Miss Whiplash and ManBoobz – The Mystery of the Male Feminist

Posted: October 18, 2011 in Feminism, Masculinities
Tags: , ,

Photo from: http://rachelrabbitwhite.com/occupy-slutwalk-a-tale-of-two-protests/#comments

‘THIS IS WHAT A FEMINIST LOOKS LIKE’ – the words are scrawled on this ‘male feminist’ s dare I say it rather skinny, but showing a bit of belly, very pale torso. And of course he sports a fagly beard.

But what do ‘male feminists’ look like? Who are they? And why do they identify with feminism which is so blatantly a movement in the interests of (some) women, that demonises (most) men?

I don’t think I have very sophisticated answers. Men who are feminists confuse the shit out of me, these days. So I thought maybe some of you could enlighten me.

regular commenter Stoner, reminded me of a high profile internet male feminist: Manboobz. http://manboobz.com/

We discussed whether the ‘manboobz’ of his name refer to himself, in a self-depreciating humourous way, or whether he is saying something about anti -feminist men. Do they think they are big masculine men but really they have ‘manboobz’? I don’t know! His tagline is ‘misogyny- I mock it’ so I expect it is the latter.

My distrust of men who are feminists is influenced in part by Mark Simpson’s excellent essay, A Hiding To Nothing. Here he presents feminism as ‘Miss Whiplash’ , a dominatrix keeping men in line, but without the fun of S and M. Just the pain. Using this analogy, men feminists would have to be masochistic, taking the blows on behalf of their fellow men, for the sake of the ‘sisterhood’.

Another commenter (I think it was Jay Generally) questioned the portrayal of feminism as a big bad domme.  I can see it is a bit crass. And I am also aware that feminists use the ‘S and M’ metaphor to describe women’s oppression by men. (eg Laurie Penny). And I hate to copy feminists. But I think my version – or rather Simpson’s- of ‘Miss Whiplash’ is a bit different.

I am not saying feminists completely dominate men or ‘society’ in a sadistic manner. Rather that they take a punitive approach to anyone who does not go along with their dogma. If you are not a male feminist and are not masochistic in that way, you are seen as a ‘problem’ as a man, a problem that needs punishing.

What do you think?

Is men being feminist a contradiction in terms?

Are you a man and a feminist?

Does the Miss Whiplash metaphor work?


Comments
  1. Ooh QRG, lots to think about here, but I have to share this video:

    The song is called Straight White Male: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVX3cpNKSuM

    Lyrics include: “I’m a guy getting paid more than a girl with a degree/I can walk down the streets in the dark, no one wants to rape me” and “My skin and my gender and my orientation are the best things to have when you live in this nation/I recommend it highly.”

    I can’t tell if my cringing is at the beard, the song itself or the bad Mountain Goats imitation, but there you go.

    • HahaHaha!

      maybe they are brothers, the two beardy feminists.

      But the thing is- whilst saying ‘straight white men’ have it all, he told a story of a man abandoning his son. How does that son ‘have it all’? Or even the dad who lost his son?

  2. And why do they identify with feminism which is so blatantly a movement in the interests of (some) women, that demonises (most) men?

    Because “radical feminism” != “all feminism.”

    It’s possible to strongly disagree with shit people say without disagreeing with other things they say. Even if some radical nutters believe you don’t have the right to call yourself a feminist if you’ve got (or had) a cock, I’d probably say most male feminists have female feminist friends who don’t think that at all.

    I understand men and women who don’t like the label because their experience has negative connotations for them. I’m not going to force anyone to label themselves “feminist” if that means something bad to them. But, your negative experiences are not the universal experience.

    • I didn’t say my experiences were universal. and I have no experience of being a man. I am genuinely interested.

      Nice beard by the way😀

    • Jonathan says:

      Exactly so. Yes, some feminists talk a load of crap. So what? Loads of people talk crap – and other people (like QRG) are here to pull them up when they do😉

      But as regards feminism itself: Personally, I don’t see how anyone (man, woman or whoever) can NOT be a feminist.

      “What is feminism? Simply the belief that women should be as free as men, however nuts, dim, deluded, badly dressed, fat, receding, lazy and smug they might be. Are you a feminist? Hahaha. Of course you are.” — Caitlin Moran

      • typhonblue says:

        I believe men should be as free as women.

        I don’t seem to be scoring feminist approval with that belief though.

        • me neither. and as for Caitlin Moran – I’m not a fan.

          • Jonathan says:

            I also believe men should be as free as women, which in my own case means that I (as a man) should be free to be as unmasculine as I want – and the feminist maxim “biology is not destiny” supports this implicitly.

            If individual feminists sometimes adopt a more essentialist position, saying that men are this (usually bad) and women are that (usually good), well, their approval was never really worth having anyway.

            (PS I think Caitlin Moran is funny, but okay she’s not for everyone.)

        • AOBAG says:

          Notice how every generalisation/characteristic of males in that quote is negative, too? Always amazes me how they’ll stand on the platform of equality but are quite fond of trying to prove how men as a whole are lazier, more useless, clueless etc. than women…

      • fidelbogen says:

        Feminism is a social cancer, so I reckon some people don’t wish to be a part of such a thing. That’s understandable.

  3. marc2020 says:

    I’ve never been comfortable identifying as a male feminist manly because it feels like I’m trying to muscle in on their movement also I’m not really into labels but I’d say I was pro feminist. I’d always thought there was some imbalance between the way men and women are treated and I still do in fact. My mum wasn’t a feminist so there was no osmosis or anything like that, it just sort of happened.

    Besides I’d always been left wing witch meant I was already team anti racist, team pro gay, team anti war, so I must be team feminism as well.

    Also the feminist’s were the only ones confronting the “real man” stereotype (I sure as hell didn’t see any men doing it at the time) so I felt comforted by that. Of course that all changed when I discovered your awesome blog and through that the writings of Mark Simpson.

    I’m still pro feminist In the scene that I want equality between all genders and as I say it was an interest in feminism which lead me to question allot of what I was taken believe as gospel about male gender roles and masculinity but I don’t identify as a feminist.

    I feel like I have more to say on this issue but I can’t quite put it into words at he moment.

    Also I just think manboobz is a funny blog.

  4. Yay! A topic I feel like I can comment on! (Normally your Focault/Simpson stuff goes right over my head, having never read either of their work.)

    Are you familiar with GirlWritesWhat?
    http://owningyourshit.blogspot.com/

    GWW is a 40-year-old female MRA. She writes some of the most well-written and persuasive content of any MRA I’ve ever seen – but don’t we have to ask the same question of her? Why in the world would a WOMAN spend the time and energy to fight a group that advocates for women and seeks to support women like her who have been abused (http://owningyourshit.blogspot.com/2011/05/why-i-advocate-for-mens-rights.html).

    The reality is that her life experiences had tainted her against men – men had done bad things to her – but 8 seconds in front of a family court judge convinced her that the SYSTEM was against men. Yes, she benefitted from it – but she realized how easy it could be to abuse the system, and when she found men who had been abused by the system, she couldn’t stand for it.

    I imagine that male feminists are the same way – their life experiences have shown them that the women around them or women they love have been hurt by the gender system – and vow to change it. For them to accept that men get fucked over by the system in a way more severe or with greater ramifications than women is just a bridge too far for their experiences to match up with.

    • Ha – glad you could get into this one, EE! Though I slipped in a bit of Simpson anyway.

      That blog is interesting. And yes the same can be applied to a ‘woman MRA’. Though just skimming her work she is much more ‘reasonable’ and considering of women’s situation than most MRAs. She is also married with kids and I know this may sound odd, but I often wonder if many women in ltr with men actually hold quite a lot of power. What I mean is, does she practise what she preaches? we will never know.

      I still think men often do experience the ‘system’ against them and still don’t speak out!

  5. This stood out for me, Marc:

    ‘Besides I’d always been left wing witch meant I was already team anti racist, team pro gay, team anti war, so I must be team feminism as well.’

    Because I think people feel they *should* be feminist as it goes with all the other right-on things.

    But in fact a lot of feminism is very conservative!

    You are right it’s hard to find a critique of masculinity. But I am glad you found me and Simpson because feminism’s critique is lacking in some major areas

  6. redpesto says:

    Gah, ‘male feminists’…we really are re-living the 80s dream…

    The BDSM analogy doesn’t work, especially if you regard it as a legitimate sexual activity (and there are plenty of feminists who will argue the toss over that point). Moreover, it doesn’t (have to) correlate with anyone’s sexual politics (a point that some feminists all too easily overlook, especially when it comes to masochism).

    Secondly, ‘male feminist’ is an example of a ‘modifier’ that you’ve written about elsewhere – it implies feminists are, by default, women. Lastly, it’s a scene/movement that seems to have far too many guys who (a) attempt to be even more zealous in their hostility to ‘the patriarchy’ (or whatever) than women; (b) end up being even more smug about it; (c) only ever offer a model of masculinity that’s based on not doing what men ‘normally do’.

    At my my most-mean-spirited, I tend to think of them as ‘fellow travellers’ or ‘useful idiots’ in the old Marxist sense, largely because they sound like cheerleaders rather than a spirit of supportive and nuanced critique. It’s not as though mainstream feminism knows what to do with them, let alone whether it wants them on board in the first place. Men can do progressive gender politics via other organisations/movements/issues which aren’t so reliant on them acting as sidekicks (if they’re that lucky). In that context, ‘pro-feminist’ is more useful than ‘male feminist’, even if the feminism one is ‘pro’ is one which includes being pro-porn/sex workers/BDSM.

    • yes they are very ‘smug’ I find! and yet also that smugness can spill over into ‘machismo’.

    • fidelbogen says:

      Some people are not feminists, and you will never know why they are not feminists. And if they do not tell you why they are not feminists, then you may not interrogate them about this or presume to know the reason for it. And if you compromise the quality of their lives in any way, whether materially or psychologically, then they shall be morally licensed to proceed against you until you stop doing whatever you are doing.

      What I have stated above, concerning individual non-feminists, applies as well to the non-feminist population en masse. And this demographic may, at its discretion, organize itself in any combination or combinations it sees fit for the purpose of securing its social and political interest against any or all forms of feminist encroachment.

      Words to the wise.

  7. dennis mccann says:

    male feminists have learned its easier and less expensive to empathise a woman’s knickers down rather than wine and dine them off

  8. redpesto says:

    QRG: If you are not a male feminist and are not masochistic in that way, you are seen as a ‘problem’ as a man, a problem that needs punishing.

    Not quite? Maybe it’s that if you are neither of the above you simply become ‘the enemy’ in an adversarial dingdong where women get to be the (ahem) ‘good guys’?

  9. john smith says:

    “why do they identify with feminism”

    It’s a modern utopian dream, the fantasy of creating a “heaven on earth”. A world without boundaries, a world without differences, a world without a hierarchy, a world without conflict. A society based on universal equality and connected by love.

    Unfortunately, this dream comes into conflict with “Others” who are different, who have “Other” ideals and “Other” qualities. They must be rejected in their entirety.

    How male feminists deal with this conflict is to split themselves into two. The feminist self that embraces the feminist utopian dream, and the conflicting self( “violent self”) onto others, that is heterosexual males. Hugo Schwyzer is a very good example of this.

  10. john smith says:

    Sorry that should read as,

    , and the conflicting self( “the violent self”) that is projected onto others,

  11. Jim says:

    It’s perfectly reasonable for a man to be a feminist if he is an egalitarian feminist, and for a women to be the same kind of MRA. I see a lot of that. Ballgame is an egalitarian feminsts who criticizes gynocentric anf other inegalitarian feminisms.

    And then there are men who are gender feminsts. It’s really a form of chivalry tarted up as something progressive. And not just the men in feminism make this mistake. Where Maoisnm had a Cutlural revolution to root out Party functionaries who were evolving into the same kind of Mandarin class they had eradicated, feminism in the 80s’ failed to root out those who turned to traditionalist thinking with Goddess feminism, and a Different Voice feminism and all the woo about the moral superiority of women, see also feminist discourse about war and men and also eco-feminism. Pure, unnadualterated Victorianism, right in line with the worship of Jane Austen and the vicarious identification with her characters.

    Here’s a pretty pitiless analysis of the motivation behind this second kind of feminist who happens to be a man http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/the-one-good-man/ and it’s not just about getting laid, it’s about being righteous, a much deeper kind of vampirism.

    • I don’t know ballgame but I don’t understand what an ‘egalitarian’ feminist is. feminism is based on the premise that ‘inequality’ means women are more disadvantaged than men, and, at the hands of men. How is that ‘egalitarian’?

      • Jim says:

        You do know ballgame; he blogs at FC.

        Egalitarian feminism is about gender equality, and maybe your point is that it doesn’t really exist.

  12. elissa says:

    Most here seem to be able to spot and identify a male feminist in the wild, so I’m wondering if there is a set of common behavioral characteristics that are solid prophets of this predilection…

    – catechism of oppression talk
    – overly self-effacing
    – overly deferential
    – more metrosexual / hipster than average ??
    – more younger than older
    – more educated than not, but not too much so
    – more middle class and up, than not
    – more gay than not (not sure about this one?)
    – more out-group than in-group
    – less sexual experience than not
    – less of a big picture type than not
    – more of an idealist than not

    I wish that coke head Freud was still around…we need a good penis wielding ethnographer on staff here.

    • Mr Simpson is good on male (and other) feminists. But I don’t know if he’ll want to join the debate – he is not a fan of feminism, even as a topic of conversation! I know though, that he thinks male feminists exert a particularly slimy and ostensibly ‘self-effacing’ version of machismo.

      They have the attitude that ‘real men’ (and real women) are feminists and everyone else is stupid.

      It was the ‘pro-feminist’ New Statesman journalists treatment of me that caused Mark S to come out in my defence in a way he wouldn’t normally bother to do! Partly because they were so ‘macho’.

      • elissa says:

        Ah yes, I’ve read some of his stuff on feminists and cohorts – he’s not very kind to them at all, to be sure.

        And I do recall your run in with the New Statesman hyenas – you had a post here where they contributed – trying to back peddle up the river they spawned in.

        • M Pierce says:

          I began to call myself a feminist when I found out about feminism way back in A level sociology class . Years later I started to use the phrase “feminist ally” [for some of the reasons outlined here]. And now I try to shut up and keep quiet.

          When I recall my early 20s I cannot help but thinking that I was one of those useful idiots Red Pesto refers to – it makes me cringe. Or if I’m being particularly uncharitable perhaps it was a convoluted form of “slimy, ostensibly self-effacing machismo” from a vaguely middle-class/liberal wanker.

          I hope I’m not like that now.

  13. Jim says:

    Oh, and I don’t get the BDSM mistress of pain thing as much as the angry nun beating on kids for being human. There is a lot of sanctimonious rage in some brands of feminism, and just plain self-righteousness in the others, that sounds a lot more religious than raunchy. The tone in a lot of internet anfd print feminism is very Amen Corner.

  14. Hiya QRG-

    I think I l;eft this link before, but this is me arguing with Mr. Manboobz—

    http://stonerwithaboner.wordpress.com/2011/08/29/arguing-with-david-futrelle/

    Anyways, yesterday, I chimed in on a post about PUA’s and got called an asshole by someone called Ruttee. Then when I asked why I was an asshole Ozymandidas broke it down but put thinks I didn’t say into the equation. Depending on how you look at it feminists are either telling part of the story or being dishonest/disingenuous….

  15. oh, here’s an article where Male Feminist Roger Jensen talks down to Mairne’s….

    http://genderberg.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=4522

    “Below is an edited transcript of the words I offered to those men. I am not naïve; the majority probably dismissed the critique of pornography and gave little or no thought to an analysis of masculinity and violence. ”

    Yeah, people tend not to listen when you talk down to them….

    “Oh yea, by the way, Suzy — you know, Suzy Rottencrotch, that lovely Marine slang term for your girlfriend — she’s a whore, too.”

    -see Professor, there you go, lecturing in a condescending manner….

    “Here’s what we know about “whores”: They don’t tend to come from wealthy families. They are more likely than other women to have been sexually abused as children. And they experience high rates of drug and alcohol abuse. Yes, women in pornography choose to perform, and they are paid. But we all recognize that choices are made in the real world under a variety of constraints; not everyone chooses from the same range of options. When you are using pornography, you are using those women.”

    Maybe so, Mr. Jensen, or maybe, just maybe they are exhibitionists, I don’t know if that is the case, why don’t you ask them….

    Also, here’s what we know about Marine’s most of ’em don’t come from wealthy families, wait, maybe they just like to blow shit up so they joined up. I really don’t know. If I don’t know, instead of pretending that I do, I ask questions…. Otherwise I might be MANSPLAININ’…..

    • Jim says:

      Is that the famous masculinities theorist Roger Jensen? What a pateranlistic prat, and a privileged idiot when it comes to understanding Marines, too.

    • I HATE R. JENSEN! He wrote this essay called Cluster Bombs and Blow Bangs likening porn to war! Stupid man.

      • you know, I have to say I admire R. Jensen in a perverse way. He manages to be misandrist and misogynist (denying women’s agency) at the same time. Quite a feat. Also, he said something about a “friend” who boasted about sleeping with a prostitute but was so good the prostitute refunded his money. He said he later dropped said “friend” after hearing the story. I realized that is genius. The “friend” was sleazy and pathetic for paying for sex, a “misogynist” for not respecting the normal channels for procurring sex. And also a stud for giving a very experienced woman a good time. Hahahaha cognitive dissonance I guess. I’ll have to make the same boast next time I am around guys who like to brag and there are girls within earshot. It’l be interesting to see if I get looks of admiration or disgust……

  16. […] just gave me a shoutout at her Miss Whiplash and ManBoobz – The Mystery of the Male Feminist […]

  17. Jay Generally says:

    Quiet Riot Girl has sad my name on the internet twice now! Squee!

    And yes, that was me, who brought up the Femdom/Feminism comparison because I’m a male sub. Femdom and I have a history, and I view femdom positively, with little to no mitigation. Feminism, I view… You see, feminism is… you know what? I don’t know. The Merriam-Webster’s dictionary definition of feminism explains feminism as

    1: the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes
    And
    2: organized activity on behalf of women’s rights and interests

    That’s pretty hard to argue against, right? Especially the first definition. However the larger feminist body of writing seems to have assumed de facto privilege for all men at all times in every political, economic, and social sphere. And I disagree with that. I might still call myself a feminist, but I don’t because there was suddenly a huge push on the internet a while back that men (I don’t know if that’s cis-specific or not) shouldn’t call themselves feminists. Men should call themselves pro-feminists largely because, it was reasoned, men would naturally dominate and co-opt the feminist movement and shout-down or intimidate the other members. Well, that was kind of the final straw. I now consider myself a person seriously concerned with gender and gender politics and leave it that. I see situations where women seem to be pulling the short straw, and I want that fixed. I see situations where men draw the short straw, and I want that fixed too.

    So, let me bounce back a bit to men would naturally dominate and co-opt the feminist movement and shout-down or intimidate the other members. Feminism seems a little obsessed with how weak women are. Feminism: strength is needed! Femdom is a little obsessed with the opposite. Femodm: strength is possessed. Some dominatrices are dominant and happen to be female; others interlace the two, they are strong because they are female (maybe even female because they are strong; much like a true gender flip of the concept that a man has to earn his manhood and could lose it at any time.)

  18. quisalas says:

    My Ethics teacher (whom I otherwise adore) was a male feminist. And yes, he had a beard.😀 The way he spoke of it was more geared towards what feminism should be, not what it had been turned into by the “girls rule, boys drool” crowd. I am not a feminist myself, I consider myself a humanist and leave it at that, but while the Ethics teacher did talk about all the bad that had been done to women (and was still being done to them), he focused a lot more on what we as people could do to support their ideals rather than just talk about them. He uses the female doctor at his pets’ vet clinic every time, he patronizes female-owned establishments, and goes out of his way to choose a woman over a man whenever he can to directly support the success of women. Which is all well and good, I suppose, but he’s still making his decisions based on what sexual equipment they wear under their uniforms and that just doesn’t sit well with me.

    We had a very good rapport, so he let his guard down around me and was able to be himself and not just Politically Correct Teacher. My final research paper for that class was on circumcision (please, don’t derail this topic with that one!) and in one part of it, I wrote that being intact made it more pleasurable for men. He circled the sentence and then said “Ha! Because oversexed men need to have MORE pleasure.” I was completely taken aback and responded “If someone said that women should be controlled sexually by being surgically altered to enjoy it less, you would flip your shit.” He conceded the point, but the initial reaction was still there. He views male sexually as the flawed device they selfishly use to please themselves.

    I think a lot of the male feminism comes from a genuine desire to have things right, and by right, I mean correct, equal, as they should be. And I think some of it comes from guilt because historically, men have created the society that put women into the status of second-class citizen. That guilt may manifest itself as a sense of unworthyness or self-loathing (which I got glimpses of from the Ethics teacher), which is pitiable and unhealthy, but it doesn’t condemn the whole concept of a male feminist. I do think there is a perfectly healthy (regarding mental health) way to be a male feminist without being misandrist (WHY is misandrist not a word?!). But I’ve yet to actually see it happen in a real-live person I know.

    It feels too much like the male feminist position is still insisting that women are weak (much as feminism does) because it goes out of its way to help them.

    • Hi Quisalas, fascinating anecdotes thanks!

      ‘It feels too much like the male feminist position is still insisting that women are weak (much as feminism does) because it goes out of its way to help them’ – excellent point I agree. There is often something ‘paternalistic’ about men feminists. They can’t handle me because I won’t play the ‘little woman’ with them.

    • Jim says:

      “he focused a lot more on what we as people could do to support their ideals rather than just talk about them”

      Ah. The paternalistic feminist. Not a bit patriarchal.

      “Ha! Because oversexed men need to have MORE pleasure.”

      Serious WTF. Oversexed? Can we gat any more church ady? This reminds me of Hugo schwyzer’s vendetta against the penis.

  19. tu quoque says:

    The PUAs have this, like everything else, figured out. Male feminists are the ultimate betas, but what makes them unique is that they’re happily beta. Most men are beta out of fear and self-loathing. Their behavior is submissive towards women without external complaint, but internally they are tortured with shame over their weakness. They don’t stand up for themselves because women are their only possible source of emotional comfort and because they’re afraid of violence and demonization from more powerful males if they step out of line. Male feminists are men who get a sexual thrill from serving and colluding with women in taking down other men. Hugo Schwyzer is such a perfect, one-dimentional example of this, it’s almost cartoonish. Sad, really.

    • LOL the PUAs don’t have ‘everything’ figured out!

    • Jim says:

      I’ll go maybe with the beta part, but not in the OPUA framework. male feminsts are very often men who don’t fit in well with men. This is treu of a lot of male academics BTW, they were always the dweebs who never got picked for the team or whatever, and they harden into contrarians as they …well, grow up is not quite the term I am looking for. Feminism is just one expression of their contrarianism. However high-minded thaey may be able to make it sound, however social justicy, it is still about them.

      • typhonblue says:

        I’ve noticed this about liberals. They want a new world order in which they’re on the top of the hierarchy. Still autocratic. Still fascistic. Still domineering.

        Some, many? most? feminist men seem to desire a new man order in which they’re on top of the manarchy. They’re the special man, won out against all the other less-special men.

        Still macho. Still posturing. Still hegemonic masculinity.

      • tu quoque says:

        Feminism is, at this point, the old guard gender system. It’s hardly even different with social conservatism. How are they being contrarians? MRAs are the only ones promoting a gender system that has never been tried before.

  20. tu quoque says:

    I would like to point out that “beta” men aren’t actually weak. It’s just that their place on the totem pole is so low that to act out is to invite such risk that most of the time it simply isn’t worth it. But that doesn’t change the fact that they view this caution as weakness.

  21. Heresiarchh says:

    There are fish, I believe, whose males have divergent reproductive strategies. There are macho fish, who are all big a fierce and fight other males; and there are feminised fish who trick other males and also females into thinking that they’re actually female. They hang around with the girls. And then they sneak in and mate. I remember seeing Attenborough on the subject.

    Achilles did something similar before he went to Troy, possibly because his mum thought that dressing him up in girls’ clothes would put him off warfare and suchlike. It didn’t.

    Could a subset of men have discovered, consciously or (more likely) unconsciously, that adopting strident feminist and even misandrist positions was a way of getting sex? Sex with feminists, yes, but still sex. The beards would be a way of reminding their target audience that, yes, femanists have functioning gonads. For the feminists they consort with, perhaps it’s a way of being “lesbian” and still getting cock. Just a thought.

    • quite a marvellous thought I might say!

      ‘The beards would be a way of reminding their target audience that, yes, femanists have functioning gonads. For the feminists they consort with, perhaps it’s a way of being “lesbian” and still getting cock. Just a thought.’ – haha!

      yes it is something not often acknowledged that feminism is SO anti-men that active feminists are actually very lesbianic. So they need lesbianic type men.

      I have not exactly had an illustrious sexual career, but I will say this, even in my feminist days I NEVER shagged a feminist man!

      • Jim says:

        I think you’re thinking of cuttlefish. What’s a “cuddlefish” – is that what a drag queen calls an affectionate bio-woman?

        • ‘cuddlefish’ sound great!

          • Jay Generally says:

            I’d totally keep an aquarium full of cuddlefish. Heck, I’d keep one for cuttlefish; they’re pretty awesome too! Cuttlefish aren’t alone there, some species of snake will also exude female pheromones to pull away other males who waste their sperm gang-banging the female impersonator who then doubles back to mate with the genuine female.

            I can’t quite equate that rather brilliant form of bisexual double-play with what male feminists are being accused of. This fella has his shirt open, his beard on, his happy trail displayed, writing all over his breasts (which forces you to look at them), and he’s openly challenging all male comers where most of the viewers are likely to be female. He’s rather clearly displaying in about the most masculine sense I can think of. It’s mentally quite evocative that Sporn stars, men socially thought of as uber-male, are playing with ‘feminine’ display tactics. Hmm, in fact if I were to equate male social potency with money and attention then sports players would be the better analogy to the sneaky submissive cuttlefish. They get men at large to waste all that money, attention, affection, even worship on them while they, if the popular narrative is true, get to roll around getting all the optimal female sexual encounters they could possibly want.

  22. Lawrence says:

    What marc2020 said earlier really chimed with me.

    I am also a pretty resolute lefty, and am to a large extent pro or anti all the things that marc is. I used perhaps slightly ponitificate to people that it was wrong to be an anti feminist, in the same way as it was to be a racist or something. I think I had a pretty simplistic view of what it meant to be a feminist – i.e. that it was about gender equality. I fundimentally believe that most of the differences between men and women are only there because we put them there, and so I was completely in favour of any doctrine that was attempting to break these differences down.

    But feminism really isn’t in favour of doing that. It’s critique on the ‘real man’ steriotype, for example, often just replaces it with another. On sexual ethics, it puts forward the erroneous (in my view) idea that sexuality was/is only regulated by men and then seeks to regulate it for itself – saying that the regulation of womens sexualities by men is a problem but then arguing that certian aspects of male and female sexualities are innate and thus forcing a whole new aparatus of regulation upon them.

    Feminism seeks to replace old things that were ‘right’ with new things that are ‘right’ without ever taking the time to evaluate whether the catagories of wrong and right are even (or ever) actually applicable. It suppliments looking at power relations in all their micro and macro complexities with one addage – ‘Men opress women’. It is utterly conservative in the sense that it seeks to supplant one strict moral narative with another, without realising that there are plenty of situations and moralities which are beyond or apart from either.

    So yeah, I still believe in gender equality (though what that actually means I am unsure – now more than ever), I just don’t think that feminism is the way to get it. What’s more, I think it is morally and interlectually incapable of coming up with a satisfactory definition of what gender eqality even means.

    I am trying not to break my moral out looks into pro- and anti- catagories anymore. They are woefully inadequate when attempting to analyse or understand the world we live in.

    • excellent points Lawrence. I don’t intend to be so ‘anti-feminist’ and a lot of my interest in e.g. Simpson’s work is an attempt to get beyond typical polarised gender politics. But sometimes I can’t help myself because feminism is a very powerful force and I think someone needs to oppose it/them!

    • Jonathan says:

      “I think I had a pretty simplistic view of what it meant to be a feminist – i.e. that it was about gender equality. I fundimentally believe that most of the differences between men and women are only there because we put them there, and so I was completely in favour of any doctrine that was attempting to break these differences down.

      Essentially, it still is. The key lesson from feminism for me is that difference is a human quality, not an inherently gendered one. Everything follows from that (so obvious it’s almost banal) simple precept – the first thing being that discrimination and prejudice based on gender is nonsensical.

      All the rest – what people seem to be having trouble with – is, I think, with what some individual feminists say. For that you just need a good bullshit detector and be able to argue your corner, or have other people to do it for you. (The bullshit I personally run into most is the bigotry of a few feminists on transgender issues.) But the underlying precept of feminism still remains.

      • I disagree Jonathan. I think feminism discriminates against men. If you scroll up through the comments you will see my post linked, Against Feminisms. That’s my stance.

        You are free to say what you want about feminism. But QRG, and many of the commenters here, have rationalised it and oppose feminism.

        • Jonathan says:

          I disagree that feminism discriminates against men. Certain quarters of the “feminist movement” may discriminate – do discriminate – against men, but I don’t think that’s the same thing at all.

          Anyway, I’ll go and read your Against Feminisms post (again), and if I’ve got anything further to say, I’ll say it there.

  23. Trimegistus says:

    Don’t forget the charms of borrowed victimhood. Victimhood is a serious badge of status on the left side of society; witness how often supposedly factual arguments break down into a contest of who’s got the higher victim card. But for a poor, miserable, middle-class white straight guy, what can he do? He loses every game of Victimhood Poker he enters. He can’t change his color, he can’t change his equipment or where he likes to stick it, so he’s stuck. Being a vocal male feminist is a way to wield a little of that seductive victimhood power.

    • very good points – there’s the chance to be victim and protector all in one!

    • Jim says:

      “Victimhood is a serious badge of status on the left side of society; …”

      And here’s the funny part – it’s a serious badge of status in the Catholicism and for that matter in the whole Abrahamic Tradtion that so many feminists claim to find so misogynist and hateful, and quite rightly. (Do you think there may be some connection, since that’s the cultural matrix they come out of?) But the temptations of the whole sick martyr thing are just too overpowering.

  24. well victimhood seems to be huge iwth MRA’s, White Power Types and the Teabaggers…..

    as far as the White Power/Teabaggers it seems to be look how the mud people are stealing our traditional way of life and making us unemployed because of affirmative action.

    • I a mixed race, a “halfbreeed” in their shitty worldview, if that makes any difference….

    • Jim says:

      With the Tea Bag and Religious Right rabble, their sense of victimization goes back to having their asses kicked but unfortunately not eliminated in and after the Civil War. they see themselves at the Righteous Remnant and can’t wait for the rest of us to be consumed in the flames of Hell in the End Times.

      • Trimegistus says:

        That’s utter nonsense. Actually learn about conservatives before repeating some shit Bill Maher said once.

        • Jim says:

          Yeah, try again. That’s Kevin Phillips i’m quoting – you know the Southern Strategy Kevin Phillips? Maybe you should go learn somthing about conservatives before you come here and make an ass of yourself with a mistake like that.

          • ok people let’s not get too upset about quotes o r misquotes😀

          • Trimegistus says:

            Just because you’re quoting some other idiot doesn’t make you less of one yourself.
            Here’s the T.E.A. Party position: taxes are too high. Explain how that’s racist. Explain how it has any fucking thing to do with millennarian Christianity.

            You’re just repeating the standard Democrat scare stories, and they’re getting a little old and shopworn.

  25. elissa says:

    A common theme I’ve noticed among ideologies such as feminism harkens back to some social psychology course I took a while back, where there was discussion on what they termed “attribution error”. This is the tendency to exaggerate the contribution of dispositional traits in items you are observing – “that sick man watching porn wants to dominate my vagina” – and minimize situational explanations for said behavior – “I’m horny and need to jerk off”.

    The above is flipped (exaggerate situational and minimize dispositional) when analyzing one’s own in-group behavior – so women are coerced, influenced, dominated into doing things they otherwise would not do if they could only not do them.

    In the case of feminism – men have agency and hence culpability, while women are acted upon and hence subjugated and, by luck of the draw, not responsible.

    Some MRM types fashionably call this the “pussy pass”.

  26. Titfortat says:

    I found this comic and decided to have some fun with it. No answers yet…😉

    http://titfortat6.blogspot.com/2011/10/calling-all-male-feminists.html

  27. Jay G: ‘This fella has his shirt open, his beard on, his happy trail displayed, writing all over his breasts (which forces you to look at them), and he’s openly challenging all male comers where most of the viewers are likely to be female. He’s rather clearly displaying in about the most masculine sense I can think of’

    I am not sure what you mean by ‘all male comers’ – who are these men? where are they?

    And…
    ‘. It’s mentally quite evocative that Sporn stars, men socially thought of as uber-male, are playing with ‘feminine’ display tactics. Hmm, in fact if I were to equate male social potency with money and attention then sports players would be the better analogy to the sneaky submissive cuttlefish. They get men at large to waste all that money, attention, affection, even worship on them while they, if the popular narrative is true, get to roll around getting all the optimal female sexual encounters they could possibly want.’

    Yes that’s true. Though I expect one or two sporno stars may have homosexual tendencies. I don’t know if they get to express them or not. But I don’t think the male feminist is presenting himself as an object of desire. He is being ‘naked’ and ‘vulnerable’ in solidarity with the women.

    • Jay Generally says:

      Well, I largely assume that he largely presumes the people who need to ‘stop imposing antiquated and irrelevant cultural constructs on self actualized women’ are male. I’m admit it’s contingent on him being the sort of feminist who stands against the supposed Patriarchy and its implicit masculinity. Frankly, if I must assign the man a sexual motivation, then I see a robin out on a limb here, complete with colored breast and prohibitive territorial calls.

  28. Paul says:

    usual lurker, occasional commenter

    (Incidentally QRG just read your new post over at GMP. Kudos, both for the article and for being able to deal with people who think Hugo Schwyzer has anything useful to say on the topic)

    I haven’t read all the comments, so apologies if I end up repeating something somebody else has said.

    Anyway, I’ll be honest, I don’t particularly trust male feminists. Or, at least, the kind of male feminist who’s in deep enough to be able to blog about it, the kind who subscribe to “rape culture” and would be willing to march at Slutwalk and where “this is what a feminist looks like Tshirt” The kind who’d teach a Women’s Study course.

    It’s hard to explain, but it just seems like they’re attempting to throw the rest of us under a bus to make themselves look better. “Ladies, men are so awful and rapey and priviledged… but not ME I’M different! I’M a feminist!”

    Those little pricks who attempt to make themselves look better by projecting their own flaws onto every other man. Like Hugo Schwyzer.

    I mean, look at the guy’s history: He’s on his fourth marriage, he’s cheated with hs own students, and was knowingly complicit in the possible cuckoldry of another man. (and that’s just the crap I can think of off the top of my head) yet HE’S the “good guy?” Why?

    Because he tells the feminists what they want to hear. He’s “anti-porn” and willing to spout off abot rape culture at the drop of a hat, but mostly it’s because he absolutely refuses to hold women responsible for *anything*

    And that’s really why the feminists love him, because he’s willing to tell them that nothing that happens to them is their fault, ever.

    Just like all the other White Knights.

    • typhonblue says:

      Paul, I have to sort of agree. I don’t think men should get a pass on their noxious behavior because they toe the party line and knee-jerk a few slogans.

      At least dark side PUAs are honest about their viciousness and don’t wear it like some sort of badge of honor. Or think a few platitudes absolves them of it.

      Patriarchy theory shames all the wrong men into taking too much responsibility and all the right men into taking too little.

    • Hi Paul and welcome.

      Yes I agree with all you say. I will say though, that is what feminists say about me! They say I say what men want to hear, I say ‘I’m not like those horrid feminists, I’m different! I’m a good guy’! But is it comparable? I don’t think so. Especially as I often write/speak in feminist spaces so the men there are not dazzled by my anti-feminist pro-men stance.

  29. typhonblue says:

    “Stop imposing antiquated and irrelevant cultural constructs on self-actualized women!”

    What? Like the antiquated and irrelevant cultural construct that antiquated and irrelevant constructs can be imposed on self-actualized women?

    Or the antiquated and irrelevant construct that self-actualized women need a guy in body paint cum shining armor to save them from antiquated and irrelevant social constructs?

    How does one fit so many opposing thoughts in one’s head without one’s brain exploding?

  30. Richard says:

    There is an additional evolutionary advantage to being a mangina/male femminist that is not often realsied. Male feminists rarely take care of their own offspring. True, they hang around the femminist household as long as they are welcome but they rarely contribute much because they have given up the role of breadwinner. Generally reproduction is used as a pretest to sponge off the state and obtain state housing and so on. In this way the mangina can trick more masculine men into supporting both him and hos own childrten.

  31. Hi Trimegistus,

    If you were calling me an idiot, thanks😉

    “A 2010 survey by the University of Washington has been cited as the strongest indication of a racial dimension to the tea party. In that survey, 73 percent of “strong” supporters of the tea party said blacks would be as well off as whites if they just tried harder, compared to 33 percent of strong tea party opponents who thought the same thing. “Support for the tea party makes one 25 percent more likely to be racially resentful than those who don’t support the tea party,” Christopher Parker, the author of the survey, concluded.”

    http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/Tea-Party-Tally/2011/1013/Tea-party-fuels-rise-of-Herman-Cain.-So-how-can-it-be-racist/%28page%29/2

  32. and, oh, yeah, glad to see they have my back even though I’m uninsured….

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20105190-503544.html

  33. redpesto says:

    Q: Are ‘male feminists’ just another variation of the zeal of the recent convert? (See also religious conversion or ex-left wing neoconservatives.) It’s not so much that they believe in gender equality etc.; it’s more that they make such a noise about the fact that they do so. It’s like they want to join the Judean People’s Front (and definitely not the People’s Front of Judea – splitters!) by trying to show how much they really, really just hate the Romans. Why else did Stoltenberg title his book Refusing to Be a Man?

    • Yes I know what you mean, redpesto!

      Though some male feminists aren’t all that zealous. Sometimes I get the impression they ‘switch on’ their feminism when they have a (women feminist) audience.

  34. elementary_watson says:

    I am a male feminist. No matter what some bigoted misandrist may think.

    I find it funny that there are some men here who stopped identifying as feminists after mainstream feminism tolld them not to; to me, strongly identifying as a feminist was caused by reading this one blog post about how to recognize “fauxmenists”, i.e. men who claim to be feminists but “still try to dominate wimmenz (TM)”. That was when I thought to myself: “No, those feminists do *not* have the authority to define who is and who isn’t a feminist. I believe that gender equality is a worthy goal, I believe that individuals’ characteristics and abilities are not determined by their sex/gender, and this makes me qua definitionem a feminist, full stop.”

    I certainly don’t try to convince anyone to start identifying as a feminist; what I will do is oppose thoughtless (or even intricate) gender essentialist remarks, be they about men or be they about women. I don’t need the approval of someone like, say, Melissa McEwan to know whether or not this is feminist or not; it is, and therefore I am a feminist.

    What really gets my eyes rolling, however, are those male “pro-feminists” or “feminist allies”, who don’t identify as feminists because they think it would be presumptuous for them to decide who is a feminist and who is not – which means they are pro-something they cannot actually define? That’s the very definition of rejecting one’s own mind to lovingly be a slave to a perceived authority.

  35. A. L. says:

    dear QRG, i also saw these pics on the interwebz and they got me thinking.
    and yes, i thank you for your post ./. sharing your thoughts and questions !

    personal/disclaimer : i’d like to be politically/feministingly “menz-inclusive”.
    past-due to/of too many negative inter-actions of self-proclaimed menz-feminists i have come to my personal conclusion that i do not wish to have men – however self-proclaimed what-ever pro-feminist-pro-bla – that i do not wish to encounter “menz” in soc. public-slut-walks-occupy-bla-safe-space/s.
    “background 101” :
    1. i live in a european country.
    2. in this country soc. womynz-only-spaces are (still) legally/allowed.
    3. no matter what ze person says : i have come to rely solely what ze acts upon ./. behaves like (in an e.g. non-cis-heteronormative-androcemtic-white-privilege-etc-way)
    meh (
    4. ergo i have heard and experienced far too many non-inclusive behaviour over the past 30+ years of esp. soc. self-proclaimed male-feminists. (no-matter-where-and-when)
    my conclusio : i do NOT need “more-of-the-same-bs” = waste of my (precious) life-time-libido-energy
    5. therefore i “radically weed out” soc. undesirable behaviour = – no matter what ze person says (and no mattter what ze-sex-gender-body as well)

    message/my conclusion : trust ze-self and only allow ze-person into your-whatever-space who ze-acts congruently.

    peace & greetz

    p.s.
    let me know if you want an “entertaining ./. geeky-goofy-vintage-YT-vid” to illustrate this😉

  36. Angelika says:

    Hi quiet riot girl,

    forgot so say that your
    > Men who are (self-proclaimed ?) feminists confuse the shit out of me, these days. <
    completely-made-my-day😉

    ot – what i was thinking of when i read "male feminists"; spontaneously, here the vintage original😉 (ParoleParole – "words nothing but words, nothing changes"…) – italian :

  37. More Misandry by Hugo Skeezer….

    http://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/in-rape-culture-all-men-are-guilty-until-proven-innocent/

    Trigger warning-it might make you vomit, so unless you have bulimia, maybe better to move on…..

  38. Here’s the Stoner With a Boner Critique–

    http://stonerwithaboner.wordpress.com/2011/12/17/another-crappy-article-by-hugo-skeezer/

    never a Male Feminist nor MRA shall I be!!!

  39. Ya wanna see Amanda Marcotte go off the rails, look at how she handles comments, funny how she reacts with personal insults when she doesn’t control the moderation….

    http://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/as-equals-and-as-friends/#comments

    (the good thing is more and more people, men and women are seeing the bigotry disguised as justice and are pushing back.)

  40. one of my comments was in moderation but eventually cleared…..

    there’s another nutty Schwyzer article here:

    http://goodmenproject.com/good-feed-blog/serious-discussion-is-not-wrath-of-feminists/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s