

          • Morag

            Thanks, lizor. It’s looks like he’s still lecturing us. Not sure if I can be bothered to read anymore. Besides, a few words of his reply pop out, and it looks like the usual protection racket with its the veiled threats: “Smile and be nice, ladies, or the baddie men will rape you and the goodie men will have to let that happen so you learn your lesson.”

          • JokerTHEIF

            Yeah, I don’t think you are really reading the text of his argument, which is admittedly badly worded at times.

            I’ve never and would never catcall a woman on the street, most men I know are the same. At the same time, I avoid eye contact with women in public, I wont say Hi, I wont smile at them, I won’t ask them for directions because too many respond as (based on your responses here) I assume you would: With disgust and an assumption that I am harassing you.

            The Sexodus article (ironically written by a gay man, not a “dudebro” as you would like to believe) is inflammatory and often wrong, but the underlying concept, that normal men are increasingly being punished for the actions of a few outspoken douchebags, is sound. Why would we attempt to attract a mate when it’s a 50/50 shot that we’ll be accused of sexual harassment? Why would we get married when if things go wrong (for whatever reason) we by default lose in court? Why would we have kids when in the unfortunate case of a divorce we would lose most if not all parental rights?

            I, and most people (men and women) don’t make very much money. I’d like to own a nice car, I’d like to maybe own a house or condo, I’d like to retire without the worry of depending on social security that may or may not exist by that point. With the situation as it stands, it’s just easier for me to do that by myself rather than risking my livelihood and happiness on trying for a relationship. I’m not putting blame for that on any one person or group of people, we’re all a little to blame. The fact remains however that it’s true.

          • amongster

            I feel so guilty now that you say we are all a little to blame that you will probably never get married and have kids and that you don’t make eye contact with women on the street anymore because you are afraid of being called a bad man! How shall ever I live with this GUILT!?! Oh well, I think I’ll manage.

          • Meghan Murphy

            Now he’s never going to marry you, amongster. DEAL WITH IT.

          • amongster

            I’ve always had a soft spot for whiny infantile men. They are rare diamonds! It’s a tragedy he is lost to womankind.

          • See Morag? Here’s one of our poor victims ^^. Why would he buy a car with one of our kind when we’re so hell bent on not being raped [again] that we’ve lost all discernment? Poor lad!

          • RadFemPornBasher

            Then go tell other men to stop using various situations as an excuse to get close enough to harm us. It’s basic Stranger Danger training (back from when I was a kid) to not get close to someone asking for directions. That’s because shit like women and children being grabbed off the streets and sexually assaulted has happened so many times. And then, God forbid as a grown woman if you *have* been at all friendly to the man who then assaults you. Check out life in the real world- any friendliness on the part of a woman towards the man who then assaults her becomes reason, even *before* any talk of of charges or trials, to dismiss her claim of being raped, because she talked to the guy, she smiled- she was *asking* for it, or else she wouldn’t have smiled. Because, you know, everyone *knows* not to give directions or smile at strangers.

            *We* are between a rock and a hard place. Welcome to the results of years upon years upon years of raping and assaulting women! If you want to stop being worried about a woman saying you harassed her, talk to your brothers. *We* are responding, not starting this shit.

          • Yes, that’s the upshot: us looney feminists think “good evening” = harassment (I think hypothetical dude is wearing a full suit and tie and speaks with an oxbridge accent), we are terrorizing men, and we’ll pay in the end for our folly because the nice guys won’t go after us anymore.

            You have to admit, it’s a pretty sobering argument. I for one will be going to my room without my supper and thinking very hard about what I did to the men.

      • Liz

        Sorry, not much sympathy here for your “distress.”

        So if you don’t like being sorted into “three categories of men” then stop dividing and labeling women into your own little groups. And stand up against every other man who does.

  • Morag

    ‘Apparently, some men have found themselves directly confronted by the notion that men should not rape. In fact, the author goes to the extent of calling new anti-rape law “unworkable, prudish and downright misandrist.”

    So, here we learn that:

    “downright misandrist” = anti-rape
    “prudish” = anti-rape

    This is great! It’s not just name-calling to intimidate, shame and silence us, and to let us know that we’re not measuring up to fuckability standards. It’s much more than that. These words have a very distinct and precise meaning: women’s natural right to be fully human conflicts with men’s “right” to keep us violently subordinated.

    I just love it when men come right out and say what they think feminist’s/women’s problem really is: that we are against male violence, in all its forms–economic, sexual, physical, emotional and psychological.

  • mauritia

    I don’t understand all these panicky thinkpieces about men suffering so badly in modern society. Yes, boys are doing slightly worse in school and fewer go to university but the old pay gap is still alive and well. The economic crisis cited in the article is not a male-only phenomenon. All around me I see men doing just fine: going to school, getting jobs, having relationships, fathering children. Why are the experiences of a few sexually frustrated, entitled nerds being extrapolated to assume that all men are living such terrible lives?

    • Missfit

      Why indeed? More so, they are talking as if a portion of men deciding to not marry and raise children is the end of the world. I don’t get all these panicky pieces neither, wanting to make a supposed ‘sexodus’ pass for a social crisis. And apparently, women are the big losers with these men who are ‘going their own way’ because of women’s too high expectations (like expecting fair share of domestic chores and not being treated as sex servants?). It might look like just men whining about women not being enough subservient, but it’s that they are just worried about us.

      When women decide to stay single, it’s : ‘too bad for you, you are going to die alone surrounded by cats’. When men decide to stay single, it’s again: ‘too bad for you women’. The impression being that single women fare worse than single men is merely projection. I know many women who don’t want to marry and have children while being good contributors to society. But these men, they are not only giving up on ‘chicks’, that literally leads them to give up on society entirely and retreat into their basement.

      Are men so weak without a woman by their side? Are men so weak as to give up because there are girls in schools doing fairly better? There was a time women couldn’t even access schools, they fought to have access to higher education and worked hard. In too many parts of the world, girls are risking their lives to go to school while being treated less than boys in every area of their life. I mean, there are valid reasons someone would want to opt out of the system, but ‘girls doing better in schools’ is surely not one of them.

      These men should stop the whining and take a serious look in the mirror. Not for our sake, for theirs!

      • Lee

        The thing about girls doing better than boys in school is interesting, because school hasn’t changed. It wasn’t like it used to be only or mostly men teaching, it was always a woman’s job (in the U.S. at least), one of the options open to women (teaching, typing, nursing). The hours (again, at least in the U.S.) haven’t changed in general, to my knowledge. I hear the food was never all that great, although maybe it used to be healthier. The ‘less recess’ argument is interesting, because it is my understanding that kids often had to sit for much longer periods of time without breaks; it also assumes girl children don’t have energy they need to expel, that they don’t get fidgety or bored, that it wouldn’t affect them, too. I believe the research has shown that all kids benefit scholastically from getting enough physical movement — maybe girls are actually just more physically active in daily life? Maybe they, ohhhh, I don’t know, play less video games??? Does the decline in boys’ performance match when video games as a hobby became the norm for boys?

        • Red

          Oh. But school has changed greatly.

          Male school teachers were much more common (particularly in the younger grades) thirty or forty years ago than today.

          The positions of authority (principal, headmaster, etc) were almost all male. Now the vast majority of elementary school principals (at least in my demographic) are female. Even if this trend didn’t exist, the female teacher of today has much different upbringing and attitude than the female teachers of our grandparents’ generation.

          I’m not saying this is entirely a bad thing, but two results we are seeing are this:

          1) GIRL power. Rightfully so, girls’ self-esteem and progress in school has become more important, i.e. focusing on how to help girls do better in math and sciences and perhaps even pursue a career in STEM, rather than just go to college to get their MRS degree;
          2) More boys failing, or passing more marginally, but not pursuing college or university. With fewer male role models in the younger grades, and more Ritalin being prescribed than ever, our boys are (as a group) falling behind.

          Now I know I’ve oversimplified for illustration, but the conclusions I reach are valid, namely, we need to find better ways to continue to achieve #1) while at the same time without exacerbating #2.

          • Meghan Murphy

            Hmm… No…. Male teachers were not more common. Teaching has always been a woman-dominated field, though you are right that the higher up positions (principal, etc) were dominated by men (and still are, just to a lesser per cent). Women still dominate in the younger grades, you get more and more male teachers in the higher grades but, again, women still make up the majority of teachers across the board. Teaching is one of the only professions (besides nursing) that professionalized yet still was not taken over by men. It’s no coincidence that teachers are horribly underpaid in the US and that the Canadian government is doing their best to chip away at the union/the profession, in general.

          • Red

            I am speaking only of the Canadian example of which I was a participant until retirement and both my parents and many friends were school teachers. I can’t speak much to what’s happened in the US over time.

            I stand by my assertion: male teachers were much more common at the elementary school levels fifty years ago than now.

            You are correct that teaching, like nursing, in the fifties and by even earlier societal norms, was considered one of the few career choices (professions) considered “acceptable” or “respectable” for young women. But bear in mind too that a far smaller percentage of women were in the paid workforce then as compared to now. Being a stay-at-home mom, or a housewife, or whatever term might be politically correct now (if there is one) was considered a much more valid and acceptable choice then than it is now. Again, no value judgement, it was just different then. My observation now is that it might be more of a financial decision now than it was then – there are many young couples I know where one of them might want to stay home full time when the kids are little but with today’s economic realities they just can’t afford to do that. Even with progressive changes like paid maternity leave, etc., the economic situation is so much different now.

            And while it is still true that the more likely grades where you might encounter a male teacher is at the higher levels, you are simply just less likely to encounter a male teacher in K-12 now – the ratios now are different than they were fifty years ago. Young men are less likely to go to university now, remember? They are entering the trades or staying in their parents basements longer, and taking longer to grow up, depending on where they live.

            When I attended elementary school (I won’t say what decade) there was not ONE female principal in any of the elementary or junior high schools or high schools in the district (~100,000 people). Maybe the occasional vice, but I can’t remember even one until several decades later. And bear in mind in earlier decades my parents knew almost all of these people professionally and/or socially so as a child I had greater exposure to the lot of them than the average Jane or Joe.

            There were lots of grade 1 and 2 female teachers. Hardly any men. Men tended to teach at the higher grades. There were lots of male principals and vice principals and junior high and high school teachers. Now the entire profession (I still consider it a profession, sadly most of society especially our government no longer does), is female dominated. I don’t consider that a bad thing. But we do need to at least acknowledge it and wonder why, or take this in to consideration when looking at how best to educate boys, girls, and which methods are best for each.

            I personally would like to see more teachers, whether male or female (at least at the younger grades before high school) check their politics and attitudes at the door and stick to the curriculum. It’s bad enough the nonsense that has been introduced into the curriculum in the past several years let alone to have a teacher pushing a personal agenda in his or her grade seven classroom.

          • Lee

            Hi Red.

            Does the decline in boys’ performance match when video games as a hobby became the norm for boys?

          • Red

            I don’t think so, unless it is interfering with the parent’s laying down some ground rules about getting homework done, and the rules are inconsistent between daughters and sons.

            Taken to an extreme, yes. If a large number of today’s parents are more inclined to let their sons goof off and play video games all evening instead of studying or sleeping, then maybe yes. Video games are just one more way of “checking out” and doing something perceived to be fun that may not necessarily be contributing to your success in the rest of life. When I was a kid it was tree forts, the opposite sex, cars, bikes, and other troubles that both genders could get into. The problem with so many video games is their addictive quality so some firm boundaries are needed.

            I’m going out on a limb here and going to say something I believe that I know will generate a lot of discussion or perhaps even some personal attacks. More single parent households, more absentee fathers, and the feminization of the education profession has left more and more boys at the younger grades less engaged in a way that helps them grow and learn and with fewer positive male role models in their lives. This is partly why we are having so many problems in today’s society. We are working to try to give girls more tools to succeed in a world that will not always be fair to them, which is awesome, but in the process we are letting the boys fall behind. This will not help either gender in the long run, regardless of what your political view points are.

          • Miranda

            That video game excuse is just that – an excuse. 49% of those playing video games are girls/women.

            So there’s more female teachers now (than there used to be) – that’s “feminized”?

            Why can’t boys be expected to have women role models?

            What tools are girls being given, exactly, that boys are no longer being given?

            It seems that when things get close to being fair, there’s no longer enough men. Girls have always been expected to relate to boys/men throughout time, and yet when things *finally* shift just a smidge, boys can’t possibly be expected to grow into responsible human beings because they can’t relate to girls/women the way girls/women have ALWAYS had to relate to boys/men??

            This is all ignoring that boys’ misbehaviour in class is more tolerated than girls’, boys get more speaking time in class than girls, teachers tend to favour their male students and give them more attention in general.

            There have always been single mothers, this isn’t suddenly some new thing happening and thus explaining why society has problems *now*. Life wasn’t that great 50-60 years ago either.

            And you know what, for all the boys/men not going to university, men still hold all the higher up positions in every field. It’s not hurting them not getting the education. A man with a high school diploma can sometimes get a job that a woman or a person of colour would need a degree for (or even an advanced degree). The studies are all out there.

          • Red

            Short answer, NO. The decline in a general decline of boys performance in school relative to girls started before video games and computers became as common as today.

            Is it a potential issue at the individual level? Yes, like any other potentially addictive behavior. If your 12 year old daughter was hitting the bottle every night for hours and not getting her homework done as a result, and being overtired in class because she was up until 2 in the morning doing so, no doubt it would interfere with her performance in school.

      • Caroza

        There’s a book just come out by a social psychologist called Kristin Anderson (Modern Misogyny: Anti-feminism in a post-feminist world) which debunks this whole”oppressed men” meme – dry as dust, meticulously researched and a really useful source book. She tackles the issue of boys underperforming at school and turns out it is because they a) are raised to feel entitled and b) overestimate their skill and ability. Girls are more realistic about their capabilities and therefore more likely to put the work in. Sigh. Why isn’t this surprising?

        • Red

          Yes, but she misses the more academically mainstream viewpoint that a big part of the problem is that female teachers expect boys to learn in all the same ways that work for girls.

          Same reason girls might not do as well in math or science when men try to teach them ways to learn it that work better for boys. It’s not that more girls aren’t capable, or want to do better in STEM subjects and careers, it is more that different approaches than what we currently use and used to use are needed. While I am all for gender equality, I do not simplify the word “equality” to be sameness. Girls and boys are different, on average, and we must play to their strengths, in a respectful and thoughtful way. Yes, how they may have been socialized by their parents and other influencers prior to exposure to our education system is certainly relevant too, as you suggest.

          Seems like you feel this is a situation where it is okay to blame the victims? Surely you don’t think a seven year old boy should be faulted for being put on Ritalin because his mom and female teachers can’t stand the fact that he behaves like a boy?

          • bella_cose

            There are numerous studies that show that boys behave like boys because they’ve been socialized/encouraged to act that way from birth. Girls are encouraged to be quiet, respectful, act like ladies, not make a fuss, and to not be rowdy.

            It’s a persistent myth that girls and boys are substantially different due to something other than socialization. Educators really need to educate themselves, because they do more harm than good by perpetuating gender myths.

    • I also see a lot of young men (here in Québec) very actively involved in bringing up those children in a way unthinkable a few decades ago. Because they were raised by FEMINISTS of my generation.

      I’d never heard of that Yiannopoulos character, but his discourse is a more elaborate version of a certain Marc Lépine’s antifemist manifesto found after the Polytechnique massacre, along with his hitlist of prominent Québec feminists. (He had been rejected as a Polytechnique candidate). It also reminds me of the kind of resentful whiteguy who always complains about Black and Aboriginal people getting an easy ride through affirmative action.

      Before recycling took hold, we’d speak of consigning such nonsense to the circular file.

      • Missfit

        Hi lagatta! Fellow quebecer here! I was watching Bazzo on tv recently, the topic was the 25 years of Polytechnique and journalist Vincent Marissal said that it is his impression that young men today are more sexist than the men of his generation and even of his father’s generation. I am wondering… Is it because of the internet and the misogynists being so loud on this platform that they seem to be more of them than there actually is? I also know that backlash means gains were made. What is your impression? I am always navigating back and forth between optimism and pessimism…

        • Red

          It’s the media and rap music.

          • Meghan Murphy

            Ummm, yeaaaah. Rap invented patriarchy. You’re right.

          • Joshua Culmer

            Blame societal constructs (Jim Crow) for rap music. That is all apart of blacks being denied fair treatment and protection throughout American history.

    • Red

      Hi Mauritia,

      I get that you don’t understand because you are not a boy or a man faced with the challenges that go with the gender. You’ve never been put on Ritalin at age 7 just because you are a boy, you’ve never been falsely accused of being a rapist, you’ve never been denied access to your children (that I know of), you’ve never been an old professional white guy laid off at age 53 with no company pension to fall back on and five mouths to feed.

      I could say similar:
      “I don’t understand all these panicky thinkpieces about women suffering so badly in modern society. Yes, some women have been victims of violence but so have many men. Some women are working in lower paid jobs but so do many men. For the most part, women working similar hours in the same professions as men have similar incomes. The economic crisis cited in the article is not a female-only phenomenon. All around me I see women doing just fine: going to school, getting jobs, having relationships, having children. Why are the experiences of a few sexually frustrated, radicalized, man-hating women being extrapolated to assume that all women are living such terrible lives?”

      We will always be inaccurate when we choose to extrapolate the experiences of a few to the many, or stereotype based on gender, race, etc. However, what is important is to acknowledge trends. While there are still some high paying professions that are still peopled by more men than women (politics and law, for example), I expect this balance will soon change. In Canada, for example, among 19-year old youth, 38.8% of girls attend university, compared with only 25.7% of boys. The average Canadian university campus is 58% female. More women than men obtain both bachelors and masters degree.

      The key is not to blame each other for societal trends, but let’s figure out how to co-exist peacefully and how to improve things. This holds true whether we are talking about black and white, male and female, or, most importantly, rich and poor. In my opinion, if there is a revolution in the near future, it won’t be women shattering the imaginary glass ceiling, it will common people, men and women, black and white, people from all walks of life, deciding to eat the rich because we’ve had enough of the exploitation.

      • Morag

        Red, this blog is called “Feminist Current.” Why do you comment here?

        • Red

          Because I think it is important to gather viewpoints from different parts of society when shaping and re-shaping one’s own worldview. If all we ever do is listen to people who believe all the same things we do, if we surround ourselves only with like-minded people, we stagnate instead of grow. I’ve learned a lot here. I’ve actually changed my worldview a bit, if ever so slightly, since first starting to read these blogs. That’s a big statement coming from an older person – most of us tend to become LESS open minded as we grow older. I now feel more worried about the younger generations and how I may need to become more active in my local community to help mentor some of these very misguided young men we talk about here.

          Because I think a feminist viewpoint is still relevant and required in today’s world even though many of the original early goals have already been achieved.

          Because I get bored and sometimes this group here makes me laugh. Sometimes it is because I don’t agree with an idea, and the idea itself makes me laugh, other times it is because I do agree with what was said and Meghan, in particular, and others here, have an admirable wit that I enjoy. I think I can contribute to the discussion, and help you to hone your political positions in a way that will help you get them recognized by more people without being labeled “rabid feminists”. A foil, if you will. A safe target to bounce your ideas off, or attack freely if you feel the need.

          Another example: many of my peers in society (both male and female) are anti-union in a world where they think the “union” has outgrown its usefulness. They think public sector employees are overpaid and under-worked. You, know the usual stereotypes. Many of the goals of the movement have already been achieved (forty hour work week, yadda yadda yadda). However, I feel that unions are more necessary now than ever before with today’s realities. Sadly, some of them are out of touch with their members, as well as societal trends in general. But that doesn’t make the entire labour movement irrelevant today. Same with feminism. Even more important now than it was thirty years ago, for sure. I may not always be your ally, but I am not your enemy.

      • marv

        “The key is not to blame each other for societal trends, but let’s figure out how to co-exist peacefully and how to improve things. This holds true whether we are talking about black and white, male and female, or, most importantly, rich and poor. In my opinion, if there is a revolution in the near future, it won’t be women shattering the imaginary glass ceiling, it will common people, men and women, black and white, people from all walks of life, deciding to eat the rich because we’ve had enough of the exploitation.”

        Yikes! It is unscrupulous to equate sexual violence between the genders. It’s like claiming an equivalency between male hunters and prey. You concede the rich are exploiting us without any awareness that they are exceedingly made up of white men who own and control the capitalist state apparatus. So you are blind to gender and race privilege. And why do you blame the rich as a class anyway. By your logic we shouldn’t extrapolate from personal experience to accuse social groups of oppression.

        In fact it is not plausible to end the concentration of power and wealth without eliminating gender or vice versa.

        http://libcom.org/library/communization-abolition-gender

        • Red

          I am white. I am male. However, I am poor, and in most areas of society, powerless. Yet you would group me with those who oppress you.

          How, exactly, does one go about “eliminating gender or vice versa” whatever the heck that means? You can call a billionaire Walton female a gender neutral rich person if you want, she can choose to dress like an early David Bowie if she wishes, however regardless she still has more power and influence in society than you or I ever will. There are many injustices in society that are not about gender, just as you can’t blame “race relations” for everything that goes wrong whenever there is a police shooting. How would the media and the black community react if the cigar stealing dude was a white kid and the officer was black? It wouldn’t have even made the news. Shameful.

  • “bros who can’t be bothered with “chicks” anymore” because of anti-rape laws and the end of male sexuality as what’s-his-name knows it.

    I feel kind of sad telling him this, sort of like telling a kid Godzilla doesn’t exist, but if that’s his idea of sex then, yes, what we’re trying to achieve is the end of it. Now.

    • Morag

      We say: “No more rape!”

      And they say: “What? no more sex? Why, that’s unworkable, that’s prudish, that’s man-hating!”

      And that tells us everything we need to know about these men.

      They say that crazy feminists came up with the idea that sex (which is always heterosexual intercourse in these discussions) and rape are conceptually, and often in practice, almost indistinguishable. But we didn’t come up with this crazy idea–men did! We just listened to them identify themselves as rapists, again and again, and decided to believe them.

  • Rick

    Yiannopoulos is one of those “manosphere” morons, and this is all connected to that “Gamergate” nonsense. He and a few other manosphere ideologues/dolts jumped on board the Gamergate thing to get a wider voice for their backward, conspiratorial, far right-wing views. The term “sexodus” is just another way of saying “MGTOW” (Men Going Their Own Way) without actually saying it. Spend an hour reading the blogs of the manosphere and your head will hurt with all the dumb, and you’ll walk away wanting a really strong drink to dull the pain from having wasted an hour with such garbage. Also, this quote from the Yiannopoulos article:

    “Never before in history have relations between the sexes been so fraught with anxiety, animosity and misunderstanding”

    What do you say about such a sentence? Fuck. So dumb.

    • derrington

      Wow, the idea that you just cant rape women has brought men to this state of anxiety, animosity and misunderstanding? Fuck knows what they’re going to do with shared parental responsibility whilst working then!

    • Red

      Hi Rick,

      I agree with most of what you say, and gave you a firm thumbs up for your comments. However, the same headache you reference may also be achieved by reading blogs and related comments on the rest of the internet too, some feminists blogs included.

      I think there is a huge danger in the demise of strong investigative reporting, and being replaced with the “everyone is an expert” blogosphere. Opinions replace facts. Urban legends become accepted history. The recent Rolling Stone fiasco, for example, comes to mind. More broadly though, the closely held mass media conglomerates tell us what they want us to believe about society and economics, and most of us just blindly accept what they tell us. Even better for the special interest groups, propagandists, hate mongers, and fear mongers, since most of us don’t read traditional newspapers anymore, most of us now get our “news” from the internet, the masses voluntarily subscribe to a skewed view of the real world by cherry picking their “news” sources to align with their own world views.

      Radical feminists look at the nonsense posted by many MRAs, and falsely conclude that those are widely held views by an entire gender.

      MRAs and some other men, on the other hand, read or hear about some dude’s nightmarish experiences with his ex and falsely conclude these examples are commonly how most women treat men. Or worse, our young impressionable boys and men get their ideas of how women want to be treated from the mass media (Hollywood block busters and rap music particularly come to mind).

      Neither world view is accurate, but the blogosphere is very good at spinning extreme world views as accurate, and polarizing groups whose viewpoints and goals really aren’t that much different, i.e. Democrat and Republican in the US really aren’t that much different politically when compared to other parties in other countries, but if you believe what you read in the American blogosphere they are diametrically opposed world views.

      • Meghan Murphy

        “Radical feminists look at the nonsense posted by many MRAs, and falsely conclude that those are widely held views by an entire gender.”

        What?? As far as I can tell feminists see MRAs as a small, insignificant group of wingnuts. Scary wingnuts, but certainly not representative of what all men believe.. All the men I know — ‘feminist’ or not — think MRAs are looneytunes.

  • Meh

    What I’m realising is the more that women are winning (such as the Collective Shout team getting GTAV taken off the shelves in Target and K-Mart), the more that these men are shitting in their big boy pants and expecting mummy to clean up the mess.

    I have been following the GTAV stuff very closely. The number of men whining about a video game is nothing short of unbelievable. A VIDEO GAME.

    One guy actually wrote, “But you can CHOOOOOOOOSE to kill prostitutes! Not all men CHOOSE that! It’s an individual’s choice whether or not they want to kill prostitutes or not!”

    The angrier that these men get, the more I know we’re winning. We’re actually winning for a change. And men are sooking because they want their diapers back. No deal. Time to wear your big boy pants and shit in the toilet like everyone else.

    • marv

      “I have been following the GTAV stuff very closely. The number of men whining about a video game is nothing short of unbelievable. A VIDEO GAME….
      The angrier that these men get, the more I know we’re winning. We’re actually winning for a change. And men are sooking because they want their diapers back. No deal. Time to wear your big boy pants and shit in the toilet like everyone else.”

      Zing! They create a wall of lamentations out of their bodily excretions over sweet nothing. Let’s hope it collapses on top of them. That would be sweet something.

    • amongster

      “I have been following the GTAV stuff very closely. The number of men whining about a video game is nothing short of unbelievable. A VIDEO GAME.”

      Just today, in a discussion about what is called liberal feminism here but what is mistaken for feminism there, a guy whined about how feminists make feminism look bad when they complained about “so called sexist video games”. Of course he didn’t want to admit that the only reason he likes to see feminists only talking about “serious issues like genital mutilation” is that he doesn’t feel threatened by that kind of activism that doesn’t force him to change so he can continue to be a privileged jerk treating women in- and outside of video games as objects.

      I hate when men pretend they cared about feminism and feminist issues while they are actually only busy keeping up the status quo. Sadly, liberal feminist make it so easy for them. There is so much confusion!

      Still, I hope you are right when you say you see a progress.

    • Morag

      ‘One guy actually wrote, “But you can CHOOOOOOOOSE to kill prostitutes! Not all men CHOOSE that! It’s an individual’s choice whether or not they want to kill prostitutes or not!”’

      Oh, that guy. Thick as a brick, and, moreover, a danger to women everywhere. Yeah, that was his “argument”: there is nothing WRONG with giving men the option to kill rape and kill prostitutes for entertainment. Oh, no! It’s all about the choosing. The option to rape women, burn them alive and shoot them dead should never be considered an evil in itself. But, choosing to do that is naughty, and choosing not to do that is next to godliness. Men –just like women — need options. Yahoo! Equality!

      This is where individualistic-choice-equality feminism has got us.

    • FireWalkWithMe

      But the problem is is that you aren’t encouraged to sexually violate women and murder them for entertainment in the game. There isn’t any sexual violence. And the game has been out a year already, so why are people complaining now? Due to the first person option, that’s why. You could do the same things when the game launched in September 2013.

      It’s a game where you pointlessly can hire prostitutes (I’ll admit the health refill is dumb) and you can kill people in droves. Yes, PEOPLE. Anyone on the street. The game doesn’t target women. You spend the whole game killing men. What about the fact male drug dealers and gang members are seen as disposable? You can set them on fire, stab and run over them. Just because they aren’t sexualized doesn’t mean they aren’t victims. They could be forced to drug deal to make a living.

      The whole issue arose cause the new release featured first person when the game had already had it a year earlier. I think arbitrary putting prostitutes into the game is immature, but the game doesn’t discourage disposing of women. It encourages you to just have fun and kill as many people as you want, avoid the police blow stuff up, crash cars, etc. in the game world. The right wing are the ones who think games lead to behavior in real life, I thought. In the mid 2000s they griped all about the violence in games training people to kill. Just because you are offended by the idea of something doesn’t mean the games portrayal of it encourages it.

      • amongster

        Women have complained about GTA since forever. GTAV is not the first game of the series that is misogynist. And no, it’s not the same that you can also shoot random people on the street. Those random people are, in facct, random, they are not put into any context, prostitutes are, they get used and disposed just like in real life. You may also check the statistics of murdered prostitutes and ask yourself again if it really doesn’t make a difference that GTA chooses to let gamers sexually objectify and violate women whenever they feel like it. It’s not “immature” to put such a possibility into a game, it’s misogynist bullshit and a danger to women everywhere.

        Also, no, gamers don’t have to become killers and rapists but they get desensitized nonetheless. Obviously the developers don’t see a problem with making fun about sexual violence.

        • FireWalkWithMe

          I do realize the prostitutes are put in there for presumed straight male gamers. However, I think prostitutes can be represented in a game to where they aren’t just for titilation. How about realism? I’m gonna get a bit specific to something most people have no idea what I’m talking about, but the same developer’s Red Dead Redemption has prostitutes you can’t use for sex. They exist to typify the Wild West, where prostitutes did exist.

          My issue is with arbitrary sex services you can hire for really no reason at all, that part is void of meaning and arbitrarily put into most games. I could complain all day about how unfortunately sexualized women are in The Witcher series whenever that game has great writing and great characters. It’s immature and objectifying beyond belief, when are developers gonna realize sex involves nudity from men too.

          Prostitutes are represented period because they exist in real life. I think having a sex function with them is meaningless, unless you could give it meaning by getting to know the prostitute as a person through dialogue, her story and personality, instead of her just being a brainless bunch of pixels that recites racy dialogue and moans. Unfortunately that’s GTA.

          Then again, you could look at GTA as it is, a parody of contemporary America. Everyone in the universe is incredibly full of shit and vain, and prostitutes are no different. The developers speckled the game world with a large myriad of insignificant characters. You can kill them, as the super criminal you are supposed to be. I don’t see how prostitutes are singled out as encouraging violence against them. It’s NOT, people have made that decision. I know that’s rehearsed but it’s true. Blame the people playing, not the developers.

          • Meh

            “You can kill them, as the super criminal you are supposed to be. I don’t see how prostitutes are singled out as encouraging violence against them. It’s NOT, people have made that decision. I know that’s rehearsed but it’s true. Blame the people playing, not the developers.”

            … What the FUCK are you talking about?

          • amongster

            Oh, realism. An argument nobody has every heard as an explanation and excuse for misogyny in the media. How convenient. When I say that misogyny could be depicted in a way that is not-misoginistic in itself you probably keep on shouting “realism” or “objectivity” or “freedom of speech” or “art” or tell me that I’m just reading misogyny into stuff.

            Red Dead Redemption let you lasso random women and prostitutes alike to carry them to a train track on horseback where you could lay the female person on the tracks to wait for the train to run her over. You see them explode into blood and get a bronze trophy called “Dastardly Trophy”. What fun! This only works with a female victim, of course.

            So you are saying you could deal with “sex services” in a game if there was a good reason for it? How good for you! There is no good reason though. Never. And giving a prostitute a background story before you use her as fuck toy certainly is not progress. It’s sexist crap that you, being the dude that you are, can overlook or even enjoy.

            You made it very clear that what you and don’t see is clouded by your ignorance and male privilege. Also funny how you first shout “realism” and then deny that there is any connection between the treatment of prostitutes in the game and in real life.

            And why the developers, who decided what they put into the game and what not, should be less responsible for the content is a mystery to me.

      • Laura Mcnally

        Shut up

        • Seconded.

          • Abby2

            You sound like my boyfriend

          • Abby2

            When my boyfriend sees me reading this blog, he always says stuff like… “we (women) are not interested in true equality with men, we just want to cherry pick our privileges”….

            Men die 8-10 years younger than women
            Men account for 89% of work place deaths
            Men make up 97% of the homeless
            Men are 4 times as likely to be the victim of violent crime than women
            Men are still the only gender, forced by law, to fight and die in times of national conflict.
            Men commit suicide more than women by 8 to 1

            He says that the bottom line is…. “Women want equality alright, but they want equality with the top 5% of men, and they want it for 100% of women”

            What can I answer him back?

          • Missfit

            I could go through each of your point but this will take too much time and it’s not really worth it. So I will simply say that you can tell him that none of what he says is due to women oppressing men.

      • Meh

        “The right wing are the ones who think games lead to behavior in real life, I thought. ”

        LOL nice way to shut down discussion. “You’re being so right-wingy!”

        How do you respond to the men that I’ve had to deal with over the last week and a half, who vehemently defend the game and then say shit like, “Hookers aren’t people” and “You deserve to get raped, bitch”? What wing are they taking?

        • marv

          If the Klan was shooting and lynching blacks and whites would that make the killings of blacks not racist? If corporations lay off thousands of employees while engaging in cutthroat competition with other corporations does that make them not classist institutions? If FireWalkWithMe can’t see reality for what it is, would that mean it doesn’t exist?

          • Morag

            “FireWalkWithMe” refers to Lynch’s Twin Peaks, which is a study of male evil and how it (literally and psychically) kills girls and women.

            I’d say that he DOES see reality for what it is, it’s just that he wants to keep it that way. He likes it.

    • Red

      I agree, for the most part, with what you are saying.

      However, I see these issues as being very challenging. Where, for example, do we draw the line between censorship (i.e. imposing moral standards on book publishers, video game makers, blog writers, etc) and freedom of speech or expression? Should all porn be illegal or only the type you don’t like? Should all video games with any violence be banned? Where do we draw the line?

      For example, looking to history, many of the suffragettes of the early twentieth century were also pro-prohibition.

      I have great respect for the achievements of many of the courageous early feminists, and perhaps prohibition was a natural outcome of the political, religious, and other social currents of that time.

      However, with hindsight and all the “progress” we have made, most of us would now conclude that prohibition caused more problems than those it solved. As a direct result of prohibition, organized crime entered the big time in the New World. The gangsters who now trade in women, children, and drugs got their start trading in alcohol, gambling, and protection racketeering.

      Does making something illegal (i.e. prostitution) really solve the problem? Is banning GTA from a handful of stores going to really make any difference? What is the answer? I don’t know. I hate misogynous rap music, but our children (both male and female) want to listen to it. How to approach this?

      • marv

        “Does making something illegal (i.e. prostitution) really solve the problem? Is banning GTA from a handful of stores going to really make any difference? What is the answer? I don’t know. I hate misogynous rap music, but our children (both male and female) want to listen to it. How to approach this?”

        Would you also equivocate about making rape and sexual harassment unlawful? Or segregation and apartheid? If you believe in human rights the answer is obvious. And you can’t compare violating women to prohibiting alcohol? Persons can not be ethically compared to beverages for consumption. Granted alcohol use in men is related to violence against women so tighter controls could be warranted.

        To single out rap music for misogyny is racist.
        http://feministcurrent.com/804/804/

        • Morag

          Red’s trying to teach the ladies that anything to do with women’s rights is a special case, very complex, with lots and lots of grey areas. He’s trying to help us look at things in a more rational, objective, cool-headed way. Pffft.

          • marv

            “Red’s trying to teach the ladies that anything to do with women’s rights is a special case, very complex, with lots and lots of grey areas.”

            Oh yes. I remember your marvelous neologism for male rationalists: The Greys.

          • Morag

            Heh. So many of the men who post here, I’ve noticed, occupy this grey area. They’re moderates when it comes to women’s humanity.

            In other words, MRA-lite. Just trying to nudge us back toward the status quo, politely and dispassionately. They often begin with: “yeah, I hear what you’re saying about objectification [or sexual harassment, prostitution, porn, rape] but what you’ve got to remember is … ”

            The upshot of their long-winded lectures can usually be summarized as: “women’s subordination is a pretty good deal–but not too much, I’ll grant you that!”

      • RadFemPornBasher

        Blah blah blah blah blah…

        Hey, Red- update your argument! Yours is more than 20 years old!

        • Morag

          Snort! I don’t think I want to hear his updated argument, either!

          • RadFemPornBasher

            TW for mention of porn, violence

            I just can’t believe that we’ve basically gotten nowhere, except now porn really is *everywhere*, and it’s much more violent and humiliating to women, and then some clown comes along and argues about the unclear boundaries and the First Amendment (which was freedom to speak against the government without being beheaded or whatnot- not so dudes can jack off to videos of women being covered in jizz) and “what to do, what to do?” Tired of the seemingly sensitive man who can only write about how tragic it is, but a necessary evil, do we want to censor art? And then who gets to decide what *is* porn? Blah blah blah blah blah… After more than 20 years, pretty much that’s all I hear. It’s the same old argument. And meanwhile, porn is getting more and more violent every day. Looks like *someone* knows what porn is, huh? I mean, they keep making it and the people responsible for making it know pretty well they’re making porn.

            “Should all porn be illegal, or only the type you don’t like?”

            God I’m sick of hearing that question virtually every time porn is brought up.

            Translated: You may not like this, ladies, but if you try to restrict it you will be a *thoughtless prude,* preying on men who only want to be left alone so they can jerk off to violence against women.

      • Meh

        “I see these issues as being very challenging. Where, for example, do we draw the line between censorship (i.e. imposing moral standards on book publishers, video game makers, blog writers, etc) and freedom of speech or expression?”

        You know what? I find it really fucking offensive that when women voice how frightened/frustrated they are with this violent shit that there’s always that one person there to rebut the argument with, “But censorshipppp!”

        What do you suggest should be done?

        • It’s funny how the so-called “challenging” aspect of free speech debates are most often a bunch of white guys fighting for hate speech.

          • Meh

            Exactly. I’ve seen too many arseholes hide behind the freedom of speech/anti-censorship argument to actually take it seriously.

            What they’re saying is essentially, “I hear your frustrations, but I don’t want this violent shit taken away from me. In conclusion, who gives a fuck about your concerns? Signed, every arsehole.”

      • ArgleBargle

        Yes, Red, making it illegal for men to rape women and children via prostitution and porn will go a long way to solving the problem. Imagine if these laws were enacted, with substantial jail sentences as the penalty. And that the police were directed by the government to aggressively enforce the laws, putting johns and pimps into jail at the same rate they had previously jailed women in prostitution. Would take no time for the “demand” side to dry up to almost nothing. What do you say, Red, worth a try ?

  • The poor poor dudes.

    Their fragile little world is just crumbling at their feet. Their entitlement penis is no longer sufficient and DAMMIT! rape is being discussed as the horrific male crime that it is!

    Get your male tears mugs, nay barrels, ready. These men have a lot of crying to do.

  • Ellesar

    I am perfectly happy to accept that some men have lost out and continue to lose out due to feminism. No feminist should ever try to argue that ending patriarchy and all manifestations of male oppression will make all men happy! Both my grandfathers treated my grandmothers appallingly for years. Now most divorces are instigated by women. No, often this isn’t making for happiness all round, but it is a hell of a lot better than being married until death to someone who has abused you consistently.

    Of course some men are unhappy that women, and particularly feminist women try to stop the various abuses that have just been taken for granted for so long. Sexist misogynist men long for the way things used to be because they got a bigger slice of the pie, had a maid in the living room, had a cook in the kitchen, a whore in the bedroom. Is it any wonder that so many of us got SO sick of it?

    • Rchen

      I remember a misogynist dude telling me feminism caused a huge increase in divorce. I said so what if it did? I said once women could get decent jobs and realized they didn’t have to accept a bad husband then it was to be expected that any man who couldn’t move with the times would end up divorced. Poor men, if they want relationships with women now, they might just have to live up to our standards and like pick up the vacuum and stop raping and stuff.

    • A misogynist’s worst fear is being treated by women in the exact way they themselves treat women, that women might behave the same way they themselves behave.

      ‘Twas ever thus, apparently. http://www.messynessychic.com/2014/12/09/the-posters-that-warned-against-the-horrors-of-a-world-with-womens-rights/

      • Missfit

        Totally. Men wouldn’t like to be treated the way women are in patriarchy. This is made very clear through these posters.

        Men know this and this is why they always like to insist that men and women are different because with this, when they think ‘I wouldn’t like that being done/said to me’ they can then think ‘but women being different, it’s okay when this happens to them’.

        When a woman wants to have access to the same rights and respect accorded to men, she becomes ‘mannish’ (again from the anti-suffragists posters).

        Fuck gender.

  • Pingback: Insert ‘some’ if it makes you feel a little better | REAL for women()