Joanna Schroeder wonders what our culture’s obsession with Ryan Gosling say about how we view men as a whole.
One of my big hits here at The Good Men Project was a piece called Objectifying Ryan Gosling… It was a reaction to a conversation that Tom Matlack and Marcus Williams were having about whether or not it’s okay to talk smack about your wife’s body, all while lusting after other women’s more perky bodies. I was even interviewed on the radio about Objectifying Ryan Gosling—both about the piece and the man himself.
Unless you’ve been on a retreat in a monastery in Nepal the last few years, you’ve probably heard the hubbub over Ryan Gosling. Star of The Notebook, Drive, and The Ides of March—as well as my personal favorite: Lars and the Real Girl. He’s it right now in Hollywood.
And maybe you’ve heard about Ryan Gosling’s feminist rant against the Motion Picture Association of America, during which he won over the hearts and minds of all of us who get gooey over the thinking man, and even more so over the socially-conscious thinking man.
As a result of this, a clever college girl named Danielle created a Tumblr page called Feminist Ryan Gosling, which I frequented heavily and shared unashamedly. It’s all sort of a joke—Gosling’s signature “Hey Girl” meme set to the words of some of the most prominent Feminist thinkers… But it’s such a great joke that now young Danielle will officially be the author of a book called Feminist Ryan Gosling: Feminist Theory (as Imagined) from Your Favorite Sensitive Movie Dude that is somehow already available for pre-sale.
I’m pretty psyched that thinking guys are getting attention for their brains and not just their bodies… but I also can’t help but wonder what the Feminist Ryan Gosling craze says about how we see guys in general. We fawn over Gosling because of his brains and his stance on women’s issues, as well as his interest in dating age-appropriate women. What’s sorta weird is that in real life, there are tons of guys everywhere just like him… Are we just not seeing them? Or are they only rare in Hollywood?
What do you, as a man, think of this whole Ryan Gosling craze? Does celebrity worship of so-called “perfect” guys damage everyday-types of guys the same way that many women feel celebrity worship of women like Angelina Jolie damages them?
Image from Feminist Ryan Gosling
“What do you, as a man, think of this whole Ryan Gosling craze? Does celebrity worship of so-called “perfect” guys damage everyday-types of guys the same way that many women feel celebrity worship of women like Angelina Jolie damages them?” Hmm… I suppose that it largely varies on the everyday-types in question. If the guy truly does agree with what Ryan Gosling says, I think it does give guys who really are a positive side in this debate an equally positive light. But at the same time, just because a guy doesn’t debate for women’s right doesn’t necessarily mean that… Read more »
I think Ryan Gosling is a total fucking baller for voicing these opinions (which I share). Instinctively I’ve always felt the classification system is backwards. As a kid i was exposed to violent cartoons where the “hero” murders the Villain at the end, but would get in trouble if i looked in the lingerie advertising that came in the mail. Thinking about this kind of stuff has always been important to my view on feminism. That he comes out and talks about this stuff is far more important to me than the fact women find him hot. Iv’e never been… Read more »
Any feminist women want to address this? –
I’ve frequently seen this on feminist boards – referring to a woman as a “girl” is patronizing. But here, a bunch of feminists find it sexy. Which is it? Can it be both? As someone who only dates progressive/feminist women, I’ve found that they’ve liked to be called “girl” when we’re getting sexy. My hunch is that it becomes OK or even hot once the man has proved that he’s safe and respectful already. What do you think?
I’ve three words for you: Context, Context, Context. 😉 No seriously though, it is all about context…and about the interpretation of the person who is being called a ‘girl.’ And, of course, it’s about the implication of the person speaking. It’s like most communication…it’s a bit complicated. I’m a lesbian, and if I tell a joke about lesbians it’s going to be interpreted differently than if a straight cis-man or a straight cis-woman tells a joke about lesbians. If I tell my same lesbian joke to an audience of lesbians, they will interpret it differently than an audience of straight… Read more »
We replied at the same time and said something very similar!
Yeah…though yours was a bit more concrete. 🙂
We should start a duo…I’ll say something abstract and you can explain what it means actually in the real world for real people. 😉 lol
Here’s how I see it, and my guidelines are as follow: What you call a woman or a man depends upon the situation and your relationship. The quick guideline is this: If the situation would make it appropriate for you to refer to a male as a “guy” or “dude”, then you can say “girl”. So you’re at a party and you’re telling a story about a woman you know, in a good natured way. You say, “…and guess what this girl did?!” that’s fine. Or “I was hanging out with this girl last week…” What wouldn’t work is to… Read more »
It was about what I expected, but thanks for spelling it out and putting me fully at ease!
Alright let the mansplaning discussion begin!!!
https://goodmenproject.com/good-feed-blog/some-splainin-to-do-mansplaining-that-is/
Can someone please give me the links to these MRM’s /MRA’s … I did a quick google search and most of what I find are organizations that represent fathers rights … I googled “top 5 men’s rights organizations” and couldn’t find much.
Appears that some people think that these MRM and MRA’s are some big national organization with similar strength to organizations like NOW. Google the top 5 feminist groups and you’ll get several hits.
For the sake of things getting back on topic (and I think there are some relevant comments that are being largely ignored) let’s lean back on the manplaining talk for now. You’ll get your chance to say your piece on that soon enough.
age-appropriate women ?
Since it’s been proven many times that maturity DOESN’T come with age, i don’t see why dating someone younger (18 and over) than yourself is a problem.
“What do you, as a man, think of this whole Ryan Gosling craze?” Standard. I think women have been crazing on men like this the whole time. Kennedy, Fred Estair. (excuse the spellings), Brad pit. It’s always been around, and it’s always been seen for what it is, a little fantasizing. The problem arises with the politically correct double standard. Men aren’t allowed to do the same thing without “objectifying all women and instilling a false perception of beauty”. This seems nothing more than a tactic to further villainize men. The double standard needs to be acknowledged and it has… Read more »
Wow, was the whole point missed here. She was asking if the whole Ryan Gosling is perfect negatively effect the view of the todays man. To sum up my own opinion on this: Mr Gosling is to woman what the (insert any hot or “perfect” woman’s name here) is to todays man. The archetype of some fantasy that will never exist in the real world. Coming from a relationshop where my ex would drool over Mr. Gosling and me knowing that was what she really wanted, yeah it effects you. If he were so perfect, why is he single? Maybe… Read more »
Ryan Gosling…SWOOON!!!
I’m posting this on Facebook…my girlfriends will all agree with you, Joanna!
To answer your question: Up until recently I would have been livid that Ryan Gosling was being celebrity worshipped for being intelligent, and sensitive, when the “real reason” that he is desired is because of his face and body. It would have struck me as shallow and hypocritical. But then up until recently I had serious self-esteem issues, and a deeply distorted idea about male desireability. I was under the impression that if I could be a good enough person, I would “earn” a relationship. I didn’t believe I could ever be seen as an object of desire. I was… Read more »
Since the previous comments on this bit got hopelessly derailed…I was hoping to actually discuss this statement: “I’m pretty psyched that thinking guys are getting attention for their brains and not just their bodies… but I also can’t help but wonder what the Feminist Ryan Gosling craze says about how we see guys in general.” I am really concerned that there seems to be a desire to equate “thinking” with “agrees with feminist thought.” This is a huge problem, as it seems to reinforce a certain way of thinking without leaving adequate room for criticism. I am NOT trying to… Read more »
Give me James Franco any day. Better actor. Just as handsome. More and better degrees.
Basically this: “It should be mentioned that the SPLC did not label MRAs as members of a hate movement; nor did our article claim that the grievances they air on their websites – false rape accusations, ruinous divorce settlements and the like – are all without merit. But we did call out specific examples of misogyny and the threat, overt or implicit, of violence.” Alrighty now, let’s not derail this further with discussions about the SPLCs report and whether it was accurate or not, etc. I just wanted to let you know how it all actually went down. Oh and… Read more »
I’m still amazed they had the nerve to put SAVE on their list. Where did this quote come from? I lost interest in the SPLC fairly soon after it all started, but it still comes up often enough I’d like to through that recantation back at a few people.
Is Ryan Gosling getting paid for any of this? Or at least the people who own the copyrights on the pictures?
As I replied to Archy, the author states on her Tumblr page that the photographs of Ryan’s face costs more than her college education.
So… is that a yes or a no?
Well, the book is not self-published and any publishing house worth their salt would not take the business risk of so blatantly disregarding copyrights. She/they obviously have made queries as to how much printing rigths for pictures of Ryan costs so I would say that it heavily implies that they are paying the copyright holders on the photographs they use in the book.
Ah. Ok then.
I detect a bit of surprise out there that Ryan Gosling could be physically attractive AND express an intelligent opinion, and, even more surprising, that he could do all that despite the fact that he is a man. That’s where I think commenters are detecting a possibility of condescension. My word, it’s even someone expressing a fairly mainstream feminist opinion about the motion picture industry. I daresay a LOT of women have already met men who are capable of the same sort of conversation, but they just have not been noticed to the degree that Mr. Gosling has. It’s almost… Read more »
God, quit it with your academsplaining 😉
What’s sorta weird is that in real life, there are tons of guys everywhere just like him… Are we just not seeing them? Or are they only rare in Hollywood? I wager the main difference is that unlike those “tons of guys everywhere just like him” Gosling is a celebrity. How much buzz would this be getting if we were talking about Random Joe #4583457 who made some of these exact same comments? Seriously how many feminists would be going gaga over this if it weren’t a celebrity? Would they try to make him a celebrity? Gosling is already a… Read more »
He has an opinion which is similar to their own, do these women also fawn over men that don’t share the opinion, or at least speak about it? He also has a chiseled body, great looks and is quite often the target of the female gaze. Would he be admired so much if his looks weren’t great? If he was 300lbs? Did anyone actually ask permission of Ryan to use him as a joke, or as a spokesperson for this agenda? Did anyone ask the photographer if it’s ok to use the image? I take it she is also selling… Read more »
She does mention in a post on her Tumblr page announcing the forthcoming book that the pictures of Ryan’s face costs more than her college education. Whether she’s on the hook for the images she has used online since last fall or if they fall under fair use/satire I don’t know.
And, Archy, I resent you a bit now for “making” me go to Tumblr. I even clicked on the notes link and got a headache from the amount of the “me too”-ness I haven’t seen since the September that never ended (my god I am getting old) 🙂
I just re-read the links above and now I understand why he is loved so much in feminist circles.
In one sentence he calls society a patriarchy and misogynistic. Now if only he had used the word priviledged he would have hit the trifecta of feminist ideology.
Wait a second…he’s a feminist using feminist terms and jargon? How dare he! That’s like an archaeologist using archaeological terms and jargon, or a politician using political terms and jargon. Unacceptable. (Yeah, I am being really sarcastic there). So instead of reacting to the terms he uses, let’s take a look at what he’s actually saying in that quote about Blue Valentine. Basically, that the MPAA is stuck in a traditional mindset, particularly when it comes to sex, and especially when it comes to women’s sexuality. Well hey now, I don’t know a whole lot of younger people who would… Read more »
What scene is it exactly? Got a time-code? Is it a solo or lesbian scene? Reason I ask is I am curious why it’s specifically about women’s sexuality, and if he is in the scene, wouldn’t it be both genders sexuality being restricted?
I think it’s natural to idolise people we agree with, especially when they support an ideology we consider to be marginalised.
Personally I’m not all that enamored with him.
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head with your comment to John, Joanna; we as a society still expect the objectively beautiful to have nothing of consequence to say. Most assume this is a phenomenon directed only at women, but Gosling is a good example of precisely the kind of expectations we have for handsome men. None. They are candy for our eyes but, like candy, don’t have any nutritional value for our minds. So when they prove us wrong, we are surprised, pleasantly so, and will champion them as exceptional when in fact, they are simply human.… Read more »
Did anyone notice the misandrist term “mansplaining” appear on the first page of Feminist Ryan Gosling site?
Yeah, just noticed that. It sounds like someone is a bit bitter about how their seminar went.
Yes. It’s patronizing.
It even takes swipes at Camille Paglia & Katie Roiphe.
The whole point of the term “mansplaining” is about certain men being patronizing to women. So it’s ironic that men don’t like the term because it’s patronizing.
Problem is Joanna it’s used as a silencer of differing opinion, not just to point out those who are patronizing. It’s patronizing behaviour at times basically telling men their opinion on the subject is wrong, the feminist is right. Radfems use it along with privilege and other terms pretty much to shut men up, hence the patronizing reaction. I doubt many would have a problem if it were only used in the way you think it is used. As a side note, I see a lot of womansplaining done in regards to equality issues, women trying to tell men about… Read more »
Your observation may be irony but to me the more interesting part is that men that patronize women has a name of its own but when women patronize men any attempt to label it in such an obviously gendered manner is stricken down as “sexism”, “misogyny”, “patriarchal _____”, etc….
I understood it described men complaining about something, when really they’ve nothing to complain about? As in “What right does he have to talk about body issues: he’s not even a woman.”
From what I gather its a matter of men patronizing women on the grounds of trying to talk over women’s exeperiences as if men know women’s lives better than women themselves. For example a woman talking about how the messages that magazines say about body image make her feel ugly and a guy just tells her that she’s not ugly and everything will be alright if she just stops looking at those magazines. Yes Peter (and anyone else reading this) I know what you might want to say about that. And frankly its true as I have experienced it first… Read more »
Well stopping reading would help:P Stopping the purchase of them is necessary, a protest against photoshopping heavily would be great. Make my own photography easier if I wasn’t asked to remove wrinkles here n there, etc.
The classic example of ‘mansplaining’ goes like this: a woman is going to put together a flat pack wardrobe. So she goes about taking the bits of the box, maybe she reads the directions. She’s got her hammer and her flathead screwdriver and she’s ready to go. At which point her father/husband/brother/male friend/whatever comes over and starts explaining to her how to put the thing together as if she has no idea what she’s doing. Basically, it’s when men talk down to women and treat them like children. And Danny, your example sort of fits too…but it’s not the “you’re… Read more »
Isn’t anything related to parenting the domain of women as most knowledgable according to society, and thus womansplaining could be done on those topics? I believe there can be patronizing attitudes, supported by culture, for different areas. Typically male areas like cars, building stuff give men the chance to mansplain, typically female areas such as childcare, cleaning house, fashion, etc give women the chance to womansplain.
Thoughts?
Could do. The difference would be that in western culture traditionally the areas of life in which women were considered default experts were less valued. Parenting isn’t monetized, for example, and yet we’re a society which highly values money. Women were denied independent access to the public sphere, yet we’re a culture which prides ourselves on our democracy. Fashion is often ridiculed as frivolous, etc. So it doesn’t mean “womensplaining” doesn’t exist for these topics…it just means the social context is different.
This sounds like creating a difference to justify one gender’s “splaining” as acceptable. I’m not sure how that box example above is monetized or socially relevant in comparison to parenting. I have actually, openly been told my opinion on children has no value because I am not a MOTHER.. not even parent, but MOTHER specifically. I was patronized and “womansplained” throughout that conversation, and I’m supposed to believe that’s not as relevant or offensive as telling a woman she’s putting to much value into Photoshoped images in beauty magazines? Why is it there is always a justification for offensive things… Read more »
One other example of ‘mansplaining’ is sexuality. “We men need sex and you gals will just never understand that desire so let us do what we want, it’s only natural. Our dicks have brains of their owns, honey, and you can’t possibly understand sexual hunger the way we do” or something along those lines. Women have very strong sexual desires and needs too–they just might be triggered and expressed differently. I’m glad to know that men are also offended by the term ‘mansplaining.’
We’re offended for different reasons
Good point.
But can’t you see how this “point” is dismissive of the experience of men? Mansplaining is when a man tells a woman that he knows her experience better than she does. Yet this example posits that women know the sex drive of men better than men do. It literally is an example of women seeking to deny the experience of men. This is the fundamental problem with “mansplaining” it is used to shut down men who try and point out a double-standard. Feminist thought often allows women to tell men “what men think” as stated here where women claim to… Read more »
But the issue she’s addressing Mike is that women’s and men’s sex drives are not that different, and that men often use what she said as an excuse for bad behavior, such as cheating. For a man to crave variety, look at other women, lust after other women, it’s considered natural. When a woman does it, she’s a slut. It’s a double standard.
And still you cannot see it. You are denying the experience of men when you claim that the sex drives are “not that different” because unless you are a man, you simply cannot know. As a result, you ASSUME a double standard exists, when you cannot actually know. Now, maybe it is a double standard, that is a possibility. But since a man cannot actually know what a woman’s sex drive is like, I cannot be sure. It is in claiming that you can be sure where you begin to deny what men tell you in favor of what you… Read more »
Lusting after other men gets women the slut title from who? I’ve never heard someone call a woman a slut for reading a romance novel, watching romcoms, porn, etc. Men cop shaming over looking at other women as well, it’s not a free lunch for either gender. If it is considered normal for men to crave variety, I’d guess it’s also considered normal that the perception is men don’t get as involved romantically so the expectation. Would women prefer to swap or something?
Well men are right who say women will not understand truly what the male sex drive is like, just as we don’t understand the female sex drive. Is it mansplaining to point that out or do you mean when some men say women don’t want sex?
And Danny, your example sort of fits too…but it’s not the “you’re not ugly, stop looking at the magazines” aspect of it that’s the problem. It’s the assumption that the woman’s emotional response to social pressure is invalid is the issue. Simply saying – just ignore it – is the problematic part. It’s like saying “man up” to someone, really. Actually I was trying to say the “you’re not ugly, stop looking at the magazines” response ignores the larger social pressures altogether. As in the only reason she could possibly feel that way was because of fashion magazines (because come… Read more »
Sorry to go off-track…but did you say Animazement? I used to go every year, back when it was in the Sheraton in Durham, NC. I think my first year to go was 2001! Wow, small world!
Yeah the same one. A few years ago it finally got too big for the Sheraton and was moved to the Raleigh Convention Center. Sadly I was born and raised in NC all my life but did not find out about Animazment until about 5 years ago. I think this is like year 12 or 13. But yeah I plan on being there Thursday night for Pre Con (basically a party from what I understand, a chance to go ahead and get your badge) and then hitting that con HARD on Friday and Saturday. Like seriously to anyone reading this… Read more »
“Yes Peter (and anyone else reading this) I know what you might want to say about that. And frankly its true as I have experienced it first hand.”
What might I want to say about that? Genuinely confused here 🙁
I stand corrected.
Joanna, could it technically be matronizing, given the context?
I think we need to have an entire post dedicated to the term “mansplaining”…
I suspect that such a post is unlikely to get us anywhere as both sides will simply talk past the other. A great deal of feminist theory is ridiculously patronizing towards men, as it seeks to “inform” men on what their “actual” motivations, goals, and viewpoints are. We can see this very easily in radical feminism, but it is also apparent in more modern, moderate feminist thought. I’m reminded of a piece from not too long ago that posited the idea that men are only offended by the word “creep” because they have a (secret? unspoken?) desire to disregard boundaries… Read more »
*applause*
Read that article, and that was very much what was going on. I tried to respond but I found that I’m no longer able to post on Jezebel due to “mansplaining” on an article regarding ACA.
I can get behind the idea that the term ‘mansplaining’ is problematic. It’s not misandrist, though. And though the term itself might be a problem, the concept is very real.
The misandry comes into play is the double standard that -splaining is something that only men do. Or at the very least I’ve yet to come across anyone that uses mansplaning freely that would at least agree that womansplaning happens.
Mansplaining is just a specific type of patronizing. It certainly exists, but as with any lingo that gets popular there is a chance that the definition gets so broad that everything under the sun starts to fit that desciption.
Should add any man or any women. Both genders can just as patronizing to each other.
Agreed
would hold men to the same acount
@ Danny
Of course there’s a double standard just look at the word: MANsplaining.
Weather it exist or not doesn’t change the fact that 1. the male gender is used in naming it and 2. it has and will continue to be used exclusively on men.
Yeah it’s not misandrist as a term, but there are misandrist applications of it that are commonly used by radfems I believe. Hence the backlash and defensiveness it arouses, similar to the words “Male privilege”.
That terms always makes me laugh because the person who uses it has deluded themselves to believe that only “male privilege” and “white privilege” exist.
Just the idea that they have privilege while also protraying the “victim” is to much for them to handle.
Joanne don’t you think it is ‘funny’ that because you agree with his points of view that he is a ‘thinking man” and you fawn all over him. If he changed his stance tomorrow , then he wouldn’t be a thinking man. I mean look at the feminist formally known as Hugo and how when his past was revealed, everything he said became “TRASH”.
First, my name is Joanna. Second, and I think this is very clearly stated on the record, I never agreed with every single thing Hugo said or did, but I have also never changed my mind about Hugo. I support him, respect him, and care about him as a person, as he is my friend. The group of feminists that rejected Hugo wholly was actually a tiny portion of the movement who also happen to be incredibly loud and whom I even consider dangerous. They’re the same ones who harass anyone who says a single thing about men’s issues online… Read more »
It’s hard to say that they’re a small part of the movement when there isn’t really much opposition to them. I’m not arguing they should be used as a definition of feminism but they can’t be exactly discounted either.
Since Hugo was brought up, I also want to mention that I knew the vast majority of what he did in his past when I became a fan–the sleeping with students, compulsive cheating, 4 marriages, addiction, and suicide attempt. He turned his life around and is now a great father and devoted husband. People can get second chances. He works on issues that hit close to home, so I’m a little biased. As someone who developed serious, life-threatening eating disorders in late ELEMENTARY school, I’m glad that there are men like him out there speaking out about body image issues.… Read more »
Yeah, here’s the problem for me: I have actively voiced my problems with these people and put my name on it, but there is an issue with feminists not standing up against them, like the letter meant to support Hugo from some supposedly famous feminists… But they didn’t put their names on it. I spoke out against THOSE feminists, too, despite the fact that Hugo has said nobody ever has to speak on his behalf. I don’t care WHO those feminists are after — their tactics are wrong and make all of us look bad. Thing is, many prominent feminists… Read more »
Feminism has a shitload more popularity, media presence, etc, so I think most MRA’s are still in the back alleys whilst feminists can latch onto something that has had decades of success, and even has offices in government (office for women, etc, at least here in Australia). There is no office for men, most people are probably oblivious to the MRM whilst pretty much everyone in Australia at least knows of feminism. Who exactly is an outspoken MRA though? It’s quite possible the outspoken MRA’s have already called out the bad mra’s but very little attention was given to it?… Read more »
They spoke out against the RadFem tactics and specifically in the case of Hugo. I think something important happened with the Hugo nightmare…I think moderate feminists saw what this small group was doing and had a better understanding of what was happening to anyone who had a dissenting voice. I think it would be AMAZING if more prominent feminists came out and talked about the silencing and abusive tactics being used by this small group, that is so very vocal on the Internet. The problem is that in real life, feminists are NOT like this and aren’t even interacting with… Read more »
I know this is seriously off topic now but: They think it’s in academia, and partially it is, but it’s also on the Internet, and if these Internet RadFems run wild and go on campaigns of hate and destruction against someone like Hugo or against individuals like you or your allies, it’s only going to bring Feminism down. Hard. Good luck getting them to realize that. A lot of feminists are too busy walking the tight rope of ignoring men and men’s issues (until they are of benefit of women), claiming that “they aren’t all like that”, and maintaining double… Read more »
I’ve only see one prominent feminist speak out against misandry in the feminist/radfem/gynocentric/whatever movement, Christina Hoff Summers. Are there others you know of and could possibly link? It’s great they speak out against radfems actions against Hugo but there are some stuff that needs to be denounced to help earn more trust, the stuff in the agent orange files would be a start and also the silly book by Andy Warhols shooter, Valerie Solanas. When that happens it’ll probably show more people a distinction between the groups/types of feminism. The only thing that stopped me becoming anti-feminist was seeing yourself,… Read more »
Well first, the SLPC didn’t label the MRM a hate group. It puts out a yearly report or some such and round about the time that story started circulating wasn’t when they put out their report. There was an article about it somewhere, and I cannot for the life of me remember. So there’s that.
Ahh, weird. I heard from feminists that they did label it a hatemovement, http://www.womensviewsonnews.org/2012/03/mens-rights-activists-named-as-hate-group/
What is really going on?
Basically this: “It should be mentioned that the SPLC did not label MRAs as members of a hate movement; nor did our article claim that the grievances they air on their websites – false rape accusations, ruinous divorce settlements and the like – are all without merit. But we did call out specific examples of misogyny and the threat, overt or implicit, of violence.”
Alrighty now, let’s not derail this further with discussions about the SPLCs report and whether it was accurate or not, etc. I just wanted to let you know how it all actually went down. 🙂
“The SPLC is guilty of the very thing it accuses mens rights of: favouring and minimising one side’s extreme speech, while highlighting and condeming the other.” Good god, I read it, it’s nearly as bad as the other article. Nice way to dodge the issues. The comment by Murphy, may 16th at 5:31am is a great rebuttal to it. They’re lumping the Norway shooter into the MRM when there is no indication of him being apart of it, if this is the official stance then it’s a pretty sad reflection on them as a group. The dismissiveness as if men… Read more »
They specifically said that they didn’t label it a hate movment, but they kind of did. They made little or no mention of the positive goals and genuine issues and their article reads as if the “fringe radicals” actually comprise of the entire movement. They also did a great job of minimising and skipping over similar hatred in feminist groups. The whole thing was written in very emotive language and generally didn’t read like trustworthy journalism. The inclusion of Anders Breivik on the hit-list is a bit like referring to the “Well known feminist Ulrike Meinhof” on the basis that… Read more »
I don’t know that much about her, but from what I’ve seen I’d generally call Hoff Sommers a traditionalist, which isn’t really compatible with feminism.
” The problem is that in real life, feminists are NOT like this and aren’t even interacting with this small group. What the mainstream feminists need to realize, however, is that the future is ON the Internet. They think it’s in academia, and partially it is, but it’s also on the Internet” Are you familiar with the Simon Fraser University men’s center blowback, and how the Accademic feminists responded to it? How the women’s center, with a council that must act unanimously (meaning it wasn’t just a few isolated individuals, but the whole council), opposed the men’s center, defined masculinity… Read more »
“On the other hand, and this conversation is going to quickly devolve, where are the outspoken MRAs who are speaking against the violent, misogynistic MRAs? I know a lot of you do it individually, but that’s the reason the MRM has such a bad name is because of those members who are like the Internet RadFems. In that way, the two movements mirror each other, and I cringe every time I hear a feminist say something negative about all MRAs and have the same reaction when MRAs do that about feminism.” You’re damn right, but It’s a little different in… Read more »
A great start would be some people coming out against the scum manifesto, it shouldn’t be possible to argue that something like that is acceptable in a liberal society, even as supposed satire.
“MRAs who are speaking against the violent mras”
What violent mras?