Nathan Poe created Poe’s Law in 2005 after spending time on christianforums.com debating the concept of creationism. Poe’s Law states:
Without a blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of extremism or fundamentalism that someone won’t mistake for the real thing.
Enter the hashtag #EndFathersDay. It was a stroke of incredible genius on the part the 4chan commenter who created it. It appears the point was to con feminists into retweeting it. And they did. Enough to get make the hashtag trend worldwide. An example of one of those retweeted tweets:
Note the 253 rewteets.
Eventually feminists did realize they had been duped. But not before making complete fools of themselves. Instead of taking responsibility for the feminists who took the hashtag seriously or calling out the inherent misandry in the feminist movement, feminists instead are upset that people thought feminists created the hashtag. And it is not only about #EndFathersDay. 4chan graced Twitter with #WhitesCantBeRaped and it too was taken seriously by many feminists and progressives.
Yes, there are plenty of feminists and progressives who called foul. Yet there seems to be far more who did not. Feminists are upset that people think they created the hashtag. But why? Are #EndFathersDay and #WhitesCantBeRaped any different from #NotAllMen and #KillAllMen, two hashtags created by feminists?
That brings us back to Poe’s Law. Without a blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of extremism or fundamentalism that someone will not mistake for the real thing.
That is exactly what happened here. Not only did non-feminists think feminists created the hashtags, actual feminists thought feminists created them as well.
For all the men’s rights bashing feminists engage in, nothing is a better indictment of the modern feminist movement than how feminists responded to the #EndFathersDay hashtag.That they joined in and attacked men for being fathers and then whined about people assuming they created the hashtag is the perfect example of what modern feminism is about: misandry.
Ironically, this is not the first time 4chan conned feminists into revealing their true attitudes about men. The group did it last year with #INeedMasculismBecause. That one prompted thousands of feminists to trip over themselves mocking men.
Feminists can complain that they did not create the hashtag, and that is a fair argument. However, that everyone assumed that they did should make feminists rethink their message. When your rhetoric is so extreme that people cannot tell when someone is mocking you, there is a problem.
Toy Soldiers 
Pingback: #EndFathersDay: The perfect example of Poe’s Law | Manosphere.com
Pingback: #EndFathersDay |
Remember, feminism isn’t anti-men!!!
Saying they didn’t create that tag is just about the lamest defense possible. To think that agreeing with a reprehensible sentiment is excusable if you didn’t originate it requires a massive sense of entitlement and a history of not being held accountable–so naturally thats what feminists are doing.
Instead of being upset that 4chan trolled them, maybe these feminists should take a long hard look at why they were so easily trolled. After all, the trolling wouldn’t have been successful if the feminists who took it seriously didn’t actually believe in it in the first place.
It doesn’t matter who created it. What matters is that feminists picked it up and ran with it instead of ignoring it. Have you seen this article about it?
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/380339/endfathersday-tweets-seek-stop-misogynistic-celebration-molly-wharton
TDOM, I did not see that article. I think some people still do not know that some of the anti-male tweets were made by trolls. That said, the issue is not just that feminists ran with the hashtag, but that it sounds like a hashtag they would actually create. That is the problem.
“I think some people still do not know that some of the anti-male tweets were made by trolls.”
This is another problem. The so-called double agents. Feminists who masquerade as MRAs making negative statements about women so that feminists are provided “proof” that MRAs are evil misogynists. Or vice versa. MRAs masquerading as feminists saying hateful things about men. The instigators may not even belong to either group. They just want to stir up trouble. Its getting to the point that you can’t tell who is saying what and so no one is credible. It’s one reason why I rarely read comments under articles unless it is a website like yours that I trust and where I recognize the commentors.
Funny thing is I saw people on Twitter yesterday claiming that MRAs started the tag as a way to troll feminists. No proof mind you, just claims.
Danny, there is someone on Thought Catalog claiming she created the hashtag and was dead serious:
Setting that aside, I think it says a lot that most of the feminists talking about the hashtag do not disagree with it. I have yet to read any feminist posts stating that they believe fathers are important, valuable, and should be recognized. I have not seen any feminists challenging the idea that because white people have power they cannot be raped. All I have seen is the typical defensive retort “That’s not my feminism!”
This reminds me of how the Tea Party, Republicans, and conservatives responded to the “Barack the Magic Negro” song. They did not object to the obvious racist nature of the song. Instead, they complained that the song made their groups look bad.
That’s a weird double standard TS. When there are some feminists that support something nasty we are supposed to just know that there are feminists that don’t support it, to the point that asking them to respond is an attack on feminists.
On the other hand even in the face of MRAs saying they don’t support something nasty its okay to still continue to say that MRAs support that nasty thing. Take the fallout from Elliot Rodger’s attack.
pretty sure that Anne Gus article on thought catalog is a joke. Not a very good one, but still
Not particularly, Danny. It is consistent with how many movements behave. They tend to view themselves as good, justified, and right. If anyone from their movement does something indefensible, the movement seeks to distance itself not because the act was wrong but because it will make them look bad. Of course, this standard does not apply to the groups movements hate. Those groups can be lambasted even if the people used to attack them have nothing to do with those groups.