Are feminists conspiring to make all women as ugly as they are? Misogynistic douchebags say “yes.”
Back in the day – way, way back in the day – dudes opposed to women’s suffrage loved to depict suffragettes as ugly spinsters (that is, when they weren’t depicting them as sexy young women using their feminine wiles to manipulate men into supporting suffrage). We looked at some examples of this yesterday and noted that, when it comes to dismissing feminists as uggos, some things never change.
But why, oh why, are feminists so (allegedly) ugly? Or, to turn the question around, why are so many (allegedly) ugly women (allegedly) drawn to feminism?
Well, we’re in luck, because some manosphere dickwads have stepped forward to provide us with possible explanations.
Over on Freedom Twenty-Five, the “red pill” Casanova who calls himself Frost offers this theory:
Feminism is the set of ideologies whose aim is to redistribute the natural allocation of access to desirable men. It is Marxism in the Sexual, rather than Economic Marketplace.
Frost is so proud of this sentence of his that he puts it in bold, as I have. He continues:
The ultimate goal of the Feminist is to create a world in which all women are as hideous and awful and dead inside as they are, so that everyone can have an equal timeshare in the alpha harems, and everyone’s fatherless offspring can be raised by the same uninspired bureaucrats in the same grey-walled, concrete and plate-glass buildings.
I can confirm that this is indeed the ultimate goal of feminism; we talk about it at all the secret meetings. The penultimate goal? To get Sleater-Kinney back together again.
Frost breaks it down:
- Feminists tend to be some combination of fat, old, ugly, abrasive, and slutty.
- Feminists want to convince men that we should be attracted to fat, old, ugly, abrasive sluts.
- Feminists want to convince women that it is OK for them to be fat, old, ugly, abrasive sluts. They want desirable women to become fat, old, ugly, abrasive sluts, so that the feminists no longer look so bad in comparison.
- Related to (1) and (2), Feminists want to convince men and women that it is immoral for men to not be attracted to fat, old, ugly, abrasive sluts.
This is why Feminism is working so passionately to ruin American women. [Who benefits] from the widespread adoption of feminist beliefs that destroy our once-slim, once-feminine, once-nurturing women? The answer, first and foremost, is the women who were already destroyed to begin with.
Feminists know that, in a monogamous world where everyone pairs up with an equally desirable mate, they could only ever earn the favour of weak, bottom-feeding men. Feminist ideology, i.e. the hysteric and childish whining about Patriarchy, Shaming Language, and Socially Constructed Gender Roles, is no more than the set of rationalizations with which they seek to drag the rest of womankind down to their level.
Over on the blog of a fellow named Anatoly Karlin, meanwhile, a commenter calling himself fcomp has a similar theory to explain why so many feminists are (allegedly) fat fatties.
If you think about it, there is a strong rationale [sic] self interest between feminism and the increase of female obesity. If feminism is to be defined as increasing the societal power of women, then it would serve them well for their to be more obese women.
Go on.
The desirability of a women to a man is far more objective then subjective. If women were to be, across the board, more attractive, if all women became, at minimum, 6s, men who ended up marrying 6s, the men who would be the lowest in male desirability in such a society, wouldn’t nearly be as unhappy as men who end up marrying 1s in our society.
I’m not quite sure that fcomp really understands how averages work. Lake Wobegon aside, you can’t actually have a world in which all women are above average in “objective” desirability.
The logical result of that, is that in such a beautiful society, ironically, the value of female beauty would become far less valuable, and beauty would be far less desired. If there isn’t a chance that one might end up with a landwhale, I suspect that most men would hardly bother with stuff like game and the like. I would imagine that such a society would experience little sexual discrimination, but at the same time, be very anti-female, in the sense that women who are competitive with men in economically productive fields would be quite successful, but at the same time, “feminine virtues”, a females capacity attracting men, the only area in which women surpass men, would be far less valued.
If all women are beautiful, then no women are beautiful?
There is a upper cap on female attractiveness, which are the feminine ideals hardwired into us by evolution, but there is no downward cap. … [F]eminism is intrinsically a downward trend because the only thing a beautiful women can do to that makes herself more desired in a society, is to reduce the amount of beauty in that society.
The blogger on whose blog this muddled comment was posted, Anatoly Karlin, is so impressed with fcomp’s theory that he highlights it in a post of his own, adding
This is why your typical Third Wave feminist or rape activist is fat, has a manjaw, or is otherwise unattractive.
If you are ugly, devaluing beauty is not bad evolutionary strategy.
On a blog called Misanthropy Today, meanwhile, Dan Y. is not only convinced that (most) feminists are ugly; he also seems bitter that anyone would dare criticize him for calling women ugly.
[M]ost women who try to guilt us out of using looks as a criterion for judgment tend to not be very attractive. It makes sense that someone lacking in a certain perceived quality would want to dissuade others from assigning value to that quality, and would want those who possessed that quality to be humble and not flaunt it. It also seems extremely self-centered and petty to try to convince others to think and feel a certain way just so we can marginalize our lesser qualities. …
Feminists’ cries of outrage at man’s obsession with physical beauty are not altruistic. They are … upset that other women are benefitting from a quality that they don’t and probably never will possess. Their own perceived value relative to better-looking women will inevitably increase if looks are dismissed as unimportant.
Apparently, suggesting there’s more to a person than conventional attractiveness = shallow and petty. But basing your judgment of a particular women largely on whether or not she gives you a boner is the height of sophistication.
As these guys show again and again, real ugliness is more than skin deep.
Like this:
Posted on November 4, 2012, in antifeminism, are these guys 12 years old?, disgusting women, evil fat fatties, evil women, evo psych fairy tales, hate, it's science!, men who should not ever be with women ever, misogyny, oppressed men, PUA, reactionary bullshit, ugly feminists and tagged antifeminism, misogyny, pickup artists, PUA. Bookmark the permalink. 132 Comments.
Actually can’t tell if this is sarcastic or not… Portlandia’s alright and Corin Tucker Band’s okayish and Wild Flag aren’t too awful or anything but I was just too late for Sleater-Kinney
Off topic, but just read in the news about Sharon Osbourne getting a double masectomy. I wonder how long before the manosphere starts gloating?
No, no, khymchanur, you’ve got it backwards: feminists are trying to make women immortal so that all the women are old. Thus will dawn the Femtopia—a word that is not a place but an era—an era of old, abrasive, slutty, butch women ruling the world and having adventures and not giving a shit about any MRA’s peenfeelings.
It’s not just that HFCS is a sugar, it’s fructose, and fructose has a different metabolic pathway to being used as energy. It’s better at making fat than other sugars are; so when one is using fructose as the main energy source, and one has a surplus, it becomes fat more readily.
At a guess, this is a way mammals who need to overwinter took advantage of fruits as a food source; but that’s just blue sky-theorising as to an evolutionary mechanism for the facts.
Shiraz: I wouldn’t say Casino Royalle was spoofing Bond films, as it was the first of them.
And I thought Feminism was about equality. Silly me.
Ogress: Of course this stuff will all be pissed out eventually, if withdrawn sufficient time before slaughter. *It isn’t*. Of course it would be broken down, if all meat were eaten very well- done. *It isn’t*. If you saw our good old boys heaping tons of meat on the barbecue and heaping it on plates while it still has a heartbeat, you’d have a better idea, and if high-fructose corn syrup were that efficacious at causing weight gain, *that’s* what they’d be feeding our slaughter animals.
I don’t really have a standard I equate with hotness. Like there are definitely certain physical traits I find more attractive than others, but when it really comes down to it, what really attracts me to someone is their personality after time spent getting to know them. And by time I mean a matter of years. I may be diagnosed now and working to start fitting into society better, but I’m no miracle worker, the social anxiety and absolute clumsiness are still there no matter what I do really.
I got sent her new album to review a couple of months ago. I was super-excited but haven’t been quite that disappointed in a while. I mean, it’s not bad but it’s dull.
On topic, I find the most annoying thing about these ‘feminists = ugly’ arguments is that some guy always turns up to reassure us that we shouldn’t worry our pretty little heads, he is still good enough to want to knob us.
I honestly don’t give a fuck. There’s seven-billion people on the planet, and I couldn’t possibly sleep with them all, so it doesn’t keep me up at night worrying that I might not perfectly fit an unattainable ‘standard’ of attractiveness that, you know, doesn’t actually fucking exist. I’m happy with myself, because unlike the MRM, I am actually, factually, A W E S O M E.
Re: factory farming and obesity - they do give feedlot animals the raw ingredients for HFCS. Feedlot cattle eat corn, and lots of it, during the homestretch before they go to slaughter. It’s cheap (though the recent drought has changed that for the moment at least) and make cattle gain weight like nobody’s business. I’ve never seen any data that says one thing or another about whether eating beef finished on corn makes you fatter than grass-fed beef, but the nutritional profile of grain-fed meat is poorer than its pastured counterpart (the omega-3 levels are particularly sad in comparison).
I’ve seen data all over the place for what’s causing the obesity epidemic. I wouldn’t discount that the way we’re raising our meat animals has something to do with it, whether it’s what they’re fed or what we inject into them. But HFCS, which as Ogress pointed out, is in effin’ EVERYTHING, seems likely to be the biggest culprit.
Notably absent from your butthurt indignation is evidence of attractive feminists.
“peenfeelings”
lol forever
HA! So says the guys who are constantly complaining about the “alpha cock carousel” and how unfair it is that they don’t get the sex they are entitled to.
And angela is still (post-flounce) going on about how it wasn’t about Slavery, and didn’t end Slavery (really, she said, unconstitutional =/= illegal), and I just want to start losing my temper.
I think the reaction to Sandy is starting to set in. It’s far from over, and (no offense to anyone here, I understand it) outside the actual disaster zone it’s “old news”. I might also be over sensitive, because it’s sort of the way the war felt too; and for me it’s still “happening” because I still have friends being shot at; even though it’s well below the national radar.
My unit is going to have a re-union; 10 years since we first deployed. The war is still ongoing.
So Angela is wearing on my last nerve.
Quick dance move! Everyone stand up. Biomedical professionals to the right, everyone else to the left.
Everyone on the left, you need to stop using the words “obesity epidemic” and those other epidemiology phrases that you like. I know that you like them, and they’re very dramatic indeed, but you need to remember that you are talking about people, and people are not diseases. I understand that you are probably very passionate about the subject, but I am equally passionate about the fact that people have bodies, which they live in, and that these people are worthy of respect, regardless of how their bodies look.
Murmuring deep thoughts about “epidemics” and “culprits” and “evolution” - and even “endocrine disruptors” for those who are feeling particularly clever - is work best left to the workers. Because when you do it - and I am very aware that you are doing it out of your own deep personal interest - you are doing it without professionalism or respect. In some cases, you’re using terms incorrectly. It amounts to criminalizing bodies, equating human beings with diseases, and insisting that everyone who does not fit a particular beauty ideal is a poor deluded freak who was left out in the cold by evolution.
Perhaps you could imagine how it would feel if you were older than 30 - some of you are - and everyone thought it appropriate to derail conversations with complaints about an “elderly epidemic.”
“It’s spreading just like a disease,” the people complain, “I never used to have to look at ugly old people, but now they’re EVERYWHERE. I had to give up my bus seat to one the other day, with visible crows-feet. Why do they all have to be so visible? Fifty years ago, there weren’t disgusting thirty-pluses, and if there were, they weren’t offensive. The population is going down the drain fast - we used to VALUE gorgeous springy young people! We were all glowing with youth, and NOW look at us! Why can’t these derelict freaks see that they’re killing themselves? Why do I have to look at their flabby skin, spotty faces and frankly disgusting HAIR all the time? The other day, I heard an old person’s KNEES crack, oh my god, they must have been FORTY YEARS OLD - I am not kidding - can you imagine? And the clothes, ewwww god, they’re such a joke, they should honestly kill themselves, haven’t they ever heard of evolution and medicine and stuff? It’s so unnecessary. They don’t give me boners at ALL. Why can’t these aged uglies just stop eating corn syrup and taking public transportation? Everyone knows that car accidents and cornbread cause aging, so WHY aren’t people just avoiding THOSE?”
Everyone has to live in their bodies. Pathologizing and criminalizing those bodies, when you do not have a shred of education to stand on in order to do it, is unproductive. Regardless of how you feel about fat, if you must derail conversations with your feelings about Other People Having Bodies In Public, please criticize using terms that you are licensed to use, which are also respectful of humanity. I am not expecting you to know anything about science or medicine. I am asking you to stop using words that you don’t understand and to stop acting as if other people’s bodies are morally, aesthetically and medically offensive to your delicate sensibilities.
Okay we can all sit down now.
GO FUCK YOURSELVES, YOU EVOPSYCH BELIEVING BUFFOONS.
THERE IS NO SUCH FUCKING THING AS EVOLUTIONARY STRATEGY, STOP POLLUTING THE WORLD OF REAL SCIENCE WITH YOUR BIGOTED SMALL MINDED BULLSHIT. WE HAVE ENOUGH TROUBLE JUST FIGURING OUT HOW THINGS ACTUALLY WORK WITHOUT MORONS LIKE YOU CLOGGING UP THE SYSTEM WITH YOUR PET “THEORIES” ABOUT HOW HUMANITY MUST ALL BE EVIL AND SELF-INTERESTED BECAUSE IT’S “IN OUR NATURE”. GO FUCKING DIE IN A HOLE, IF YOU SO SINCERELY BELIEVE THAT EVOLUTIONARY SUPERIORITY IS A NOBLE GOAL TO ACHIEVE, THEN IN DOING SO YOU’D BE DOING ALL OF HUMANITY A FAVOUR BY ERASING YOUR STUPIDITY FROM THE GENE POOL.
I’m sorry, but these people make me mad, very mad, willful ignorance about how evolution actually works makes me mad. I mean seriously, how fucking dense do these people have to be to not get that how evolution actually works is that some traits fare better in some environments than others. THERE’S NO FUCKING STRATEGY TO IT. EITHER YOU HAVE TRAITS THAT HELP YOU SURVIVE LONG ENOUGH TO REPRODUCE IN THE WILD OR NOT, END OF STORY. FUCK, WHEN WE EVOLVED THE CAPACITY FOR COGNITION AND HIGHER ORDER THINKING, WE ESSENTIALLY MADE ANY AND ALL APPLICABILITY OF NATURAL SELECTION TOWARDS US NULL AND VOID BECAUSE GUESS WHAT, AS HUMANS WE ADAPT THE ENVIRONMENT TO US NOW.
I fucking despise the naturalistic fallacy, cant ya tell.
@elodie - Good points. Am now exorcising phrase “obesity epidemic” from vocabulary.
Pecunium: Hm? The Woody Allen Casino Royale was released in 1967, and Dr No was released in 1962 (with From Russia With Love, Goldfinger, and Thunderball in the interim as well).
I won’t say that we are exempt from evolution; we survive or not, as a group, with selective pressures. We are certainly changing what those pressures are, but we can’t opt out of them altogether.
But I agree that “strategy” is bollocks. There is no “goal”. Evolution isn’t “going” anyplace. You can’t strategise it.
Hrmnn…. Now I am feeling confused.
Elodie, can all of us standing on the right do something too? The passive voice could stop being abused by us.
Fitzy, you’re a sweetheart.
Nepenthe, we can enjoy some delicious drinks and footrubs! And we can also stop abusing the passive voice. It would be also be good if we didn’t portray evolution as having a positive endgame - it’s resulted in the public’s perception that Evolution = Always For The Best.
And we also get some snacks too
I think you are thinking of the book Pecunium.
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/casino-royale-ian-fleming/1100675049
*applause* for Elodie. I am occasionally guilty of forgetting that there are real people under all the talk about the “obesity epidemic” - even as I struggle with my own weight and diet issues. Thanks for reminding us.
I was about to say the same thing, emilygoddess. I mentioned in a comment on another thread about how half of my family struggle with their weight. However, when I run my mouth (or my keyboard) about “the obesity epidemic,” I never think of my mom standing in her kitchen with a food scale and a portion-control chart. I think of diseased cows and GMO grains and tidal waves of high fructose corn syrup. I’m glad elodie gave me a virtual kick in the avatar butt; I needed it badly.
@Pecunium
You make a valid point, I think I was more trying to say that natural selection doesn’t have nearly the pull on us that it has on other animals. It’s nowhere near pulling enough that it would still affect our behaviour in any significant way, or at least not in the way that a lot of biotruthers seem to enjoy fapping to.
Well, you could say that natural selection has an enormous impact on human behaviour… For instance, natural selection favoured self awareness and reflective thinking in human beings, and there are loads of things we only do because we have these capacities.
The problem isn’t saying that human beings are affected by evolution, the problem isn’t even saying that evolution has affected our behaviour a lot. The problem is a) anthropomorphising evolution, thinking it has a goal it’s working towards, b) forgetting Hume’s law, and most often c) making very specific claims about how this or that particular behaviour in our species has been directly shaped by evolution (rather than indirectly shaped in the sense that evolution made us social creatures that create societies and cultures and care about what other people think about us and so on and this in turn means that we have various social norms that we often try to adjust our behaviour to).
*hands elodie the internet*
That? Was awesome.
Off topic request- american election thread for awesome american election ads please! Like this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_Es82leIkE&feature=g-logo-xit
One of the local candidates here (Republican, natch) is robo calling voters with the wrong polling location.
I hate this. It is so depressing.
I haven’t seen Kendra around recently, but she would definitely be able to sympathize.
Dvarg: Another problem is acting like evolution still affects us in the ways it affects other animals (or is imagined to affect other animals), eg, stronger people being more evolutionarily fit.
@aworld: thanks for the dubstep brain bleach! So enjoyable! Let me counter with this one: heavier on the beautiful vocals, lighter on the dubstep, but still gorgeous:
let’s see how badly I fail at hyperlinks in WordPress
@elodie:
*Slow clap*
aworldanon: You make a valid point, I think I was more trying to say that natural selection doesn’t have nearly the pull on us that it has on other animals. It’s nowhere near pulling enough that it would still affect our behaviour in any significant way, or at least not in the way that a lot of biotruthers seem to enjoy fapping to.
I think it does affect our thinking, a lot. I suspect it’s why we are crappy at long term planning. What I don’t think is 1: it’s as granular as the EvPsych idiots try to tell me. 2: Directed, at all. 3: Anything we can try to affect at the individual level.
Populations evolve, individuals survive (or not).
What we like isn’t necessarity fit, in the Darwinian sense, even if it looks like it. In, “The Beak of the Finch” there is a bird who gets a mate, every year; for 13 years. Being a finch, it’s not the same mate. Some years he gets more than one. They always hatch at least one egg.
Not one of his offspring have survived. He’s a “dead end” even though, at first blush, it would look as if he were doing well. You need to see the follow on.
Back to the OP, I just cannot get over these MRAs. I’m like, what universe do they live in? My younger sister (who passed away two years ago and I still cry nearly every day over that fact) was quite beautiful, and she used to get SO MAD in her teen years about guys she considered hot being out in public with fat women. She would just be like, “How can they DO that! I want that hot guy!” And I would say, well you know it’s not always about LOOKS. I understood, though, that she thought that was all she had to offer, she so underestimated herself and was so conditioned. In later years she wasn’t like that at all. But these MRAs-I don’t know one single man of my acquaintance who even thinks like this. Where do these nutjobs come from?? What a bunch of bitter losers! I used to be active in NOW and most of us were married, had kids, etc. So apparently someone found each of us attractive enough to get sexual with! What on earth are these guys going on about? Do they just live in man caves?
@Katz: Yeah, like people thinking someone who’s either physically strong OR (I’ve seen this more often than the physically-strong-claim) has tons of money and resources is thereby “fit” in evolutionary terms.
Today, the only trait that really correlates with spreading one’s genes a lot would be “wanting to have a big family”.
>You make a valid point, I think I was more trying to say that natural selection doesn’t have nearly the pull on us that it has on other animals. It’s nowhere near pulling enough that it would still affect our behaviour in any significant way, or at least not in the way that a lot of biotruthers seem to enjoy fapping to.
As it seems that some of the stuff that we’re exposed to during out lifetime does end up affecting which dormant genes get activated, I’d say that selection and evolution are still an ongoing process in our lifes.
Plus, you see, we aren’t actually any more conscious of the effects self-induced changes in our enviroment have on us than any other species who manages to change theirs. At least on a species-level, which is what matters to evolution.
Kakanian: But on a species level we have tailored a lot of hostile environments enough to suit us, and in some of them (the Arctic, the Andes, Malarial Africa) we’ve adapted too.
So we are monkeying with the feedback loops of Evolution, and vice-versa.
Or, as Rush Limbaugh put it decades ago, “Feminism was established so as to allow unattractive women access to the mainstream of society.”
Just like radio was invented to give men who look like Rush Limbaugh access to society.
@Nice Ogress
Ingested hormones absolutely do affect the ingesters, see birth control pills, hormone treatment, oestrogenic effects of soy foods, etc. Cooking will probably denature a majority of hormones, but not “completely”, and they are likely to be digested as any other lipid/protein, rather than excreted as a toxin. Hormones are not consumed in reactions, except for their specific breakdown, and there would be “unused” hormones left in the blood in any case.
Sorry for OT, I didn’t want lurkers to be misinformed.
*relurk*
princessbonbon: No. I was thinking of Fleming’s reaction to the film (you may use my titles, but never again the plots) and thought it was the first film made.
Mea Stupide.
‘There is a upper cap on female attractiveness, which are the feminine ideals hardwired into us by evolution, but there is no downward cap. … ‘
Really? Good god, what does she look like? Where does it end? Can we use this woman as a weapon of war or something?
“Do they just live in man caves?”
Short answer? Probably.
Seriously, not a single MRA decided to weigh in on how I should make myself ugly? Well, that’s disappointing. I went with the grotesque paint and scars, but I bet it’s just not ugly enough. You can still tell that I have boobs.
http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t92/Lauralot/jokerhalloween.jpg
(Yes, I have been waiting for any excuse to post Halloween pictures, why do you ask?)
RE: Casino Royale:
There is this TV segmet from 1954…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casino_Royale_(Climax!)
And of cousre the bang borked my link, how about this.
@elodieunderglass:
*standing ovation*
Thank you thank you thank you.
I saw a comment from Truthy in my inbox, but it’s not here. Does that mean it was deleted, or it’s in moderation, or what? I have no idea how WordPress works.
I’m a writer, not a scientist, but can I register an objection to the term “obesity epidemic” from that point of view too? The word “epidemic” implies a disease or a virus. Obesity is not something that you can catch because a fat person sneezes on you. Surely it should be obvious why “epidemic” is not the correct word to use even from a purely linguistic perspective.
@estraven - in high school the head cheerleader was in my AP English class. She was sort of the epitome of the blonde, blue-eyed, pretty cheerleader. I remember vividly her saying she wanted to be President someday and we all laughed. I did too. Because she was a cheerleader and a pretty blonde girl so duh, that was all she had to offer the world! Never mind that she was in AP English and ergo probably not stupid. To this day I cringe with shame when I remember participating in that. I hope she went on to have a wildly successful life in spite of us.
Lauralot, your costume is awesome, although under the circumstances, I can’t entirely approve.
(Please don’t shoot me in the spine.)
Grr, broken html tag. Oh well, at least the link worked.
Duel between Polliwog and Lauralot!
Meanwhile, I was Rainbow Dash.
Isn’t this just a lot of fun to hear this from the same kind of people who keep whining about “friend-zoning” and “not getting dates” and “alpha cocks” and “creep shaming”?
Polliwog, that is all sorts of awesomeness. I’ve been wanting to make a Batgirl but I’m utterly failing at her cowl.
Katz that is objectively the second best costume ever.
I want Katz’s hair!
Unfortunately I am terribly, terribly lazy. My hair’s supposed to be red and black but it’s been baby-pink and black since about the beginning of summer since if I have four hours free I don’t want to spend it fannying about trying not to dye the carpets. I am still at a loss as to why it’s impossible to buy permanent bright red hair dye, all you can get is shitty semi-permanent stuff which means you have to re-dye it once a month or just let it fade >:(
/off-topic hair-based rant
^Ugh, don’t I know it! The colors are fading out at different rates. The green was already mostly gone when I took those pictures. Now the yellow and purple are still pretty strong, but the red, orange, and cyan have faded a lot. Demand permanent primary-color dyes!
Katz: have you tried using vegetable food colorings and a moderate mordant?
These Mra’s have no idea what they are talking about regarding Feminists being fat and ugly. My girlfriends *gasp* are actually attractive-successful-passionate and not “fat pigs!” And so what if some Feminists are not attractive to them?! These women don’t give a fuck what these idiotic-uneducated-sexist bastards think of them! “Mra’s” have such ridiculous “theories!!” I was laughing very hard reading them!! These guys can’t be for real. First-we live in a patriarchy, so men are in control of society, and second-these guys claim to be pro-male but are actually anti-female. They poo poo rape and other important women’s issues..they love to try and degrade and insult us American women. Great. Some “movement.” Sounds like a “bowel movement” to me:)