Can an ideology teach hate?

One of the curious changes in the online community over the last decade is the growth of the men’s rights movement. Driven by concern for men’s issues, men’s rights activists formed online communities. The movement garnered the attention of several people who have since led offline activist campaigns to help men and boys. But perhaps more than helping men, the men’s rights movement has spawned a feminist backlash against the movement and the discussion of men’s issues.

The most common accusation against men’s rights activists is that they are part of a hate group. Feminists claim that the ideology guiding men’s rights activists is rife with misogyny, particularly as it relates to violence against women. Feminists claim exposure to men’s rights groups causes people to support and potentially commit violence, although no self-professed men’s activist has ever been reported to have hurt anyone, whether on his own or in the name of the movement. Feminist bloggers like Manboobz owner David Futrelle, Amanda Marcotte, Hugo Schwyzer, and dozens of others list examples of comments and posts from men’s rights sites to try to prove their claim. As far as feminists are concerned, the men’s movement or any concern for men’s issues teaches nothing but hate.

Coincidentally,  men’s rights activists argue the same thing about feminism. Part of their core beliefs is that feminism seeks to oppress men and shift all power to women.  Of course, feminists cry foul at the mere assertion that any feminist is capable of hurting men, let alone that feminism as an ideology teaches misandry.

Case in point, on a recent Manboobz thread I mentioned my experiences with my feminist aunt. Futrelle posted a rhetorical question from a men’s rights blog, but the comment section revolved around a joke one of the men’s rights’ commenters made involving shooting feminists with boiled potatoes until they renounced feminism. To this I replied:

[…] I would have much preferred my feminist aunt to jokingly fantasize about shooting me with boiled potatoes to get me to accept feminism than have her actually maliciously shove dildos and strap-ons up my ass when I was a child to teach me how evil “patriarchy” is.

This prompted a number of comments, the gist of which was that feminism had nothing to do with my aunt’s actions, that feminism never causes bad behavior, and that my aunt is not a feminist. I received a similar response from feminist blogger Barry Deutsch several years ago when I mentioned my aunt (which also prompted Barry to ban me). My response to the Manboobz comments that an ideology can inform a person’s actions led to a host of retorts, the best of which came from Rutee Katreya:

Find for me where feminist thought says the rape of boys is a requisite action to promote equality for women. What your aunt did was fucking horrible. I don’t really see a reason for you to be on board with feminism because of it. But I simply will not allow you to slander an entire movement trying to prevent similar for hundreds of people (Not women, girls, boys, or men, people) because of one person, who can’t even get people to agree with what she did, and who nobody within has apparently defended. Trying to say we’re ‘like’ or worse, *worse* than a movement that just wants to perpetuate enslavement for a gender, because one woman who is a feminist did a horrible thing to you, is not going to fly.

This is the the same feminism that teaches that men collectively oppress women for the sole purpose of keeping all the power for themselves. The same feminism that claims that every male, regardless of his age or social status, benefits from this “patriarchy” at women’s expense. The same feminism that holds the fraction of men with power and the fraction men who commit violence as representative of the whole male population. The same feminism that views men as the ultimate enemy, one to be feared, distrusted, and suspected.

Would it surprise anyone that an ideology espousing that kind of hatred might cause a person to hurt someone?

It certainly does not surprise feminists. The core of the feminist argument is that society’s ideas about women cause men to commit violence against them. Yet how is it possible for the men’s rights movement and conspiracy theory called “patriarchy” can cause violence, but an openly anti-male ideology like feminism could not possibly cause a woman to hurt her nephew? This blog is full of accounts of feminists using feminism to hurt, punish, and discriminate against men. Numerous men and women have written and spoken about the negative impact feminist ideas had on them. Plenty of people have discussed how feminist policies have hurt boys and men. The misandry within feminist doctrine is obvious that feminists feel the need to create a Feminism 101 blog and constantly remind people that feminism is not about hating men.

And they do this all while claiming that “patriarchy” makes men rape, beat, and kill women. Everything from stiletto heels to make-up comes back to one pseudo-ideology making men oppress women. It is a glaring contradiction that so far none of the feminists responding to me over at Manboobz can seem to get around.

I do feel for them. They are essentially trying to defend the feminist version of “when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal”. They cannot just admit that feminism as an ideology can be and has been used to hurt people, and something inherent in the ideology makes that so common. As such, I can forgive the insults and the wild straw man arguments claiming that I stated my aunt represents feminism or that I stated that feminism supports child rape. I suppose I would pull at straws too if someone said a thing I do not believe possible happened to them.

Advertisements

27 thoughts on “Can an ideology teach hate?

  1. Men’s actions are generally more direct and straightforward (hence the threats and violence, though usually not carried out, except by a few disturbed loners who probably had a host of other much more serious issues aside from identifying with MRAs). Feminists (aka women and their feminized male lackeys) act in a more subtle fashion. They don’t encourage violence against men; they just paint men as the enemy, as the oppressor, as the one who must be fought and hated – in the media, in society, and in culture. It’s more insidious, and possibly even more damaging, than direct threats of violence.

  2. You are a spineless, dishonest liar not worth the lable of “man”, and this is coming from another man. Fuck you, you make men and abuse victims look like shit. You don’t speak for me or anyone else with your ideology of hate, as shown clearly in this post. You deliberately lie to make things look a certain way – guess what, the source is still there and anyone can see your lack of integrity.

    Men like you make me ashamed of being called a man.

  3. Looks like feminist trolls still like to visit this blog. For the record, any comments containing profanity must be approved. That is to keep people like you from spamming this blog with hate.

  4. Carrie L. Lukas of the uber-conservative Independent Women’s Forum wrote, “[t]he radicalized bra-burning, shoulder-pad-wearing, men hating feminists of the 70’o and 80’s were a necessary force in the women’s movement, willing to go to extremes to challenge the male-dominated status quo.” “Hating men” was a “necessary force.” I was confronted by that “necessary force” on many occasions when speaking about child sexual abuse of boys at conferences which, at the time, were often all women. One went as far as to tell me I deserved to be raped as a child because “white males were the cause of the problem so now you know how it feels.” Not a very loving attitude for someone who is trying to help. Maybe her mother knew about her abuse, or worse, set her up for it. Like my mom, and Oprah’s… and didn’t you mention your mom knew about your aunt TS? Sounds like a Matriarchal Conspiracy to me.

  5. Sounds like Gendao has some anger issues. I for one, commend your honesty and bravery for opening up the dialogue about your aunt. The ugly responses posted at man boobz are testament to why men & boys don’t talk about abusive childhoods. And when it comes to matriarchal oppression of boys, it’s not like feminists “just don’t get it.” They’re too smart for that… they just don’t care. They’re “fempathetic” as opposed to empathetic. They are the reason we need to establish the White House Council for Men & Boys and to ratify Barbara Boxer’s Violence Against Children Act.

  6. It is very easy to be a hypocrite, and often very difficult to come to terms with the idea that you are one. The huge and malicious hypocrisy is one of my biggest gripes with modern feminism, but I can also start to understand where it comes from. It really is a damn shame that the hate has progressed as far as it has, though.

    Men suffer, and cause suffering. Women suffer, and cause suffering. We’re all a part of it. It’s a terrible thing, to try and take that away from someone, to dehumanize them that much to the point where we don’t even believe that their pain exists, much less that it matters.

    Keep fighting the good fight, brother.

  7. I for one, commend your honesty and bravery for opening up the dialogue about your aunt. The ugly responses posted at man boobz are testament to why men & boys don’t talk about abusive childhoods.

    Actually, the comments are pretty tame compared to have I have gotten before. I do not find what I did brave. I just wanted to note to them that there is a marked difference between some comment said in jest and real violence. A fantasy harms no one unless a person acts on it. What I find deliciously ironic is that they argue that the joke comment does matter because it puts the seed of violence into people’s minds as they argue that hateful feminist views about men could never put the seed of violence into people’s minds.

  8. Actually TS, I thought the man boobz folks were coming up with some really funny comments about the boiled potato gun. That was until you tied it in with your aunt raping you. But that was a great argumentative strategy. It changed the dynamic of the conversation, much like the Vagina Monologues usurping Valentines Day and deadbeat dad’s being rounded up on Father’s Day. Spite for spite, feminists would still rather put the onus back on you, with some nasty name calling and lengthy tirades of rhetorical obsfucation, rather than honestly deal with maternal child abuse as a prominent form of domestic violence. Keep up the good work.

  9. If manboobz is anything to go by yes, an ideology can teach hate and obviously the way feminism rallies to obscure female abusers is hateful behaviour.

    That little group over there are no better than the hateful people they seek out and the strawman mens advocates they use to attempt to stereotype all advocacy for men.

  10. Catalogue: “[F]eminism rallies to obscure females abusers.” Well said, I’m going to quote you on that one. Obscurring female abusers is what the silence of the matriarchy is all about. I don’t put manboobz in the hateful category. Some seem to be goose-stepping with their feminist girlfriends, or actually are the feminist girlfriend, but most seem very diverse, informed and have a good sense of humor. Something woefully lacking these days.

  11. Great post. This remark by Rutee Katreya::

    “Find for me where feminist thought says the rape of boys is a requisite action to promote equality for women.”

    Seems extremely ironic, considering that so many- I’d say the great majority, at least from what I’ve run into- feminist arguments about people being indoctrinated into gender roles by the “Patriarchy” do not involve the existence of outright statements of the messages that feminists argue are present. Feminists rarely, if ever, claim that popular women’s fashion magazines explicitly say “Being sexually attractive to men is your most important purpose in life,” or that characters in action films go around saying that women are weak and helpless, or that jokes about rape involve the joke’s teller saying “And that’s why raping women isn’t a big deal,” or whatever. If one accepts the standard of proof Katreya demands here, most of what feminists say about modern culture- including almost everything they say concerning attitudes about rape- should be dismissed out of hand.

  12. John, you make a good point about feminists rarely claiming that any specific party issue explicitly says “Hurt and exploit women”. However, nothing in feminism implies that feminists should commit violence against anyone. Rather, the ideology presents a lot of overt and cover anti-male messages that could lead a feminist to want to or actually hurt men. In other words, feminism itself does not cause abuse, but it can cause people to behave in abusive ways. That is a nuanced distinction that feminists like Rutee make about men, men’s rights groups, the right-wing, and a host of other groups. It is only when someone applies it to them that they claim it is flawed logic.

  13. The charge that feminism basically blames men for every evil in the world does not match-up with feminists’ self-image of being a bunch of Ultra-Brilliant Grrrl Geniuses who could certainly never believe in something so simplistic. Despite the fact that, well, these Grrrl Geniuses basically blame men for every evil in the world.

    In fact, the more tenuous and more vague the wrongdoing which can be blamed upon men (with ‘patriarchy’ simply being a laughably-veiled euphemism for ‘men’), the more brilliant and insightful the feminist analysis is said to be.

    Best of all? You wouldn’t believe the number of women who notice this, are disgusted by it and find feminism off-putting because of it.

    Rather than listen to these women, their behavior can be blamed on men as well. The women in question are afraid that they won’t get boyfriends– ultimately men’s fault. They’ve been misled by male-dominated media– ultimately men’s fault. They’ve been brainwashed by– guess who?

  14. “Feminist bloggers like Manboobz owner David Futrelle, Amanda Marcotte, Hugo Schwyzer, and dozens of others list examples of comments and posts from men’s rights sites to try to prove their claim. As far as feminists are concerned, the men’s movement or any concern for men’s issues teaches nothing but hate.”

    I believe that they are using polemics, not debating in good faith. I’ve left a comment about that at Feminist Critics and learned the word from a poster named Mathew at Quite Riot Girl’s blog. What they are doing is trying to push an ideology. So they will never cede an inch to an MRA no matter how legitimate the point. ….even if you disagree with someone, you know the old phrase that even a broken clock is right twice a day. They are stating dogma with the fervor of a religious fundamentalist-not someone looking for rational dialogue. I believe the best way to resist them is to pick apart their arguments carefully and show the flaws in logic and question everything. Those who are their “followers” will unlikely be swayed, however those who are sitting on the fence can better understand the arguments and make up their own minds.

    I believe the MRA movement to be a different side of the same coin as Feminism and I don’t believe that either have the answers for society. It is as if one is a Christian and the other a Satanist. The true heretic is the Agnostic. And should one think the Christian has the higher ground, let’s not forget they have blood on their hands-the Crusades, cover-ups of child molestation….

    I am getting closer to being able to discuss my own views and issues with society and my place in it. Feminism and the MRM movement are not giving me the language or framework I need to become a complete human being. While being somewhat vague, I think they both need to get out of the way in gender discussions and such.

    Be Well,

    Stoner With a Boner

  15. I believe that they are using polemics, not debating in good faith.

    That is a fair assessment, although it is hardly unique to feminists. Lots of people with hard-line positions play the game of trying to prove their views are superior rather than engage in an honest debate.

  16. So they will never cede an inch to an MRA no matter how legitimate the point.

    They’ll never cede an inch to anyone. A few of the folks behind FM have been trying for years to engender dialogue, with no results. They have tried different rules, different systems, they’ve spent years politely commenting at femi-centric blogs with utter understanding and compassion, with no results, none.

    All the people who run FM, and then similar people like Miguel and others have been giving in inches to femi-centrics for years, without a single inch given back, yet they still feel like it must be their fault. “Oh, we just haven’t found a way to accomodate femi-centrics enough, we just haven’t found the way to make them comfortable yet”.

    The definition of insanity = doing the same thing over and over and over.

    What a lot of people don’t get is that most MRA started out trying to dialogue. Most of them were not MRAs, they spent years trying to politely build dialogue and understanding, and only then snapped into the understand that this ideology of hate called femi-centrism will never cede an inch under any case. It doesn’t matter how accommodating you are, doesn’t matter if you read their top 1000 books and complete understand their perspective and you try to bond and work on a mutual dialogue.

    They never ever ever will cede a single inch, ever through cooperation. I see some talk of MRA in negative terms as a strategy, but they actually get results. (I’m including all the proactive movements and sites popping up which do protests, contact representatives to cutoff femi-funding etc).

    They keep getting inches. You guys keep trying your pacifist strategy, but I’ve yet to see you after years of trying desperately to get even one issue ceded to even partially by the other side. They do not understand dialogue.

  17. @Gendao, Are you gonna support your whiny rant with some facts, or are you gonna continue screaming at the top of your lungs like a hysterical little girl?

    No on the whole facts and logic thing? Then STFU and crawl back into to the sloppy cavity you crawled out of, mangina.

    Geldings like you make me sick. No personal attacks are allowed here, Ollie – TS

  18. Pingback: Top posts of 2011 | Toy Soldiers

  19. Pingback: This Is What It Looks Like v4 | Toy Soldiers

  20. Come on ya’ll! REAL “feminists” are not rapists or evil, neither are REAL “masculinists.” Good people don’t rape children and just because a very evil woman raped and took advantage of her young, innocent nephew doesn’t mean that women would do this often. Same as the idea that because one man raped a woman that all men are rapists. I think that most of the people part of the MRA have never studied professional feminist literature or ideology. Otherwise ignorant comments like “man-hating” and “blame men for everything” would not exist. Feminists are TRULY equalists. We believe in the simple idea that men and women are equal and that gender aught to have nothing to do with how we treat one another. Is that so wrong to want equality? Can you truthfully sit there and say, “It is wrong for women to want to be equally represented in our government, payed equally and have equal representation and power in this world to men”?

  21. Good people don’t rape children

    That depends on how you define good. By most accounts, Jerry Sandusky is a good man, yet he nevertheless stands accused of molesting nearly a dozen boys over the last decade. Just because appears “good” does not mean they do not do bad things.

    and just because a very evil woman raped and took advantage of her young, innocent nephew doesn’t mean that women would do this often.

    No one said that they did. Most people do not abuse children. Yet that does not mean no people abuse children, and it would be silly to pretend that people rarely abuse children in light of the current statistics on the rate of sexual violence against children.

    I think that most of the people part of the MRA have never studied professional feminist literature or ideology. Otherwise ignorant comments like “man-hating” and “blame men for everything” would not exist.

    That is a rather inane logical fallacy. Most of the criticism against feminist positions rely on feminist literature for support. It is the feminist literature and ideology itself that leads people to believe feminism contains misandrous ideas. Your argument makes as much sense as saying that most gay activists have never studies Christianity, otherwise “ignorant” comments like “gay-bashing” and “blame gays for everything” would not exist.

    Feminists are TRULY equalists. We believe in the simple idea that men and women are equal and that gender aught to have nothing to do with how we treat one another. Is that so wrong to want equality?

    That is a red herring. Plenty of people say one thing and do another. That is the current situation with many feminists. They say they want equality, yet when presented with clear examples of the unequal treatment of men, feminists ignore, downplay, or deny it happens. They say they do not want anyone judged by their sex, yet argue that all men are collectively responsible for the oppression of women, and benefit from said oppression, even when those men are in worse situations than women. One cannot claim to be equalists, or more correctly egalitarian, and hold the above views. They are inherently contradictory, yet this is again the message people hear from feminists.

  22. Pingback: When Ideologies Teach Hate | Toy Soldiers

  23. Pingback: A Dose of Stupid v94 | Toy Soldiers

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