Saw this and just thought it needed to be posted
tekno-pathetic said: I get that Kitty Pryde is your favourite character, but dont you feel like you force her into stories a bit too much? I mean a third of the fourth 'All New' volume was retrospective on her. A comic about the original xmen spending that much time on a irrelevant character, dont you find that to be a bit forced?
I’ve been following the Men’s Rights movement loosely over the past year or so, and I’ve noticed a growing trend of negativity toward the group. Sure, there hasn’t ever really been any positivity surrounding the group, but as of late I have seen active attempts not just from feminists but from people in the media to make Men’s Rights Activists look like a bunch of undeniably misogynistic, self entitled assholes.
To some, the very idea that men anywhere could see themselves disadvantaged in any way is outrageous, and thus they will actively attempt to drag any Men’s Rights group through the mud and silence their voices. The assumption is that Men’s Rights Activists are simply trying to act as if their issues are somehow more important or more significant than Women’s issues, feminist concerns or concerns of other genders. In the progress of all of this mud slinging, significant forums where MRAs discuss their issues have essentially been dubbed a wasteland of complete scumbags where only misandrists dare to go. One of the more popular forums is of course on the popular website Reddit — http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights.
Today, I’m going to perform a little experiment in order to determine how much of the mud slinging performed by those who hate the Men’s Rights movement is deserved. In order to test this theory, I’ll be looking at the reddit group and taking note of not only the popular subjects, but the most popular responses to them in the comments section. I will also be noting the most unpopular responses in order to come to as fair of a conclusion as possible. Of course, this will only be a small sampling size, but you are welcome to perform this type of test for yourself if you do not agree with the results, or suggest other methods of testing that would meet your requirements.
For this experiment, I’ll be looking at the top five posts on /r/MensRights for the day of June 1st, 2014.
'So who's the extremist here?' - stickied post
“I think this is a very important point. This board, and the people who write here, are being branded as extremists. If you look at the external links to this board on the right side of this page, you’ll see my blog listed at the top. My blog has been branded as an extremist site in more ways than I can count. I know it’s not true, and in this post, I prove it — I hope this is helpful to the vast majority here who know they are not extremists, either: http://www.cotwa.info/2014/05/cotwa-was-right.html”
“For whatever it is worth to you, I find your site to be - by far - the finest example of men’s rights advocacy out of the entire movement. I have considered myself an MRA since 2000, and I’ve read every major site associated with men’s rights, from Angry Harry, to Men’s News Daily, to AVfM, and many others in between.
Yours is consistently the most well-researched, the most professionally presented, the most adultlike in tone, and the most compelling in its arguments. It’s been said so often in this subreddit that it hardly bears repeating, but nevertheless: Feminists are trying desperately to smear CotWA with hysterical buzzwords, wildly inaccurate labels, and misleading association with false flags and malicious trolls because there’s no other possible response to the case you make other than concession.
Consider it a compliment to your ability to make arguments, and a tacit recognition of the merits of your position, but above all - please keep doing what you’re doing. You have more admirers than you know.”
Most Downvoted Comment:
“Spray and pray is a useless and inefficient tactic when diagnosing illness or disorder or even characterization of species.
A Case by case basis search is slow process that takes bodies, time, resources, skills. How much data does it take for one human to collect for one to determine a group is a hate group or to make determinations of motives?
There are cognitive limits and declarations have been made without scope.
In Summation: A novice lumberjack goes to a dying tree and sees infestation. In return he burns the whole forest down without checking the health of any other tree.”
We can take away a few things from this top post – first, it’s clear that activists in the Men’s Rights movement feel that they are being mislabeled and unfairly judged. However, of particular note here is that both the top and bottom comment lack anything that could be described as misandry. In fact, while reading through the comments I was stricken to find that there was nothing that could even be considered hateful towards women. There were a few examples of people who may have been misrepresenting women and feminists in general, but they were sharing their opinions from their viewpoint and at no time said anything hateful. In fact, I was happy to note that one person even said “By the way, whomever popularized the term “rapey” deserves a special place in purgatory.” If you can find any way to try and make this somehow a negative statement towards women, I would like to hear your incredibly flawed reasoning. After all, this is an example of someone legitimately calling out a rape joke as inappropriate – and on a Men’s Rights forum no less. Wait, before you gasp in shock, allow me to continue on to the next post.
“Billie Jean King on genders”
“I always want both genders to champion each other. I just think it’s really important, I know it’s really idealistic, but I don’t care. Our job in this world is to help each other, champion each other. We’re in this world together, so let’s make the best of it.”
“The world would be a happier place if we were all “on each other’s team”, no doubt.
Sadly, at least in my experience, there’s a lot less willingness these days for one side of the team to go to bat for the other.
Guess the best any of us can do these days is (if we’re lucky) find those few, or that one, who will be on our side.”
Most Downvoted Comment:
“Billie Jean is NOT my lover!
She’s just a girl who claims that I am the one!!!!!
BUT THE KID IS NOT MY SON!!!!!!!!!!”
Needless to say, the downvoted comment was downvoted because it had nothing to do with the subject at hand. The top comment, however, simply states a desire to work with other genders and attempt to find those who will work with men. Once more, there is not one misogynistic comment in the thread. Some of the other comments include:
“I see far more men on the side of feminism than I see women willing to even forego that title and adopt something more neutral like “egalitarianism”.”
“Great line, think we can all agree on that.”
“Woman’s “post secret” about an innocent man serving 10 years for her “rape”.”
“That man didn’t rape me…but he spent 10 years in prison.”
“Anonymous stuff on the internet. Nothing to see here.”
Most Downvoted Comment:
“I’m sure half the cunts on the YesAllWoman bullshit made plenty of shit up.”
Here is perhaps one of the most interesting posts we’ve encountered during the test. The top voted comment is someone questioning the legitimacy of the claim made by the original poster that the content is real. As a “post secret,” it is almost impossible to determine whether or not the person who wrote it was being honest or not, and thus it is impossible to ascertain the legitimacy of the claim. As such, the top comment (with over 270 upvotes as of writing this) suggests that viewers should ignore it.
On the other hand, the most downvoted comment is one which is definitely negative towards women and could be considered misogynistic. So, not only are we not finding many examples of misogyny on this popular Mens Rights forum, but when we do see anything of the sort, it is being downvoted into oblivion and largely removed from the sight of anyone who might see it. There seems to be an active attempt on the forum to keep mistreatment and negativity towards women at a minimum, which doesn’t quite fit with the image that the media and many feminist portray. Here are a few more highly downvoted comments:
“I see that you’re at zero. Here’s a bump to +1 brother.
"Because I will get downvoted by women for simply stating the truth. #:YesAllMen!"
“So, does she own him a free rape? I think so. He paid the price. Might as well collect /s.”
As you can see, misogyny is not being supported here, it is being removed.
“”Abolish the white race. Abolish men.” -presentation by a Feminist in Oregon, at a public library. - [4:44]” (Youtube video, marked as having misleading title)
“The one question I would love ask this woman…
"What is something you want to do, but can’t, because of your gender?"
I’d be very curious to see what sort of response she would contrive for that.”
Most Downvoted Comment:
“Women are more likely to be poor than men.
Men going to prison in droves isn’t because of women, or because they are seen as less worth, but because of a toxic masculinity. .”
Here we see that tempers are a little more heated after seeing an upsetting video. That being said, the top comment doesn’t say anything misandrist in nature. It does posit a question that might seem unfair to some, but it does not suggest any hate or negativity toward women. Some feminists might find the question problematic, but it would be quite a bit of a stretch to call it misandry.
On the other hand, the most downvoted comment appeared to have been from a feminist who was getting into it with the MRAs on the forum. This person presented a couple of links to support their claims, although the first link did not provide any concrete evidence and the second was simply a definition of a term. It is possible that this was downvoted because the links were not really supportive or concrete in nature and the description of toxic masculinity was used to largely ignore the problem of men over-populating prisons.
It seems that poor arguments, whether made by MRA supporters or feminists arguing against them, are routinely downvoted and kept from sight. That being said, it is a little disturbing to see that many of the comments made by feminists on this post were downvoted. However, they were making some pretty wild accusations and not providing much if any legitimate evidence for their claims, so it shouldn’t be too surprising that they were given little respect. Here are some of the other comments from the users in question, so you can make a decision for yourself:
“Well sure they can, about 3% of homicides last time I checked, and men were responsible for a little less than 97%. Here’s the system in a nutshell: women are weak and must give up their rights to control their lives and have agency in exchange for being benevolently protected by men…
from men. Excellent closed system.” (no link to evidence supporting claim provided)
“Perhaps the answer is, to be considered a full and complete human being.” (in response to top comment)
I would not deny that many of the downvotes may have been from men who do not like feminists and simply did not approve of what was being said instead of attempting to argue it. This is definitely the most negative thing I have seen so far, but is it misandry to disagree with someone’s point of view? Not really. Once more, we found anything even remotely misandrist in nature was downvoted:
“Why is she trying to look like a man then?” (-3 points as of writing this)
“Internationally, average hostility of men towards women is -0.02 and mean female hostility towards men is 0.10”
“is this it?
It’s a pdf
looks like a good read anyway
"Yodanis and Straus (1996) found no correlation between men’s HTW and assault of a female partner but did find a positive correlation between women’s HTM and their assault of a male partner. That is, the higher the women’s HTM, the more physical assaults against a male partner reported." = Hostility toward men”
Most Downvoted Comment (tie):
“Median is still a measure of centre and usable as an average”
“N=27? Results not significant.”
The top comment finds the document in question and provides it to the user base. This effectively allows those on the Men’s Rights forum to discuss the legitimacy of the claim, which clearly some people questioned.
The most downvoted comment was at -1 point and there were two examples. The first example was in response to the claim made by the OP was actually the mean and not the medium. In the end, this boiled down to semantics at best and was probably downvoted due to irrelevance. The second example was a response based on confusion and it was explained that the N=27 referred to the number of countries sampled in the statistic. This boiled down to a mistaken reading of the data and someone correcting the mistake.
Once again, there didn’t seem to be any outright misandry on display here, instead just a bunch of people discussing a paper that provided an interesting statistic. It is worth nothing that the data in question found that men were slightly more likely to be hostile toward women in the United States, but not by much. The number for men in the US was .19, while it was .15 for Women in the US.
Legitimate discussion of a peer reviewed scientific paper written by people with Ph.D’s in social science can’t really be considered misandry, can it?
So there you have it. Although these are only the top five posts on /r/MensRights, the messages we can take from a somewhat close reading of their content are pretty clear. We’re seeing a lot of repeating trends here that need to be noted. Perhaps the most notable trend is this:
Misandry is not tolerated on /r/MensRights. Whenever it is found by regular viewers, it is routinely downvoted and silenced. Voices of hatred and ignorance are shunned from participating in discussion, not invited.
But this isn’t what we’ve been told about Men’s Rights Activists, is it? We’ve been told they are all misandrists and assholes and nothing they say should ever be taken seriously or given any merit. One of the top five posts linked to a legitimate scientific paper and promoted discussion and education on the issues of gender hostility. Is this something that you would expect of a bigoted pig who simply hates women and wants to confuse the issues? Or is it something you would expect of an educated individual who has legitimate concerns over issues of gender?
Although there do appear to be some clear issues with the silencing of opposition (however poor their sources may have been) and there were some examples of negativity towards women, the most widely supported and upvoted comments were all made in an attempt to further serious discussion about the important issues surrounding gender identity in our world today.
Perhaps it’s time to stop slinging mud and assuming that MRAs are all horrible people. In every group of activists, you are likely to find at least a few people who do not represent what the whole stand for. Even Martin Luther King Jr. had to deal with people committing crimes during his non-violent protests. Don’t let a few bad apples ruin the bunch for you – there are a lot of intelligent people having intelligent and important discussions in the Men’s Rights movement.
Honestly, Forrest Gump, much like the other work of Zemeckis (BTTF series), is grounded in the generation of filmmaking that he helped to create — a generation of films which focuses on intertextuality and nostalgia. This is why you will notice several references within the film to historical events, and even the events which are unique to the film become nostalgic and intertextual within the film itself. Is it any wonder that modern audiences now can’t get enough of TV and movies which refer to past events or make us otherwise nostalgic for the past?
This was meant to be a quick warm up, but it turned into a comic that I’ve wanted to draw for a while. This is something that is extremely important to me, and I appreciate it if you read it.
A while ago, I heard a story that broke my heart. A family went a cat shelter to adopt. The daughter fell in love with a 3-legged cat. The father straight up said “absolutely not”. Because he was missing a leg. That cat was that close to having a family that loved him, but the missing leg held him back. Why?!
Many people have the initial instinct of “nope” when they see an imperfect animal. I get it, but less-adoptable does NOT mean less loveable. 9 out of 10 people will choose a kitten over an adult cat. And those 10% that would get an adult cat often overlook “different” animals.
All I want people to do is be open to the idea of having a “different” pet in their lives. Choose the pet that you fall in love with, but at least give all of them a fair shot at winning your heart.
Don’t dismiss them, they deserve a loving home just as much as any other cat. They still purr, they still love a warm lap, they still play, they still love you. Trust me, next time you are in the market for a new kitty, just go over to that one cat that’s missing an eye and see what he’s all about!
I have a group of friends who have confided in me that they don’t want to spend time with me because I like to spend a lot of time with someone they don’t particularly like. This person they don’t like? He’s my best friend.
Is it just me, or is this sophomoric? Isn’t it kind of childish to refuse spending time with your friend because of who they are friends with? That’s the kind of exclusionary tactic one takes when they are in high school.
Guess what? These friends of mine are fully grown adults. They have been out of high school for years, and yet they still create cliques and behave as if they are teenagers. The joke of the whole matter is that I’m sure they think I’m the one who behaves like a child. Hah. Yeah, okay. Sure.
I’m done with this childish bullshit. If you want to speak with me, speak with me. I’m not going to change who my best friend is just because you don’t like him. I’m not going to change who I am either. Either you accept both of us or you accept neither of us. That’s all there is to it. I’m done with the soft and unnecessary behavior on display here. I’m tired of it and I’m just not going to do it anymore.
That’s all I have to say on the matter.