SYABM - To Inform, Educate, and Entertain
-
Hey (radical) Feminists, men don’t owe you anything.
friendly-neighborhood-patriarch:
You STEREOTYPE them.
You say SEXIST things against them.
You MAKE FUN of them.
You BELITTLE them.
You TREAT THEM LIKE ANIMALS.
You DON’T CARE about their feelings.
You HURT them.
You are HATEFUL to them.
You RUIN THEIR LIVES.
You are HYPOCRITES.And you wonder why they don’t fucking respect you.
I don’t respect you either.
Not one bit.You’re a group of disgusting children who blame all problems on men simply for existing and having a penis.
Not a single man or woman owes you an OUNCE of respect.
You don’t deserve any.
Hey men! Women don’t owe you anything.
You stereotype them.
You say sexist things against them.
You make fun of them.
You belittle them.
You condescend to them.
You control and dominate them.
You rape them.
You beat them.
You buy and sell them.
You honestly treat animals better than them.
You don’t care about them, you care about what they can do for you.
You are hateful to them, especially when they try to talk about these things.
You hurt them.
You murder them.
You ruin their lives.
And you expect them to love you and trust you anyway. How’s that for hypocritical?And you wonder why we don’t respect you.
I certainly don’t respect you. Not one bit.
You’re a group of disgusting children who built entire cultures on the idea that all suffering in the world is the fault of women, who are inherently evil. Talk about blaming all your problems on women for simply existing.
No woman owes you an ounce of respect.
You don’t deserve it.
Amazing.
I attack radical feminists in particular and they attack an ENTIRE GENDER as a rebuttle.Wow.
10/10.
Proving my point of the kinds of “feminists” that make people hate feminism.
Sister, this kind of pandering isn’t going to make men hate you any less or treat you any better. Anti-feminism has never saved a single woman from rape or abuse or other mistreatment at the hands of men. They might pat your head with approval for siding with them against those evil witches/lesbians/radical feminists/whatever the current term for a female boogeyman is. But at the end of the day, they hate you just as much as they hate us. During the burning times, a women could sell out a sister as a witch on Monday and be burned herself for witchcraft on Tuesday. Hating other women will never do a thing for you.
We’re on YOUR side, sister. Are you?
You STEREOTYPE them.
We use class analysis and have lots of different things we talk about.You say SEXIST things against them.
No such thing as sexism against men.
We’ve already established this.
You MAKE FUN of them.
Can’t men take a joke?
You BELITTLE them.
Probably because they come onto our blogs and act like fuckheads.
We don’t go around starting fights with men for the sake of it.
You TREAT THEM LIKE ANIMALS.
How?
You DON’T CARE about their feelings.
Men need to set aside their emotions, listen to women and stop being so hyper-sensitive and ridiculous all the time.
You HURT them.
Actually men threaten feminists and have attacked women because they are anti feminist. Have you heard of the Montreal massacre?
You are HATEFUL to them.
Have you seen the way men treat women?
You RUIN THEIR LIVES.
What did we do this time?
You are HYPOCRITES.
An example?
And you wonder why they don’t fucking respect you.
I don’t respect you either.
That’s nice but we are still keep being radfems and rasing awareness about all sorts of feminist issues.
Not one bit.
You should though. You might find we have interesting things to say.
You’re a group of disgusting children who blame all problems on men simply for existing and having a penis.
No we are blaming men for the situation they’ve created.
Not a single man or woman owes you an OUNCE of respect.
A healthy disrespect for men is in good order.
You don’t deserve any.
What did we do again?
@angryinkeddrunk literally every word of that rebuttal was 100% true but I see you managed to gracefully skip over that fact. You referenced a group of people, she referenced a group of people. Where exactly is the issue? You care more about the fact that a radical feminist, in response to being “attacked” (as you said) for not pandering to men and male supremacy, decided to mirror your points by using men as a fitting example? Yikes. How dare anyone criticize men, amirite? It was indeed 10/10 I agree 👌🏼👌🏼 Mayhem is right this might earn you a few “cool girl” points but believe me when I say you don’t want them, because they won’t save you when the men in your life don’t listen to you when you say no. Impressing men with how much you’re “not like other girls” and vying for men’s approval by criticizing feminism because you “don’t hate men” may seem like a good idea, like it’ll work in your favour, it almost makes sense as a survival instinct, but when you realize, as radical feminists have, just how much men hate women, it’ll become clear how futile it is to try and charm them into sparing you. It won’t work. It has never worked. There is nothing in the world a woman can do that will be enough to make up for her womanhood, which is an sin so grievous in this patriarchal culture that it is, and always has been, punishable by death.
Where is the issue?
It’s in that part where @angryinkeddrunk addressed a group united in a political motive, and the retaliation for that was addressing a group that shares an immutable, uncontrollable trait.
As a political group, feminism carries significantly more collective responsibility than any non-political demographic. If you choose to call yourself a feminist, you are adding your voice to a movement that has done all of the things she mentioned in the opening post. Although I suspect that in your case, you don’t particularly care about mistreating men.
OP, at least, shows compassion and basic human decency. If you think that you and other radfems are disliked because you are women, you are sorely mistaken. I will loathe anyone with your viewpoints and personality, be they male or be they female.
“Charm them into sparing you”
You sound like a nazi talking about the ‘jewish plot’.
^^^^^^^^^
A bona fide man here. I can assure all radfems that its only THEM I hate. Women in general are just fine by me
Celtyradfem and radicalmayhem are the types of hateful, bigoted people that are hated. They generalize and get butthurt when they’re pointed out their mindless hating harms men. Radfems are akin to extreme nazism and they scapegoat all their problems to be the fault of men, even their personal fuck ups…. just like how the nazis did with jews. Too bad they don’t realize without men, their dumbass wouldn’t even exist. There are awesome women out there, such as @angryinkeddrunk along with many like her, who are compassionate and caring of everyone, regardless of their standing and sure as fuck could care less about physical factors beyond one’s control. People should strive, atleast in this sense to be as caring as OP is in this manner.
This tells me that these lunatics see their politics as just as important and immutable as gender.
(via tuhmblr-logic)
-
Not just other men but society and it’s standards in general. The stigma on men isn’t being dealt with because men who “have problems” with something are seen as whiny and wimpy. Which is the opposite it takes nerve to admit you have a problem with something. Never hate on someone for standing for something they have a problem with.
“The patriarchy tells men that they are lust-filled monsters incapable of controlling their own libidos”
When did they start calling feminism “the patriarchy”?“I care that the patriarchy tells men that they cannot be raped or assaulted because the patriarchy believes women are too weak and inferior to be dangerous.”
Yep, that’s feminism all right!
The UK says that rape, legally, is forcibly penetrating someone with a penis. It has for 12 years. When exactly is feminism going to get on that, OP? Or the similar laws in place in New Zealand and India? It’s not like the UK exactly has a lack of feminists.
Heck, when are y'all going to stop those feminists using terms like ‘mansplaining’ and 'male tears’ and actively trying to shut up people who want to talk about men’s issues? They’ve pulled fire alarms on multiple occasions, and I see so much as a hashtag calling them out.
-
You know what’s messed up? The fact that in order to be taken seriously by a man, a women cannot be better at what she does than that man, but she cannot be to inexperienced for fear of being belittled
I’m sure this general statement is backed by evidence and holds true for every man and every woman.
In the world of feminist Tumblr, the extreme exceptions are the norm and the personal experiences of paranoid harpies are the experiences of all women everywhere.
Five bucks says the OP was femsplaining and men didn’t take it well.
You know what? Men didn’t take this post well lmao, and the majority of people who sent me hate messages were men who had the word “anti feminist” or “Meninist” somewhere in their username. I just take comfort in the fact that the only reason they found my post is that they spend their time angrily scrolling through the “feminist tag” in order to respond to people who had different opinions than them and to knock them down. I pity the people who’s lives and opinions are driven by such a negative and pathetic source :(
Of course a man would not like this post. You literally said that they were all condescending jerks. Your claims of “hatemail” sent from “men with the words meninist in their username” also sound a tad overexaggerated to me. Even if people like @siryouarebeingmocked and @cishetwhiteopressor do browse the feminism tag for things they disagree with, you have no place to criticize them. After all, you are the one posting ridiculous generalizations about men and women on the same website.
I’ve literally never browsed the “feminist” tag. And I’d like to point out that feminists have gone to talks about men’s issues IRL to yell at attendees, and protest, and occasionally pull fire alarms. Almost everything I reblog comes from other anti-SJW blogs.
Also, notice OPs tendency towards yelling at strawman, which is rather hypocritical considering how much they complain about their opinion not being respected.
-
what the fuck is this garbage
They don’t know what actual anti-feminists do tbh.
or what feminists do
Leaving aside the fact that the only anti-fems who say things remotely* like that are Redpillers and PUAs, are we talking about the same feminists who tell men they forever have to atone for the actions of other men, and women that they’re perpetual victims? The ones who sometimes tell men they can never be more than second class citizens in feminism, and maybe not even “real” feminists at all, just “allies”?
Or do those feminists only do that with adults, not children? Just kind of ease them into it?
* And I do mean ‘remotely’. EG: They’re more likely to encourage men to take responsibility for their lives than to blame girls. And they often put a lot of effort into being 'pretty’ themselves.
-
Audrey Hepburn, Ladies And Gentlemen
And nero was famous for setting a fire he didnt start .
She’s famous for doing the things that appeared on the giant screens that millions of people saw yes
She’s also kind of known for, y'know, being a good actress.
-
Lol look at how Edgy™ you are. Satanic-anti-feminist, MRA, gotta list the "big tumblr names" that have you blocked. Such a child tbh.
Anonymous
well, the reason that i’m listing them is so that people will understand why i won’t be able to interact with them.
also, how is it “edgy” to advocate for men to have rights? seriously
Bc it’s something you shouldn’t do
so you don’t want men to have rights? and you have feminism in your description.
how revealing.
Men have rights. They don’t need advocacy.
men have rights, yes. but less rights than women still.
That whole article is invalid and plain old not true.
1. Women are protected against genital mutilation bc there is more than a 50% chance of them dying during female circumcision. They have the right not to be subjected to ½ of them dying at birth. Men have that right too.
2. Ok so then why are y'all also complaining about women being in the military? This is something that is based in sexism towards women and it’s an issue that feminists are trying to fix too. Congrats. 1 right to women.
3. Actually, after birth, if the father is still present in the baby’s life, the father has just as much choice in it as the woman. And before birth, it’s the woman’s body and the father has no right to control for their own doing.
4. Once again, the woman only has power over that and is given first caregiving rights if the father is not present in their lives when the baby is born.
5. The definition of rape is penetration without both parties’ consent. So if the girl raped the guy via intercourse, that’s still considered rape by the FBI“1. Women are protected against genital mutilation bc there is more than a 50% chance of them dying during female circumcision. They have the right not to be subjected to ½ of them dying at birth. Men have that right too.”
although the point is that genital mutilation on women that would cause as much damage as mutilation (cutting off the lhabia) is still not legal and not likely to be made legal. i don’t want it to be legal because women should have the right to genital integrity, just like men should. but sadly men don’t have that right.
“2. Ok so then why are y'all also complaining about women being in the military? This is something that is based in sexism towards women and it’s an issue that feminists are trying to fix too. Congrats. 1 right to women.”
oh, i have been complaining about women in the military? please point out where i’ve said that. whatever it’s based in or if feminists are fighting against it or not it’s still a right women have that men don’t. that’s the whole point of the article, you’re not disproving anything.
“3. Actually, after birth, if the father is still present in the baby’s life, the father has just as much choice in it as the woman. And before birth, it’s the woman’s body and the father has no right to control for their own doing.”
“if the father is still present in the baby’s life”, you know that’s what they’re not given a choice on and lacking in rights of, right?
“4. Once again, the woman only has power over that and is given first caregiving rights if the father is not present in their lives when the baby is born.”
is that a justification for non gender neutral custody laws though?
“5. The definition of rape is penetration without both parties’ consent. So if the girl raped the guy via intercourse, that’s still considered rape by the FBI”
i’ve been told there’s many states where men can’t legally be raped though. idk, i haven’t looked into it but here’s more info on that. although i do know Britain’s rape laws make it so that men can’t legally be raped, but that might not be relevant.
I’m at work so not much time but for 5: the main complaint is the wording that makes penetration rape so a woman forcing a man to penetrate her CANNOT be called rape
#2: Remember how Credence Clearwater Revival sang about how the archetypal “senator’s son” didn’t have to go to ‘Nam and risk his life? And how this was implicitly a result of privilege?
Sure is weird how when it comes to women not being drafted, SJWs call it misogyny. I also like how feminism supposedly fights this when it hasn’t really acknowledged it between the 80s and a few months ago, both times when there was a risk it would start to include women too. Even though it’s one of the most common issues MRAs talk about.
The FBI’s definition does include forced penetration, and they’ve since clarified their definitions and materials. Why? Because non-feminists were asking.
-
“I know nothing about this ‘star wars’ thing but it has a diverse cast that I can use to advance my progressive liberal agenda and I can use it for race-baiting!”
More ammunition for the stockpile.
If star wars nerds have an issue with females and non-white please explain the mass popularity of Leia Organa-Solo, Mara Jade-Skywalker, Mace Windup, Asoka Tanno, and Boba Fett just to name the bare minimum.
>not including Lando
the bechdel test is more of a bare minimum thing than a gold star
http://bechdeltest.com/statistics/
A “bare minimum” that most movies pass, as far as anyone can tell. And, of course, using it ignores context; why would you expect, say, Saving Private Ryan to pass?
-
I like how the concept of a man becoming friends with a hot woman sincerely and then becoming sincerely attracted to her never crosses their minds.
Nope, if a guy has the hots for a female friend, that means he was never really a friend in the first place, which is totes not sexist. I mean, it’s not like all the evidence supporting this consists almost entirely of anecdata and stereotypes which never bother to get the actual man’s opinion.
What counts as evidence?
Does the actual statements of women who were told, directly by men, that they were ONLY friends with them because they were interested in dating them not count as evidence? If someone makes a direct statement of their own intentions, doesn’t that count as an opinion?
This is in a “Real Life examples” section because it happens in real life, to real women. It doesn’t mean every single guy who develops feelings for a woman is trying to do this. However, there are men who feel as if they are entitled to a woman’s relationship simply by being friends with her. They exist.
You mean those statements I have literally never seen anyone make in any discussion on the subject ever?
However, there are men who feel as if they are entitled to a woman’s relationship simply by being friends with her. They exist.
Sure do. But the idea that they’re a significant number is unsupported, and the meme any man that develops feelings for a friend and doesn’t like it when she doesn’t reciprocate is entitled and was doing it just to bang her? That’s sexist.
-
This is a problem
Meanwhile men don’t get the right to vote unless they sign paperwork allowing the government to turn them into expendable weapons. And no protection from infant genital mutilation. And no reproductive rights. And in many areas they cannot see justice if they are raped or abused.
But yeah, a short partial list of fictonal characters with happy endings and a long partial list of dead fictional characters is a problem.
Hey, op here. I agree with all of your points (except I’m unclear on the reproductive rights one, but that’s okay). I want gender equality, and I recognize that men face societal standards that are unfair, such as drafts and castration, and I don’t believe in either of them either.
However, I fail to see what any of that has to do with my post. These are two wildly different discussions, and the fact that I’m advocating equal LGBTQ representation doesn’t mean that I’m simultaneously not advocating for gender equality. Both of these things affect different groups of people in different ways. Why are we comparing them? Why are we hijacking completely unrelated posts? It’s pointless.
My addition to your post was intended to set in contrast the largest issues that affect the male and female genders in our culture. Female issues are things such as media coverage, social expectations, and similar soft issues. Men on the other hand lack actual legal rights in our society, by law just for being men.
There was nothing specific and superlative that singled out your post for me to comment on, I just saw a post about thoroughly trivial complaints from feminist sources and I thought that it was a good opportunity to put that in relief against the life-and-death issues that men suffer by comparison.
My post did not take anything away from your post. The original meaning is intact, and I started my own divergent conversation from it.
I think this should be a good sign, take a minute and think about the amount of straight men in things, how much would you like to bet if you looked at it all a majority of them die to further to story or don’t get a happy ending, it’s just the way narrative works. What this says to me is that Lesbians and Bi women are getting more representation. Bad things happen to fictional characters.
I completely understand where you’re coming from, bro. I really do, and I thought about that too. So I did some research and I thought about it, and here’s what I found :)
So, first of all, it turns out that media representation actually ISN’T on the increase for gay/bi women. In fact, since 1976, there have been less than 200 gay/bi women characters on tv or in movies at all. To put that in perspective, there are currently 400 tv shows airing through networks, broadcasting, and streaming services. That means that the total number of gay/bi women shown in tv shows AND movies since 1976 doesn’t even account for half the tv shows that are on air currently. To say the least, that sucks.
When these characters DO finally appear, they rarely last more than one season. In fact, overall, gay/bi women have an 80% death rate. Now, we’re really not opposed to these characters dying off. I mean, we’re a bit opposed to them dying off so frequently, and we’d like to see that rate lowered to a more realistic standard, but whatever. What we really dislike is that the vast majority of these deaths occur because of a jealous boyfriend or a father that can’t accept his daughters love for a girl or whatever. Very rarely do these deaths have meaning besides furthering the development of the main character, and very rarely do these characters get decent story lines.
To recap, we’re not opposed to our lesbian/bi characters dying, we’re opposed to how often they die (80% death rate) and how they never have decent, original story lines.
Also, yes, straight characters die all the time, but when they do, there’s a bunch more everywhere else. But a lot of times these writers will bring in an LGBTQ character so that they can say “look we have representation”, only to botch their story lines and kill them off within one season. Which also sucks, obviously.
Thanks for reading :)
Let me just say I love the level of discourse, so perhaps you’d allow me another rebuttal? It’s clear the attitudes towards homosexuality is becoming more sympathetic but it’s clearly not been so in recent history, could that perhaps account for the number of deaths? That is to say the fact that we know bad things have happened to homosexuals for decades compels writers to end their stories the way they seem to?
I think you’re absolutely correct with that point. There’s a whole history behind the LGBTQ movement that doesn’t get taught, and all people end up hearing about is the violence and hatred towards the LGBTQ community. I think that definitely has an impact on what is portrayed in our media, especially since the vast majority of producers and writers are straight. It’s the danger of a single story. Now, I don’t fault them for that, but I fault them for choosing not to address the issue when it’s presented to them. Jason Roth and other writers have chosen to just ignore their LGBTQ fans and hope the criticism goes away, which is what I have a problem with. That’s how a single story persists, you know? And therefore, we can’t use it as an excuse anymore. It’s a writers job to write a variety of different characters, and if they can’t write a character that is different from themselves in an accurate and developed way, then I don’t think they should be a writer, you know?
Eh I’m less inclined to believe “They don’t understand because they’re straight” and more “They want to sell the sensational.” So even indie filmakers and even LGBTQ filmmakers are more likely to focus on the violence or the big stories because they know it’s the kind of thing that gets peoples attention.
So, first of all, it turns out that media representation actually ISN’T on the increase for gay/bi women. In fact, since 1976, there have been less than 200 gay/bi women characters on tv or in movies at all. To put that in perspective, there are currently 400 tv shows airing through networks, broadcasting, and streaming services. That means that the total number of gay/bi women shown in tv shows AND movies since 1976 doesn’t even account for half the tv shows that are on air currently. To say the least, that sucks.
How does that prove that media representation isn’t increasing compared to what it used to be?
In fact, inability to grok context seems to be a running theme here.
In fact, overall, gay/bi women have an 80% death rate. Now, we’re really not opposed to these characters dying off. I mean, we’re a bit opposed to them dying off so frequently, and we’d like to see that rate lowered to a more realistic standard, but whatever.
What about the many, many characters whose sex lives we don’t explicitly know about? I didn’t learn that McGonagall had a husband until Pottermore came out. I was shipping her with Dumbledore until, well, you know.
Speaking of which, lots of people complained that Dumbledore being gay wasn’t explicitly made clear in the books. To which people, myself included, asked when it would have been appropriate in-universe for Harry to learn about Dumbledore’s love life. I’ve never heard an answer.
To recap, we’re not opposed to our lesbian/bi characters dying, we’re opposed to how often they die (80% death rate) and how they never have decent,
That’s an entirely subjective judgement, and I strongly doubt you’ve personally watched those 160 storylines.
original story lines.
Neither do most characters. Have you never heard of ’The Seven Basic Plots’. Star Wars is possibly the most famous and influential franchise of all time, and Lucas has basically admitted that he ripped off everything but the lightsabers.
What we really dislike is that the vast majority of these deaths occur because of a jealous boyfriend or a father that can’t accept his daughters love for a girl or whatever. Very rarely do these deaths have meaning besides furthering the development of the main character, and very rarely do these characters get decent story lines.
So you’re expecting supporting characters’ storylines to have main character importance. Based on lumping forty years of TV and films together, instead of comparing actual eras and including context. Sure, that makes sense.
What’s ironic is that as I understand it, the death that started this whole uproar involved a character who was involved with the female, bisexual lead character. Also, several of the modern examples are from shows like Scream Queens and American Horror Story and Supernatural and 24 and Buffy, which regularly kill off characters. I also like how Xena is included in there even though she died at the end of her long-running and popular TV series. In fact, most of the deaths on the list seem to be clustered in the last 15 years, less than a dozen examples are prior to 1996, and some of them are from shows that already have a higher than usual amount of LGBT characters, like Dante’s Cove, Orange, or The L Word. Which indicates to me that representation is increasing.
Some of the examples are from Latin American shows, which strikes me as…reaching.
When I look at >the list<, deaths inflicted by fathers and boyfriends are actually pretty uncommon, so I’d really like to know what you’re basing your claim on. Heck, a fair amount seem to have been killed by their girlfriends or other women.
I wonder how much of the high death rate has to do with shows willing to show sexuality at all are more mature and mature shows having a higher death count overall.
Good point.
-
Ayaani Hirsi Ali
not taking anyone’s bullshit
Damn
You can’t blame white men for shit they do because of a shitty culture and then EXCUSE the shitty things non white men do because of a shitty culture. That double standard don’t work with a person with two brain cells.
