Why “Fucking Their Shit Up” is fucked up.
Here’s a picture someone posted to Reddit about a day ago:
Found on Reddit.
The general consensus amongst Redditors who saw the post was that it was hilarious. At last count, the post had gotten 1,157 up votes and 318 down votes, giving it 830 net upvotes. That’s a shitload, even for Reddit; it’s gotten more net upvotes than all but one of the posts currently on the front page of the subreddit (r/vertical) it was posted in.
It’s also pretty fucking offensive — a rape joke, a murder-of-women joke, and a necrophilia joke all rolled into one. Sure, it’s a “joke,” but it wouldn’t be hard to make the argument that pictures like this one, which make violence against women into a joke, can actually serve to encourage such violence.
If you did believe this, what would be the appropriate reaction to such a picture? You could post critical remarks about it in the comments section for the post on Reddit. You could post about it in ShitRedditSays, a subreddit devoted to ferreting out misogyny and racism and other bigotries on Reddit. You could post about it on your blog.
Or you could declare the picture an “unambiguous call for murder” and the person responsible for it to be a ” depraved and murderous male supremacist.” You could offer a reward for information on that person’s real identity, and post that person’s personal information — including their phone number, their place of employment, their home address — online. And if someone points out that posting such information might lead to this person being physically harmed or even killed, you could say: I don’t give a shit.
But that would be wrong.
It would also be terribly time-consuming, because crap like this gets posted to Reddit all the fucking time.
The proper response to speech you don’t like, however vile you think it is, isn’t violence or harassment, but more speech.
If what someone says goes beyond the bounds of free speech, you have other options. If someone threatens you personally, in a posting on the internet or by letter or email or phone call, you have the right to (and you should) report them to the proper authorities. If someone threatens you physically, you have the right to defend yourself.
But a misogynistic picture on the internet is not a threat to you. Nor is a misandrist video. These things are challenges — and in many ways opportunities — for you to make your case against hate. Responding to shit you don’t like on the internet with harassment and threats — implicit or explicit — of violence? That is hate.
Like this:
Posted on November 22, 2011, in antifeminism, misandry, misogyny, MRA, rape, rapey, reddit, threats. Bookmark the permalink. 193 Comments.
At least this explains why you are so angry and bitter. I know you claim to be laughing but really, your actions belie your claims. Maybe one day your family will care enough about you to feel something about you besides indifferent.
@Rutee: Family reunion doesn’t start till tomorrow. This afternoon was just travel time.
@Snowy: Ya…no. Do I have to place sarcasm tags around what I say so you will understand?
@Elizabeth: I so want you to get it right…just keep trying a little more. You can do it!
Uh ohhh! Call your sponsor Brandon! Otherwise we might have to take away your 3 seconds of not being a dickhead token away! You were doing so well. Admitting you have a problem is the first step!
So you have people you know, and presumably like, and don’t see often, in the same geographical location, and you’re trolling the internet instead of spending time with them, and you think nothing of it. Yepperoni, the Troll’s a sad one XD
What is even sadder about Brandon’s misery that he tries to cover up is the fact that he has no way of changing unlike MRAL. If he stopped denying that it actually hurts to have no one in his family care enough about him to even be disappointed by or in him maybe he could change but he is not capable of that.
So sad.
@Snowy: You seem to have an understanding of 12 step anonymous programs….did you smoke a lot of dope back in the day? How much clean time do you have?
@Rutee: I will see my family tomorrow. I am not with them right now. But believe what you want. Even Rutee’s can be wrong!
Ohhhh snap! Did I just get called a druggie? Wow, such a horrible insult! Also, uh, dope? How old are you again?
@Snowy: Oh sorry…it wasn’t heroin it was crack. My bad.
@elizabeth: Ya, I am really not miserable. Life is pretty damn awesome and it is even better when you don’t do what society wants you to do.
Yeah, Snowy, why don’t you go smoke some “Mary Jane” with all your hop head friends?
I would CB but I just got done watching reefer madness and now I’m scared straight!
@Snowy: You know what is funny…that is the name of my cat. Further proof that feminists are just timid little kitties. HAHAHAHAHHA
Keep telling yourself that Brandon.
@Elizabeth: lets see…I can support myself, I have no debt, I have a loving girlfriend and I pretty much see the world as my playground.
So how am I miserable?
Well, that’s good, Snowy. I’ve heard that smoking the Wacky Tobaccy leads to socialism, jazz, and consorting with Negroes.
If you were not miserable, you would not be trying to get cheap thrills from badly mocking feminists. Instead you would be out living your life.
And yet, here you are. Once again.
Oh noes, I’m named after your imaginary cat? The only thing I can say is, thank god I’m not named after your imaginary girlfriend! *hides timidly*
@Elizabeth: The same could be said of you. Why aren’t you out living your life instead of writing comments directed at me.
Mocking feminists and feminism is actually my guilty little pleasure. It’s even better in person when I laugh at them in the most unapologetic way possible.
@Snowy: Seriously? Why would I lie about a fucking cat? What purpose would that serve? Nothing is what it would serve.
I don’t have to lie to you people…my own thoughts and real actions serve me much better than any stupid lie can do.
It’s funny, if you didn’t like your family, that’d be one thing, but again.. you’re here. And ostensibly do. You’re with people you’re not usually near. That isn’t the same for all of us XD
I really have no idea. Why would you? Also, why do you troll a feminist blog when you’re obviously so above it all? I guess it’s a mystery.
You should probably get better at it… the only way I can see you being a slightly less minor inconvenience is if your laugh is actually annoying. XD
We totally believe you, you’ve just been so honest and forthcoming in the past!
@Rutee: What part of “I will see my entire family tomorrow and be spending most of the weekend with them” don’t you understand? Seriously, are you just dense?
*goes off to listen to jazz and talk about socialism with negros*
@Rutee: I made a feminist girl cry…does that count?
Brandon, I salute you. You’re living the dream, man. It’s a good life if you don’t weaken.
BTW, I’ve noticed the womyn on this board sure do just love when they can rile a guy up, just like with NWOS but sure do just hate it when they’re the ones getting riled up i.e. they can’t get his goat. As usual, they can give it good but it seems they can’t take it well lolololol XD
Well, maybe you’re in a nothing town, but I would think you have shit to do if you’re not in a tiny town. Hell, even my hometown had shit. Either that or it’s a hella small reunion…
Brandon: Thing about the non-trollish types on here is that, believe it or not, they’re entertained even when you’re not around. The comment threads that trollish types have yet to show up in often turn into conversations about literature or cooking or games, the forums exist with topics that have nothing to do with you or others who come here just to feel clever by being assholes, and there have even been a couple real-life meetups.
In other words: they’re enjoying themselves without resorting to acting juvenile and being such a poor specimen of humanity that they think irritating people for no other reason than the joy of being a near-nonsensical ass is fun.
You’re the type of person who thinks that’s fun, and…honestly, it really is kinda sad. The folks here enrich themselves, even if only slightly, by hanging around here. You just make the world a marginally worse place.
@Rutee: WTF are you babbling about?
It’s friggin 1:30 in the morning where I am. What else is there to do besides troll manboobz till I get tired, so I can go to bed. I already checked facebook and my email.
Oh, Snowy is the cat’s name. I thought it was called Reefer Madness.
Are you in Florida? Because most cities are open all night, you just have to know what you’re doing XD
Reefer Madness would actually be a marginally clever name for a cat.
Blah, blah, blah.
Who’s getting riled up here? XD
Whoever Brandon’s arguing with, apparently.
Reefer Madness would be a great cat name. Reminds me of a video my om sent me of our cat. He had just eaten a bunch of catnip and was wriggling on the floor on his back all drunk-like. Awww, stoned kittyyyy.
Oh. And mara-juwanna’s bad, mmmkay?
Christ, is there anything sadder than someone who so clearly thinks he’s the 21st century equivalent of Oscar Wilde, despite the rather overwhelming evidence to the contrary?
Part of me desperately wants Brandon to develop even the most subatomic particle-sized smidgen of self-awareness - but the other part is worried about his sanity if he ever realizes what other people actually think of him, and why.
Sometimes his posts are unintentionally funny (his attempts to persuade us that he had this amazingly varied sex life had me laughing out loud), but most of the time I just find them boring and a bit pathetic. And I genuinely wonder what he can possibly get out of them.
While commenting on this blog I played a game, watched a show on H.G. Wells and Phillip K. Dick, read a dozen articles online, and talked to four people about topics ranging from the failure of the so called Supercommittee to the recent AZ Supreme Court decision.
I also finished all of my Christmas shopping for my family, who like me and are proud of me, unlike your family with regards to you.
And you…trolled Manboobz instead of talking to anyone in your family or doing more then just sitting there lonely and sad.
Oh and I cuddled my dog. She wanted attention.
Ironically enough, the fact that I honestly thought that Solanas had killed Warhol underscores what I was saying about her all along - she’s a peripheral figure in terms of feminist history. For most feminists she’s either “that crazy person who shot Warhol” or “Valerie who?”. Most feminists on this thread haven’t read her book. I read part of it, at university, but didn’t get through much of it because I’m not fond of rage-filled rambling.
So yeah - sorry not to burst into tears at your attempted “j’accuse!”, little troll, but the reason that I don’t know much about her is that she’s nothing more than an odd little footnote in feminist history.
Also, wow. Elam really is batshit. MRA brain-melting disease strikes again.
“Reefer Madness would be a great cat name. Reminds me of a video my om sent me of our cat. He had just eaten a bunch of catnip and was wriggling on the floor on his back all drunk-like. Awww, stoned kittyyyy.”
Highway cat (ie the one the ex and I rescued from the highway a while back) was recently spayed and had to wear the cone of shame. At some point she decided that the cone was not up to her standards of cleanliness, so she started grooming it.
If I can get the ex to upload the video he took of that we may have a YouTube sensation on our hands.
@Brandon: Srsly, you can only do one thing on the internet at a time?
I have this blog open, my personal email account (am resisting checking work email on holiday though I might break down), and my dreamwidth journal, and have made a batch of cranberry sauce, done a load of dishes, and a load of laundry which I’m about to hang out, and eaten breakfast, all in the last two hours or so since I got up.
Learn to multitask, dude!
Damn, Brandon is more pathetic than previously thought.
I can read this and prep most of the t-day dinner.
Why is it a “guilty” pleasure, Brandon? Making fun of feminism and feminists is one of my favorite past times and it’s a pleasure I don’t feel the least bit guilty about!
‘Ironically enough, the fact that I honestly thought that Solanas had killed Warhol underscores what I was saying about her all along – she’s a peripheral figure in terms of feminist history.’
As ironic as you find your lack of knowledge about what we were discussing, I found it hysterical that you stated that a lack of knowledge about solanos invalidated my ability to discuss her.
‘BTW, Solanos actually did kill someone – Andy Warhol. She was a lot like the guy who shot Lennon, in a way. See what I mean when I say that you’re not qualified to discuss this? ‘
It’s like pointing out that if you don’t know 2+2=5 then you shouldn’t do maths.
Like your lack of knowledge of an ad-hom, dude?
Seriously, Solanas is nearly irrelevant to feminism. If the conversation were solely about her and Warhol, this dismissive bullshit over this error would be sensible and not actually bullshit; that’s demonstrated lack of knowledge over the topic. The topic is not really Solanas; you are trying to turn your lack of knowledge of feminism into an equivalent of her lack of knowledge of Solanas. Not going to fly.
I’m in favor of the b-r-a-n-d-o-n carachter string filtering; so many comment threads with him in devolve to “well, you’re a poopyhead” in a way Slavey and MRAL threads, say, do not.
Keep digging, Ullere. You can see how effective it’s been in convincing people to take you seriously so far, right?
Also, notice that I have admitted that I was wrong about Solanas actually killing Warhol. (She tried, but did not succeed.) You have yet to admit that any of your claims have been shown to be false, like the one about Solanas being a significant figure with an influence on modern feminism. In fact, in another thread you’re trying to claim a line from a novel as proof of Official Feminist Doctrine, which is pretty damn funny.
Ullere: You’re comparing the one to the other, is being wilfully obtuse.
Are you really trying to argue that the folks on reddit are making a political statement, in response to the SCUM video?
Fine, support your argument. Show that 1,500 upvotes is because they think this is some trenchant riposte to something which was connected to an outside work.
If the SCUM video had been a standalone effort, not meant to get people to attend a play; a play which by all reports of those who have seen it, has nuance and actual substance, then there might (might) be some sort of, “johhny did it first/See how it feels to have the shoe on the other foot) argument.
That this sort of thing is so widespread that it’s got a name actor doing shit like this undercuts your position, but you could make that argument… if the SCUM video was a standalone object.
But it’s not, and this shit is.
That’s what makes more like NWO than you want to admit… like him you are pretending patently false things are true, and blatantly different things are the same.
No ‘Mainstream’ MRAs defended him, the ones who did are obviously extremists or idiots, are there no idiots nor extremists in the feminist movement?
Sorry, but that dog don’t hunt, because you said this ‘The funniest thing about all this is that I have never seen a feminist quote Solanos in an admiring way.’
I found some quotes for you, to expand you knowledge of feminist view points on Solanas, not to prove anything to you.
If you want random quotations from comments, and long past presidents of NOW to count, you have to accept that notable figures in your movement (more notable than commenters/long past presidents of NOW) said that Breivik was to be emulated.
‘Osborne? you realize feminists mocked her, right?’ Yes I have no doubt many did, noone in the audience admitedly…
And you know they were feminists because… You took a poll of the audience afterwards?
Ullere: ad hominem ‘Attacking an opponent’s motives or character rather than the policy or position they maintain.’ Calling me a sexist, troll, moron, idiot, luddite has the ringing of an attack on character.
Note (as has been pointed out before) the all-important, rather
People here have not been calling you a moron, etc., rather than addressing your arguments, they have been doing it in addition,and it’s supposed to have the ring of an attack on your person, motives, and character, because it is.
None of which invalidates any comments about your arguments.
You, accusing people (falsely) of making ad hominem attacks is a different sort of qualified ad hominem, in that you are accusing them of failing to address your points, when they have been.
You are all so dedcated to jumping on anything I say you just attach any nonsense to my posts.
‘Seriously, Solanas is nearly irrelevant to feminism.’
Yes I agree, and in another comment I said I didn’t consider her a feminist. Some people do.
‘like the one about Solanas being a significant figure with an influence on modern feminism’
Where did I make this claim? I have stated I do not consider her a feminist.
‘In fact, in another thread you’re trying to claim a line from a novel as proof of Official Feminist Doctrine, which is pretty damn funny.’
In the other thread I claimed groups with a named enemy usually compare them to nazis. I didn’t mention feminsm, but you can’t see past your own beliefs.
Ullere: In the other thread I claimed groups with a named enemy usually compare them to nazis. I didn’t mention feminsm, but you can’t see past your own beliefs.
Yes, you did mention feminism.
My post was simply pointing out that godwins law if very common among groups who have a named enemy. In this case the MRA’s who name feminism the enemy. The marilyn french quote was appropriate as it names men the enemy and names them nazis.
And the parent comment you made @ Arielle Shander Yeah godwins rule is pretty common in all groups who have a named enemy.
“My feelings about men are the result of my experience. I have little sympathy for them. Like a Jew just released from Dachau, I watch the handsome young Nazi soldier fall writhing to the ground with a bullet in his stomach and I look briefly and walk on. I don’t even need to shrug. I simply don’t care. What he was, as a person, I mean, what his shames and yearnings were, simply don’t matter.”
Marilyn French; The Woman’s Room.
Is quoting a piece of fiction. To argue that the fiction reflects the dynamic between groups with named enemies is intellectually bankrupt, or foolish ignorance.
I don’t care which you are; on one level, but those are pretty much the only choices you have left.
BWAHAHAHAHAHH
Well no wonder I am addicted to the stuff!
Ah, Capt. Bathrobe, well met once again!
It’s also pretty fucking offensive — a rape joke, a murder-of-women joke, and a necrophilia joke all rolled into one.
It’s not nearly as funny as the one about the wife who poisoned her husband then cut off his penis and destroyed it in the garbage disposal all because he wanted a divorce. Oh wait, that actually happened and how many millions of women think that is freaking hilarious? Clearly the executives that run CBS and the producers of “The Talk” agree. It’s a hoot.
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander (whatever that means). Or put another way, when you laugh at actual violence done towards men you do more to promote that violence than when you laugh at fake violence portrayed in photos.
By the way, technically speaking it’s only murder and necrophilia. But I do appreciate how you feminists always find a way to bring up rape-it so cheapens the issue and desensitizes everyone to it.
What you all should really be concerned about is that we are moving from a time where you can’t say nasty things about women without penalty to a time where you can. We aren’t there yet but when we are you folks are gonna be truly miserable.
Marilyn French; The Woman’s Room.
Is quoting a piece of fiction. To argue that the fiction reflects the dynamic between groups with named enemies is intellectually bankrupt, or foolish ignorance.
I don’t care which you are; on one level, but those are pretty much the only choices you have left.
So what you are saying then is that Futrelle’s little tirade about the photo joke above (which is also a work of fiction) is also “intellectually bankrupt, or foolish ignorance”?
Thanks for clearing that up for us.