Some Men’s Rights Activists are blaming the positive media coverage of Caitlyn Jenner on the Jews. Yes, you read that correctly.
For several weeks, I’ve been carefully preparing an article on a childhood experience that profoundly shaped my worldview today: An act of anti-Semitic bullying that nearly cost me my life. Because June 6th marks the eighteenth anniversary of that event and the number eighteen happens to carry great symbolic significance in Jewish tradition, I set aside this upcoming Saturday for an essay that would focus on the spiritual impact this traumatic event has had on my life.
As fate would have it, the issue of anti-Semitism was brought to my attention a couple days ahead of schedule. For this I can thank the response of a section of the Men’s Rights Activist movement, or MRAs, to Caitlyn Jenner’s recent appearance on the cover of Vanity Fair. I am referring in particular to some of the regular commenters at Roosh V, one of the Internet’s most notorious misogynistic websites, who blamed Jenner’s growing prominence as a transgender icon on – you guessed it – the Jews.
While this isn’t particularly unusual for a site whose founder is openly anti-Semitic, the bizarre anti-Jewish rhetoric used by these particular MRAs was noteworthy not because of its seeming randomness, but because it ultimately reveals so much about the core insecurities that afflict fanatical MRAs… and, indeed, all members of hate groups.
While this isn’t particularly unusual for a site whose founder is openly anti-Semitic, the bizarre anti-Jewish rhetoric used by these particular MRAs was noteworthy not because of its seeming randomness, but because it ultimately reveals so much about the core insecurities that afflict all fanatical MRAs… and, indeed, all members of hate groups.
|
The following is brought to you courtesy of David Futrelle’s feminist news site, We Hunted The Mammoth:
From “Rhino”:
2015 is the year of the continuation of that same old sick postmodern cultural agenda rammed down America’s (and by cultural imperialism extension – the world’s) throats.
Unsurprisingly, executing that funny business are ruthless agents of Zion.
The Vanity Fair cover, with that quasi-ambiguous exposed crotch shown front and center in our faces was photographed by Leibovitz (notice how they couldn’t cover that thing in dress or skirt, as that would not make as strong trolling impact.) While glowing, indeed gushing article was written by Bissinger* (mother’s maiden name Lebenthal). The Vanity Fair magazine is owned by parent company Conde Nast. The chairman of Conde Nast is Samuel Irving Newhouse Jr. (mother’s maiden name Epstein).
From “Chateau Heartiste”:
There are those who have the nerve to call “confirmation bias” whenever I bring up the Tribe…..
“But but but, Vanity Fair is a publication full of Jews, so it doesn’t mean anything!”
From “Corvinus”:
Their running “Vanity” Fair is rather funny, considering that they tend to be as ugly as a mud fence.
♦◊♦
We can start with the dominant theme in these comments – namely, the observation that many of Vanity Fair’s owners and employees (including the photographer who shot the Caitlyn Jenner cover, Annie Leibovitz) are of Jewish descent. Like many anti-Semites, the Roosh V commenters are unable to grasp the difference between a cultural product that happens to involve a large number of Jews and one that has an actual “Jewish agenda.” You rarely hear insinuations that a magazine cover or movie or television show that was mainly created by Protestants has a “Protestant agenda,” or (if you choose to define Jewishness as an ethnicity instead of a religion) that material created mainly by Italians has an “Italian agenda”… unless, of course, that product clearly promotes religious and/or political themes distinctly tied to those groups. Likewise, it is ridiculous to assume that if a lot of Jews are involved in a certain project, that automatically means they are acting in concert as Jews, instead of as a collection of professionals who coincidentally share the same theological and cultural background. Their Jewish heritage may subtly influence their sensibilities, of course, but it may just as likely have little to no influence at all; as with members of any other religious and ethnic groups, it depends entirely on the individual in question.
Like many anti-Semites, the Roosh V commenters are unable to grasp the difference between a cultural product that happens to involve a large number of Jews and one that has an actual ‘Jewish agenda.’
|
Of course, the big difference between Jews and other religious/ethnic groups is that the former have long been persecuted because of their disproportionate presence as notable figures in a wide range of scientific, artistic, political, economic, and intellectual fields. Yet the very fact that Jews are expected to be defensive about this is actually quite illogical. As the comedian Larry Miller once put it:
“Are Jews over-represented in all sorts of important fields? You’re damn right we’re over-represented in all sorts of important fields, but isn’t that an amazing thing? You might have thought over the years folks would look at the Jews and say, ‘These people are incredible and astonishing. Let’s be more like them.’ The actual response has been, uh, slightly different, more along the lines of ‘These people are too good at everything they do. Let’s kill them.'”
♦◊♦
When you consider that anti-Semites who think along these lines are obviously motivated by deep insecurity (see how Adolf Hitler’s rejection from a Vienna art school ultimately inspired “Mein Kampf”), it suddenly makes a great deal of sense why MRAs would be predisposed to anti-Semitism. As psychologist Jack Schafer explained in Psychology Today, “Not all insecure people are haters, but all haters are insecure people. Hate elevates the hater above the hated.” To validate the belief systems behind their hatred (and thus rationalize away their insecurities), haters will create groups, “form identities through symbols, rituals, and mythologies,” disparage and taunt their targets, and eventually find ways of attacking them – sometimes violently.
And make no mistake about it, MRAs aren’t ordinary haters: They are an officially classified hate group and have been responsible for acts of violence against women. Although there are a number of MRA subsets – just as there are different branches of neo-Nazi, skinhead, or KKK organizations – they are all linked by a common hatred of women. Whether its pick-up artist sites like Roosh V and The Red Pill or explicitly anti-feminist ideological groups like Return Of Kings and A Voice for Men, MRAs prey on sexually insecure men by blaming women for their real or imagined problems, such as not being able to convince large numbers of attractive women to sleep with them (a failure that many men view as emasculating), being cuckolded and/or forced to raise another man’s children, having their lives ruined in divorce settlements, or being falsely accused of rape (although some, like Roosh Vorek himself, believe rape shouldn’t be illegal). In the world of the so-called “manosphere,” women are depicted as inherently manipulative, dishonest, overly-emotional, and intellectually inferior to men. At the same time, they are despised for the perceived power MRAs insist they have acquired over men thanks to the feminist movement, a belief based on the erroneous premises that women have already attained equality with men (which is demonstrably untrue) and that modern feminism is either striving for or has already brought about a period of feminine supremacy. Not surprisingly, many MRAs want to return to the even more reactionary patriarchal hierarchies of the past, while other simply want to prevent any further erosion of the privileges they enjoy (but usually deny exist) as heterosexual men.
MRAs prey on sexually insecure men by blaming women for their real or imagined problems – not being able to convince attractive women to sleep with them, being cuckolded and/or left to raise another man’s children, having their lives ruined in divorce settlements, or being falsely accused of rape.
|
Needless to say, a movement fueled by male sexual insecurity is going to feel particularly threatened by a transgendered woman like Caitlyn Jenner. Not only does her increasing celebrity further subvert patriarchal gender hierarchies, but her appearance on the cover of Vanity Fair is a significant blow to the heteronormative ideals of beauty that are central to the MRA worldview. That’s why most of the comments on message boards like the one from Roosh V’s site focus on either depicting Jenner as some sort of grotesque monster (one commenter posted a GIF from The Simpsons marked with the caption “Kill it with fire!”; others chose GIFs of various celebrities retching in horror) or belittling her for being unattractive and thus, implicitly, without value. It is hardly a coincidence that this is the same tactic they employ against any woman they wish to delegitimize – or, for that matter, how the commenter “Corvinus” decided to put down Jews (a race that, for whatever it’s worth, has produced sex symbols from Andrew Garfield and James Franco to Natalie Portman and Mila Kunis).
♦◊♦
Although the anti-Semites on Roosh V are wrong about Caitlyn Jenner’s appearance on the cover of “Vanity Fair” being the result of a Jewish conspiracy, I will confess that if such a conspiracy did exist, I would be proud to be associated with it. Jews have been the victims of unparalleled persecution for millennia, from the diasporas and pogroms of the pre-modern world to more recent atrocities like the Holocaust and anti-Semitic mass shootings in Latin America, Europe, or right here in the United States. If ever a group of people had a moral responsibility to sympathize with the oppressed, and to take a stand against those who bully them, it is the Jews. There may not be anything explicitly “Jewish” in the rise of Caitlyn Jenner as a transgender sex symbol, but in terms of the narrative of our cultural history, there is a nice poetic touch to the fact that so many Jews played a role in this development.
As for the MRAs, anti-Semites, and other haters of the world: Let’s just say that until they stop blaming their problems on others and honestly confront their insecurities, they will continue to find themselves on the wrong side of history.
Me before clicking the link: “Bet it’s either Roosh or RoK”
Bingo.
Good god, do some research before you make yourself look even more of a fool.
“We are generally against men’s rights and how they portray men as victims in need of state assistance (see: The Men’s Rights Movement Is No Place For Men). ”
That is straight out of RoK’s “about” section. Took me all of ten seconds to find it.
But, y’know, gotta keep peddlin’ that narrative, don’tcha?
Men’s rights are a part of feminism, especially since the 90s.
Whacky cults impress no one.
Lol Jeremy, you are the last person to go to for information about men’s rights. Considering you don’t care when women hit men and your article couldn’t get basic facts right. The only whacky cult is the one in your mind, the strawman you built of a group that doesn’t exist how you see it.
Apparently not if people are seeking other venues to work on men’s rights. And besides this writer is using a tactic that is quite people among feminists (but oddly they have a problem with it when its done to them) which is to force an association of anything negative in the gender conversation to the MRM.
Maybe if you folks talked about actual MRAs (come on I’ll even let you bring up Paul Elam) there wouldn’t be so much dissent going on.
I just turned 50. I am not the sharpest pencil in the box however I am not dull either. With age comes a level of experience that can only be gained thru living. This young writer while having command of the facts he deems important, they are still the facts that prove he predestined outcome. There are many groups that are anti-Semitic. I would say that many anti-Israel and pro Palestinian are anti Semitic. However, many are not. Most believe that Israel and Palestine should be able to live in peace. With my age and experience i have learned that… Read more »
“Hitler’s rejection from a Vienna art school inspired “Mein Kampf”…
I just saw an interesting exhibit at the Neue Galerie in NY about all the “Degenerate Art” rejected by the Nazis….they hated the Fauvists and certain “Jewish artists” among others….just trying to define what they liked vs. what they hated brought out ridiculous and arbitrary prejudices….in fact, the whole idea of Nazis as art critics is just ludicrous….
Haters need to examine themselves in the mirror…it seems what they really hate the most is right in front of them….
@ Leia It isn’t just the Nazis. Maybe 20 years ago I heard debates as to whether we should stop listening to Wagner. I don’t know if Wagner was a Nazi, but it was enough that his music was favored by them. I heard people say we shouldn’t consider A Birth of a Nation based on it’s artistic merits alone, but should include that it was racist when judging it’s artistic merits. Recently I’ve heard many feminists make similar arguments when it cones to artists like Chris Brown. If we think the artist is a scum bag, we should never… Read more »
I would also say that there is a subset of Jewish people who believe that anyone opposing circumcision must be anti-emetic. Oppose Israel, ant-Semite. Condemn the slaughter of Palestinians, ant-Semite. Oppose the expansion of Jewish settlements, ant-Semite.
“I would also say that there is a subset of Jewish people who believe that anyone opposing circumcision must be anti-emetic.”
Then they are calling a lot of Jews anti-Semitic:
http://intactnews.org/node/424/1391468945/jewish-intactivists-increasingly-vocal-israel
http://www.beyondthebris.com/
http://circinfosite.info/index.php/resources-and-links-for-jews/jewish-intactivism-a-male-human-rights-movement/
There are feminists that are anti-circ too. I think the distinction comes in because the MRM is pro-ban. Feminists and maybe even some Jews are pro-ban when it comes to female circumcision. They don’t see that as being anti-Islamic for some reason. Even the “ceremonial nick” has been banned. If it’s an issue of bodily autonomy as some claim, how can you be anti-ban? I’ve even suggested that maybe we could keep circumcision, but if something were to go wrong, the persons performing the circumcision and the parents would be held criminally responsible. That position didn’t seem to have backers… Read more »
To be fair, opposing circumcision probably would work well as an anti-emetic. I’ve been to several brises and it’s not easy to sit through them unless you have a strong stomach.
Someone may hide their anti-semetic sentiments behind an anti circumcision position but being against circumcision is not in and of itself anti-semetic.
If that’s the line of logic then that would mean respecting the bodily autonomy of baby boys is inherntly anti-semetic.
“they are despised for the perceived power MRAs insist they have acquired over men thanks to the feminist movement” I think the first question you should ask is do they have reason to believe this? When you see articles like the one I saw today, they kind of have a point. A female college student rapes a male college student. Everyone agrees he was incapacitated (black out drunk). That would be the definition of rape. She charges him with rape and he is expelled. Talk about making rape “legal”. I wonder who might have been pushing for this. I suspect… Read more »
*sigh*
RooshV is a PUA, not an MRA. Nor is the MRM a hate movement.
Please check your facts.
MRA is totally all about hate. It is a reaction against civil rights movements, serving no useful purpose.
“It is a reaction against civil rights movements” It is a civil rights movement itself. It sets its purposes and issues out quite clearly. if you think those aren’t valid, that is another question, not really relevant to the MRM. Civil rights movements can be racist, as the suffrage movement was. Suffragette opposition to black voting rights is well-documented and the overlap between suffrage groups and the Women’s KKK is also well-documented. Being a civil rights movement does not in fact immunize you from being a hate movement. What immunizes you is not trying to take anyone’s rights away –… Read more »
That didn’t address what OIrishM said.
He said “RooshV is PUA not MRA” and you said, “MRA is all about hate.”
That’s the same as him saying, “The sky is green.” and you respond with “Green is an ugly color.” It has absolutely nothing to do with what color the sky it.
Well, they could have been responding to my statement that the MRM isn’t a hate group. But it isn’t classified as one anywhere to my knowledge, not even by the SPLC. Although I see no reason why the opinion of an obviously partisan political group should be given such weight over what constitutes a hate movement or not.
Although I see no reason why the opinion of an obviously partisan political group should be given such weight over what constitutes a hate movement or not.
Unfortunately that partisan political group is sandbagging its political influence. In one breath saying they have no power but in the next being able to influence mainstream media and politicians with misleading information and outright lies.
And returnofkings is a feminist parody site. That would be like me creating a feminist site, making up fake posts, and then pointing to the site as proof that feminists are X,Y, and Z. MRAs are a lot classier and with more integrity than that.
Return of Kings is not a feminist parody site. If you want to say it is, you should at least prove it.
Yes, the most famous MRA site is A Voice for Men. CLASSY!
And it seems that for a history student its not beyond you to lie through your teeth to push your own agenda. Its been shown time and time again that Elliot Roger was not an MRA. But like the dumb leading the blind leading the bigots you will continue to parrot on anyway. Roos by his own words is not an MRA. Infact he ridicules MRAs from time to time. If you as a history student had done even an ounce of research (do they not teach that anymore?) you would know. Then you provide extract from David Frutelle who… Read more »
Add to that I see that one of his links appears to be an apologist of child molester and false accuser Lena Dunham. How sick do you have to be before the editors decide not to publish around here?
You know I’ve had this argument about RooshV and Elliot Rodger before and I’ve noticed something. People who push the lie that they are MRA say that they look beyond self identification and look at the actions of the person to determine that they are MRA even if they say they aren’t. What they means is they are picking and choosing which actions count towards their assessment. Rodger was more PUA than MRA by his actions yet they are ignored because he went on a violent rampage. Accord to those pushing the lie violent rampaging is an MRA characteristic. RooshV… Read more »
” Somehow being at odds means with a movement means you’re a part of it.”
That’s the “logic” alright. And by that logic, we may as well call Rodger a feminist.
MRAs oppose feminists after all, and being at odds with a movement still means you’re part of it.
Since when did MRA and PUA become one and the same….?
Classic leftist rubbish painting anyone who dares to deviate from the party line as a hate group.
Yes, I would agree with you that Roosh V is a misogynistic and an anti-Semitic man. But how is that men who have valid complaints about the legal system and how it negatively impacts many men become women haters?
You sound like white racists in the South during the 1960s labeling any Black person who “agitated” as a communist.
I guess all men need to know their place!