Kate Harding, whose Shapely Prose was perhaps the most beloved and influential feminist blog ever ever ever, last year wrote an article "That's All She Wrote" about why she decided to "retire" from blogging (and it wasn't only because she got a column in Salon and a book deal, either).
"I occasionally teach Blogging 101 classes now, even though I haven’t had
an active blog in almost three years. The first thing I tell my
students is: Do not even bother to blog unless you find it fun or
someone is paying you for it. Those are the only two good reasons to do
it. The second thing I tell them is: Probably no one will pay you for
it. Fun is actually the only good reason to blog."
"Fun" is a subjective concept, isn't it? There are certainly a lot of activities that are worth doing that aren't necessarily fun ("physical exercise" springs to mind). I would rather substitute "engaging" for the word "fun" here. I have to admit that reading and writing about the manosphere initially captured my interest, even my fascination. With over a year of exposure, my interest has waned considerably. Once a person gets inured to the jaw-dropping horror that passes for discourse on most manosphere sites, they get mind-numbingly tedious. And depressing.
I honestly don't know how David Futrelle keeps it up. P.Z. Myers has likened Futrelle's job to "mining for turds under an outhouse. You simultaneously think, “OMG,
that’s the easiest mission in the world” and “OMG, that’s the most
horrible mission in the world.”
I sincerely appreciate Futrelle for being willing to do what he does, because God knows someone needs to monitor these groups and keep them in the proper perspective (that is, viewed strictly through the prism of mockery).
I started a blog to practice my writing skills, but until I ran into the "manosphere" I must say "feminism" was not a subject I had much interest in at all. I'm still not very interested in reading much feminist theory. I may never get around to reading The Feminine Mystique and I will almost certainly never read The SCUM Manifesto, Andrea Dworkin, or other radical feminist works. Last year a friend kept pressing me to read The End of Men and I refused for no better reason than I really detest that hyperbolic title. So it seems rather artificial and strained to be characterized or encouraged to characterize myself as primarily a "feminist."
One of my favorite bloggers, Eseld Bosustow, announced today her intention to write about whatever she damn well pleases. She is also burned out on the MRA. Her appetite for logic and constructing clean, tight logical arguments is, of course, wasted on responding to intellectual pygmies. I hope she'll keep writing, though -- on whatever topic she fancies. Similarly, I hope Ms. Bodycrimes returns to writing on the far-reaching theme ("the ways that the body intersects with commerce") that initially inspired her blog.
For the kind of writing I am interested in, which is personal response, bordering on confessional, a blog that is now inextricably linked to my true identity is probably just about the worst medium. I can no longer do the kind of writing I want to do here, since I am now constrained by the knowledge that everything I write Can and Will Be Used Against Me. And hence I have developed a kind of visceral distaste for blogging in general.
And so it comes down to Ms. Harding's point: If it's not fun, and you're not being paid for it, why do it? To which I would add, if I have nothing particularly fresh or insightful to contribute, that hasn't already been said (by Ms. Harding and so many others), why bother?
And really, when it comes to the Men's Rights Movement, Ms. Harding has already said everything that ever needs to be said: "Fuck You Men's Rights Activists."
Showing posts with label mens rights movement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mens rights movement. Show all posts
Friday, April 4, 2014
Monday, November 4, 2013
Fan Mail From A Squirrel
"Ella the Squirrel" asks me, "What future do you predict for the manosphere?"
Well, Ella, first let me say I am incredibly flattered (and bemused) that you would think I have any idea. If you have read much of this blog, you'll realize that I --- like mostold fogies Baby Boomers --- am much more engaged in reminiscing about the past (specifically, my own past) than speculating about a future, especially a hypothetical future that I am, every day, less and less likely to be around for.
However, thanks for your question. Let me haul out myreading glasses crystal ball, and give your query an honest crack.
Hmm... I'm not seeing much here, Ella. The future looks cloudy, with a strong possibility of rain -- whoops, that's the local weather forecast! Never mind...
I'm still not seeing a damn thing, Ella. Perhaps that means that the MRM (Male Rights Movement) doesn't have a future. Maybe because it doesn't have a present? By that I mean it doesn't exist as a movement at all, but rather as a symptom -- a symptom of severe post-Reaganomics social / economic distress.
As you no doubt know, the "manosphere" is a loose confederation of PUAs (pick up artists and gamers), MGTOW (men going their own way), and MRAs (male rights activists, or, as Paul Elam of "A Voice for Men" would have it, MHRAs). Feminists and other intelligent, thoughtful-type people (who may not identify themselves as feminists, but, frankly, who are) clump them together, recognizing that they are linked by a common thread of misogyny (= fear and loathing of women) w/ a big round dollop of racism.
What also unites the followers of the "manosphere" blogs is that they are really, really unhappy (frustrated) + really, really stupid. What unites the leaders of the "manosphere" (i.e., the writers of the blogs) is they are, for the most part, utter and abject social failures w/ outsized senses of entitlement, whose only experience of (or hope for) recognition is in being followed by... well, by a bunch of desperate morons. (And these days recognition (for whatever reason) = success, hence the phenomena of reality television "stars" and the fact that news media have become little more than celebrity gossip mills.)
The leaders of these manosphere blogs (Roosh, Roissy, Price, Elam, Forney, et al.) eke out slender livings by pandering to an audience of losers. And I call them "losers" not in anger, but in pity: young (or developmentally delayed) white guys who are being cast out by a global economy that no longer values them, or rather, that is no longer willing to accord them privilege simply by virtue of being white + male.
They perceive themselves as being "overtaken" by women and by brown people. The reality is that they are, for the first time in thousands of years, simply being forced to compete with those "minorities" on an increasingly level playing field. (Still, it has to be pretty scary. "Who stole my cheese?" I mean, I can only imagine...)
I am not without sympathy. But then, I've always been kind of a softy.
I was reprimanded over at manboobz for calling these guys "dinosaurs" who were heading for extinction (because I was being too hard on the dinosaurs, as I recall). But I will resurrect that poor analogy, nonetheless. The "manosphere" may survive, but the so-called "movements" it purports to be incubating will not. Oh, I'm sure there will always be a place for lonely guys to give each other dating advice, just as (for some inexplicable reason) girls keep buying Cosmopolitan magazine. Just cuz when we're young, we're horny and clueless...
The Men's Rights Movement in its present incarnation will go the way of the KKK and the John Birch Society, increasingly marginalized and irrelevant. The legitimate grievances of the MRM (fathers' rights, acknowledgement of sexual and domestic abuse of men) will be subsumed under the broader liberal agenda (and I predict feminists doing a lot of the legwork in those regards). Men Going Their Own Way? There have always been a portion of involuntary celibates (of both genders) and "hermits" (of both genders), and nothing necessarily "wrong" with that: some people just aren't suited to "coupling", yet still enjoy rich and rewarding, albeit eccentric and somewhat lonesome, lives.
Of course, to a great extent, the "manosphere" is a phenomenon of the internet. People are (I certainly am!) still thrilled to be able to "connect" to others with similarly "esoteric" interests. The internet has made it possible for people with relatively uncommon conditions or identities to find one another, to connect, to share, and to build on that.
I'm not trans, but my Best Beloved is. How we envy the trans kids today, who have so much more information (and power) at their fingertips! How different would my SO's life have been, had she known she was so far-from-alone in the world? The internet has in this way fueled social justice movements, by bringing people together.
Of course, the dark side to this is that the internet also brings together people who are marginalized (or feel themselves to be unfairly disadvantaged) in a very different way, and provides them with a refuge, an answer. In the case of the "manosphere" boys, that "answer" is scapegoating women (and minorities) for their troubles. Paradoxically, the internet also isolates, and draws already-isolated people into cults. And ultimately does them great disservice.
But the "manosphere" is ultimately likely to remain primarily an internet phenomenon because it cannot stand up to public scrutiny. In the court of public discourse, the New Misogynists will lose. That explains why they are so ambivalent about straying outside of the "intertubes" into the "real world." And why, aside from their kamikaze-style leaders, most members scrupulously avoid having their real identities known: most people are not willing to commit social suicide.
To publicly identify oneself with this stuff (as Roosh has, in essence, admitted on more than one occasion) = to burn one's bridges forever. Elam and Price are old farts, so who cares? On the other hand, Roosh and Forney are relatively young -- yet they have tattooed their bigotries and hatred onto their identities more permanently and damnably than any white supremacist ever tattooed his face. There is as yet no laser surgery powerful enough to erase the evidence they have strewn upon servers across the world that they are, simply, terrible people...
Returning to the "patriarchy" is a lost cause. The followers of the manosphere, however much they may enjoy indulging in false nostalgia, know that the tide of the world is irrevocably turning against them, and the few of them willing to be swept out to sea for such a lost cause will be remembered with the approximate admixture of pity and contempt as we now accord the long-dead soldiers of the Confederacy: the poor, stupid, deluded bastards!
Does this answer your question?
Well, Ella, first let me say I am incredibly flattered (and bemused) that you would think I have any idea. If you have read much of this blog, you'll realize that I --- like most
However, thanks for your question. Let me haul out my
Hmm... I'm not seeing much here, Ella. The future looks cloudy, with a strong possibility of rain -- whoops, that's the local weather forecast! Never mind...
I'm still not seeing a damn thing, Ella. Perhaps that means that the MRM (Male Rights Movement) doesn't have a future. Maybe because it doesn't have a present? By that I mean it doesn't exist as a movement at all, but rather as a symptom -- a symptom of severe post-Reaganomics social / economic distress.
As you no doubt know, the "manosphere" is a loose confederation of PUAs (pick up artists and gamers), MGTOW (men going their own way), and MRAs (male rights activists, or, as Paul Elam of "A Voice for Men" would have it, MHRAs). Feminists and other intelligent, thoughtful-type people (who may not identify themselves as feminists, but, frankly, who are) clump them together, recognizing that they are linked by a common thread of misogyny (= fear and loathing of women) w/ a big round dollop of racism.
What also unites the followers of the "manosphere" blogs is that they are really, really unhappy (frustrated) + really, really stupid. What unites the leaders of the "manosphere" (i.e., the writers of the blogs) is they are, for the most part, utter and abject social failures w/ outsized senses of entitlement, whose only experience of (or hope for) recognition is in being followed by... well, by a bunch of desperate morons. (And these days recognition (for whatever reason) = success, hence the phenomena of reality television "stars" and the fact that news media have become little more than celebrity gossip mills.)
The leaders of these manosphere blogs (Roosh, Roissy, Price, Elam, Forney, et al.) eke out slender livings by pandering to an audience of losers. And I call them "losers" not in anger, but in pity: young (or developmentally delayed) white guys who are being cast out by a global economy that no longer values them, or rather, that is no longer willing to accord them privilege simply by virtue of being white + male.
They perceive themselves as being "overtaken" by women and by brown people. The reality is that they are, for the first time in thousands of years, simply being forced to compete with those "minorities" on an increasingly level playing field. (Still, it has to be pretty scary. "Who stole my cheese?" I mean, I can only imagine...)
I am not without sympathy. But then, I've always been kind of a softy.
I was reprimanded over at manboobz for calling these guys "dinosaurs" who were heading for extinction (because I was being too hard on the dinosaurs, as I recall). But I will resurrect that poor analogy, nonetheless. The "manosphere" may survive, but the so-called "movements" it purports to be incubating will not. Oh, I'm sure there will always be a place for lonely guys to give each other dating advice, just as (for some inexplicable reason) girls keep buying Cosmopolitan magazine. Just cuz when we're young, we're horny and clueless...
The Men's Rights Movement in its present incarnation will go the way of the KKK and the John Birch Society, increasingly marginalized and irrelevant. The legitimate grievances of the MRM (fathers' rights, acknowledgement of sexual and domestic abuse of men) will be subsumed under the broader liberal agenda (and I predict feminists doing a lot of the legwork in those regards). Men Going Their Own Way? There have always been a portion of involuntary celibates (of both genders) and "hermits" (of both genders), and nothing necessarily "wrong" with that: some people just aren't suited to "coupling", yet still enjoy rich and rewarding, albeit eccentric and somewhat lonesome, lives.
Of course, to a great extent, the "manosphere" is a phenomenon of the internet. People are (I certainly am!) still thrilled to be able to "connect" to others with similarly "esoteric" interests. The internet has made it possible for people with relatively uncommon conditions or identities to find one another, to connect, to share, and to build on that.
I'm not trans, but my Best Beloved is. How we envy the trans kids today, who have so much more information (and power) at their fingertips! How different would my SO's life have been, had she known she was so far-from-alone in the world? The internet has in this way fueled social justice movements, by bringing people together.
Of course, the dark side to this is that the internet also brings together people who are marginalized (or feel themselves to be unfairly disadvantaged) in a very different way, and provides them with a refuge, an answer. In the case of the "manosphere" boys, that "answer" is scapegoating women (and minorities) for their troubles. Paradoxically, the internet also isolates, and draws already-isolated people into cults. And ultimately does them great disservice.
But the "manosphere" is ultimately likely to remain primarily an internet phenomenon because it cannot stand up to public scrutiny. In the court of public discourse, the New Misogynists will lose. That explains why they are so ambivalent about straying outside of the "intertubes" into the "real world." And why, aside from their kamikaze-style leaders, most members scrupulously avoid having their real identities known: most people are not willing to commit social suicide.
To publicly identify oneself with this stuff (as Roosh has, in essence, admitted on more than one occasion) = to burn one's bridges forever. Elam and Price are old farts, so who cares? On the other hand, Roosh and Forney are relatively young -- yet they have tattooed their bigotries and hatred onto their identities more permanently and damnably than any white supremacist ever tattooed his face. There is as yet no laser surgery powerful enough to erase the evidence they have strewn upon servers across the world that they are, simply, terrible people...
Returning to the "patriarchy" is a lost cause. The followers of the manosphere, however much they may enjoy indulging in false nostalgia, know that the tide of the world is irrevocably turning against them, and the few of them willing to be swept out to sea for such a lost cause will be remembered with the approximate admixture of pity and contempt as we now accord the long-dead soldiers of the Confederacy: the poor, stupid, deluded bastards!
Does this answer your question?
Thursday, October 24, 2013
On the Lack of Domestic Violence Programs for Men
Gosh, I get tired of hearing MRAs whine about the lack of shelters for male victims of domestic violence.
Some years ago, a younger and more eager I spent a long dark winter in rural Colorado volunteering for victims of domestic abuse and sexual assault. Mainly this consisted of being called in the middle of the night to drive twenty or thirty miles to meet a strange woman at a desolate McDonalds or in the back room of a police station. It also involved accompanying women if their cases went to court. As an advocate, I held hands, explained legal procedures, made referrals to social services, and fetched coffee (in other words, provided moral support). The area in which I was living had an appalling rate of DV. Unemployment was high (end of a local shale oil boom), couples were stranded in their houses for weeks on end due to the frigid temperatures, and alcoholism and drug abuse were rampant.
It didn't take long before I burned out. I probably imagined I was going to help pluck women like Tracey Thurman from the jaws of death, but my experience was that most of the victims were simply not very sympathetic characters, nor were they entirely "innocent" in terms of their roles in instigating violent squabbles. Many of them had mental illness or chemical dependency issues that no amount of well-intentioned feminist theory or police intervention could address. And most of them didn't want the kind of very limited help I could provide.
Once they had been stitched up and sobered up, most of them made beelines back to their SOs. There were so many things wrong with their lives (boiling down to poverty + an utter lack of imagination) that their relationships with their husbands or boyfriends were the only sources of stability and "love" that they knew, and even when that relationship was as dysfunctional as hell, it was what they could count on.
The area I was in didn't have a shelter at the time. Instead, we relied on a string of "safe houses" which were the modest abodes of volunteers like myself. The unsung heroines who opened their homes as havens were periodically exposed (often by the very women they harbored), so we were always scrambling for more. It was exhausting, unrewarding effort for little payoff, and although I admired the director and her valiant team -- all unpaid volunteers BTW -- I soon conceded that I was not the right person for this particular job.
I know from personal experience that men, too, are assaulted by women. A few years ago I dated a man who had a history of being struck by his female partners. He recounted one prolonged argument with a girlfriend which had culminated in her "cold cocking" him in the head with a telephone, knocking him senseless. He didn't press charges, and I was appalled to learn that this episode had hardly diminished his attraction to her -- although it was, in retrospect, a kind of red flag in terms of our own prospects. (In fact, although I was never remotely tempted to assault him myself, he was so maddeningly passive-aggressive that I broke up with him within a few tempestuous months.)
As these anecdotes suggest, I am no saint. I am impatient and easily frustrated by people who can't, or won't, take a strong stance for themselves. And I recognize the line between victim and perpetrator can get mighty blurry when it comes to domestic violence: in most cases I was involved with, the woman was just as likely to have "provoked" the violent altercations that resulted in her fleeing her partner. The problem was the size/strength differential that resulted in "him" with a scratch down the side of his face, and "her" with a broken jaw. Most of the male "perps" were not so much "evil" as really, really dumb -- too dumb to recognize how trapped they were in their own cycles of inchoate rage, dependency, helplessness, and lashing out -- despite repeated, predictable negative consequences... 200 pound toddlers, for the most part.
Of course, regardless of gender, or relative culpability, all people need refuges when they are at risk of injury in their homes. I just don't want to be the person to create and staff these shelters.
So why are the MRAs who demand male DV shelters pissed off that feminists like me haven't made that happen yet?
Well, why haven't you done anything more than complain? Paul Elam and John Hembling are paying themselves salaries with the money some of you are donating! It's been years without any "activism" beyond harassing feminists and one very lackluster demonstration. Why aren't any of you challenging AVfM's handling of your contributions? Could it be that you don't really care as much about showing "compassion for men and boys" as you do "fucking up [women's] shit"?
Listen, guys, I'll be the first to donate $20, canned food, and a big box of toiletries. You only need to get out from behind your computers, and start raising some funds. In my neck of the woods, there are a number of thrift stores that support shelters for women, so there's a suggestion for you. Put down your gym weights, pick up your tool boxes, and start renovating that safe house for teh menz that your community so desperately needs. You can do it! (And if you need advice or support, I'm sure you can find some nice feminists to help you -- you have only to ask.)
Just for God's sake quit your bloody whining before I [sarcasm alert] really give you something to whine about!
Some years ago, a younger and more eager I spent a long dark winter in rural Colorado volunteering for victims of domestic abuse and sexual assault. Mainly this consisted of being called in the middle of the night to drive twenty or thirty miles to meet a strange woman at a desolate McDonalds or in the back room of a police station. It also involved accompanying women if their cases went to court. As an advocate, I held hands, explained legal procedures, made referrals to social services, and fetched coffee (in other words, provided moral support). The area in which I was living had an appalling rate of DV. Unemployment was high (end of a local shale oil boom), couples were stranded in their houses for weeks on end due to the frigid temperatures, and alcoholism and drug abuse were rampant.
It didn't take long before I burned out. I probably imagined I was going to help pluck women like Tracey Thurman from the jaws of death, but my experience was that most of the victims were simply not very sympathetic characters, nor were they entirely "innocent" in terms of their roles in instigating violent squabbles. Many of them had mental illness or chemical dependency issues that no amount of well-intentioned feminist theory or police intervention could address. And most of them didn't want the kind of very limited help I could provide.
Once they had been stitched up and sobered up, most of them made beelines back to their SOs. There were so many things wrong with their lives (boiling down to poverty + an utter lack of imagination) that their relationships with their husbands or boyfriends were the only sources of stability and "love" that they knew, and even when that relationship was as dysfunctional as hell, it was what they could count on.
The area I was in didn't have a shelter at the time. Instead, we relied on a string of "safe houses" which were the modest abodes of volunteers like myself. The unsung heroines who opened their homes as havens were periodically exposed (often by the very women they harbored), so we were always scrambling for more. It was exhausting, unrewarding effort for little payoff, and although I admired the director and her valiant team -- all unpaid volunteers BTW -- I soon conceded that I was not the right person for this particular job.
I know from personal experience that men, too, are assaulted by women. A few years ago I dated a man who had a history of being struck by his female partners. He recounted one prolonged argument with a girlfriend which had culminated in her "cold cocking" him in the head with a telephone, knocking him senseless. He didn't press charges, and I was appalled to learn that this episode had hardly diminished his attraction to her -- although it was, in retrospect, a kind of red flag in terms of our own prospects. (In fact, although I was never remotely tempted to assault him myself, he was so maddeningly passive-aggressive that I broke up with him within a few tempestuous months.)
As these anecdotes suggest, I am no saint. I am impatient and easily frustrated by people who can't, or won't, take a strong stance for themselves. And I recognize the line between victim and perpetrator can get mighty blurry when it comes to domestic violence: in most cases I was involved with, the woman was just as likely to have "provoked" the violent altercations that resulted in her fleeing her partner. The problem was the size/strength differential that resulted in "him" with a scratch down the side of his face, and "her" with a broken jaw. Most of the male "perps" were not so much "evil" as really, really dumb -- too dumb to recognize how trapped they were in their own cycles of inchoate rage, dependency, helplessness, and lashing out -- despite repeated, predictable negative consequences... 200 pound toddlers, for the most part.
Of course, regardless of gender, or relative culpability, all people need refuges when they are at risk of injury in their homes. I just don't want to be the person to create and staff these shelters.
So why are the MRAs who demand male DV shelters pissed off that feminists like me haven't made that happen yet?
Well, why haven't you done anything more than complain? Paul Elam and John Hembling are paying themselves salaries with the money some of you are donating! It's been years without any "activism" beyond harassing feminists and one very lackluster demonstration. Why aren't any of you challenging AVfM's handling of your contributions? Could it be that you don't really care as much about showing "compassion for men and boys" as you do "fucking up [women's] shit"?
Listen, guys, I'll be the first to donate $20, canned food, and a big box of toiletries. You only need to get out from behind your computers, and start raising some funds. In my neck of the woods, there are a number of thrift stores that support shelters for women, so there's a suggestion for you. Put down your gym weights, pick up your tool boxes, and start renovating that safe house for teh menz that your community so desperately needs. You can do it! (And if you need advice or support, I'm sure you can find some nice feminists to help you -- you have only to ask.)
Just for God's sake quit your bloody whining before I [sarcasm alert] really give you something to whine about!
Saturday, October 19, 2013
New to the Manosphere?
A succinct and temperate sympathetic introduction to the Men's Rights Movement from the Daily Beast. Note that most of the folks at manboobz were highly critical of the piece -- especially of its kid gloves treatment of The Spearhead. The consensus was that it emphasized MRM's "legitimate" grievances and downplayed the violently misogynistic rhetoric that is the MRM's most salient characteristic. Still, it gives the newcomer some basic information. Ironically, given how gently the author, R. Tod Kelly, approaches them, the MRAs are busy hating on this article.
Monday, June 10, 2013
A Man I Love: Steve Shives
Courtesy of "carnation," a commenter on Manboobz, two videos by Steve Shives:
While the MRM has predicted it's quickly reaching a tipping point, poised to go "mainstream" and become a real force for social change, this is what is happening instead: vigorous pushback from... well, men: serious men (that is, men to take seriously).
I know I've said I don't care for baseball caps on grown men, but for Mr. Shives, I'll make an exception. In fact, I'd love to buy this guy a drink right now!
While the MRM has predicted it's quickly reaching a tipping point, poised to go "mainstream" and become a real force for social change, this is what is happening instead: vigorous pushback from... well, men: serious men (that is, men to take seriously).
I know I've said I don't care for baseball caps on grown men, but for Mr. Shives, I'll make an exception. In fact, I'd love to buy this guy a drink right now!
Monday, May 20, 2013
Whatever Happened To...?
Whatever happened to the Feminist Victim Fund that Roosh set up? It's been over a month since any commented over there. Have they reached their mark? Did they even raise a dime? Or did everyone lose interest, like, immediately?
I wanted to ask over at Manboobz but they were busy talking about real victims (of the tornado) and I didn't want to seem like a completely insensitive jerk.
I wanted to ask over at Manboobz but they were busy talking about real victims (of the tornado) and I didn't want to seem like a completely insensitive jerk.
Tuesday, May 14, 2013
Being Outrageous
If anything characterizes The Way We Live Now, it is the cult of celebrity. It seems like almost everyone wants to be famous. We crave recognition so badly that many of us don't care what it takes: better notoriety than anonymity. And because we live in a day of unparallelled opportunities to self-publish and self-promote, people often have to scream to be heard above the din of competing sources of input. One way to stand out above the fray is to be Outrageous.
One recent commenter on Manboobz alluded to this as a way of explaining the "manosphere." For the most part, it's an internet phenomenon, which has linked various and numerous unhappy and disenfranchised white men. Unable to form a coherent platform, they have united behind a common enemy, which they call "feminism" but which really is femininity in general (including, as we have recently seen, female children and transsexual women). Much has already been written about this elsewhere, and much more eloquently than I could.
Members of the manosphere post, for the most part, anonymously. They have to, because to openly espouse the views they claim to hold would be to commit social and professional suicide.
A handful of leaders do identify themselves (Roosh V aka Daryush Valizadeh, Paul Elam, Matt Forney aka Ferdinand Bardemu), and a few have had their true identities made known against their will (Roissy "Heartiste" and the guy who went by "violentacrez"). Of course, any semblance of a "normal" life is over for them: they are now officially and irrevocably married to their online personae. In some ways, they have paid the ultimate price for their narcissism (or "martyrdom" as their acolytes might frame it).
Yet in order to maintain readership, they must keep producing more of what their readers want, which is ever more outrageous material. The "outrage" comes from the overtly hateful nature of their ideas, the hateful expression of these ideas, and sometimes from a potent and disturbing stew of fantasy, entitlement, resentment, and violent retribution. In other words: hate porn.
Then there are people like JudgyBitch, who is torn between the demands of her compulsive exhibitionism and the need to protect her personal life. From what I have seen, exhibitionism usually trumps prudence in these cases. Hence, she uses pseudonyms, but "vlogs" on YouTube; being recognized and outed is but a matter of months. And that is not a threat, since I have neither the means nor the interest in doxing her. It is simply a prediction and perhaps a warning. We may enjoy the anonymity of the internet, but we are foolish indeed if we think that it is guaranteed.
Personally, I'm not sure the threat of exposure is an entirely bad thing. Perhaps it's a reflection of my age, but I don't hold anonymity to be sacrosanct. The internet is not the confessional. A blog is is not your analyst's couch. Writing about, or for, other people affects them. Words can be as influential and powerful as actions, and they should be treated as such. People should be held accountable for what they say. Free speech is not free of consequences.
Right now the Internet is The Wild West and anything goes, so naturally it is a fertile ground for the worst of people and the worst kinds of people, but in time I am confident we will develop some respect for its power; we will demand and adopt standards of behavior and responsibility. Meanwhile, we are left with vigilante groups like Anonymous, which is perhaps better -- or perhaps worse -- than no moral order whatsoever.
At the same time -- and getting back to the title of this post -- I do understand the merciless thirst for recognition, and how blogging plays to that. That's because I understand The Quest for Immortality and The Denial of Death. What's more human and existentially poignant than to counter the inevitability of death by howling in protest? Of course, ranting and raging avails us little -- often makes everything worse in fact -- but it makes us feel powerful, and distracts us from the unbearable knowledge that all of this -- and all of us -- will be dust in a hundred years.
As one hostile commenter unkindly and needlessly pointed out, I have a very "obscure" blog. Indeed, I'm thrilled if five people look at it a day. I'm pleasantly puzzled by the number of visitors I do get. I'm not trying to make a name for myself here, much less a profit. I'm just practicing my writing skills, and I find it more motivating to write for an audience (even if it's only an imaginary, potential audience).
Like Hansel and Gretl, I've littered my blog with so many crumbs that it would be fairly easy to figure out who I am, if anyone cared (and I am very, very sure that no one does). And not that it matters because it really, really doesn't, in part because I am not only old, but also (like my heroine Jane Eyre) plain and poor and obscure and have no family or reputation to protect. Also, when I write critically about the New Misogynists, I only write what I would say to their faces, given the opportunity. I would be happy to meet with Roosh V or Janet Bloomfield in person and tell them what I think. Hell, I'd buy the first round!
However, a few years ago, I had a very different blog. It was a kind of confessional, recounting with humor and some salacious detail a year spent pursuing casual encounters on craigslist. (Frankly, I was more than a little inspired by A Round Heeled Woman by Jane Juska.) Well, as you know, Sex Sells, even sexual escapades as weird and pathetic as I was often describing in my crazy little blog.
As my readership took off, I found that more and more I was living my life in service to my blog. Consequently, I was engaging in behaviors that were increasingly humiliating and risky (both to my physical and emotional well being) just to have something to regale "my readers" with over their morning coffee. It got a little out of hand. Sometimes I said and did things I didn't really believe in or feel good about, just for the "copy." Inevitably, I got more than a little burned out. And, as fun as it was to shock and delight a lot of random strangers in cyberspace, I had to let it go. (Also, I happened to meet someone I loved, thereby putting the final kabosh on pursuing or reporting what I might call "My Slutty, SluttyYear.")
This experience gives me a little personal insight into -- and real sympathy for -- why and how a phenomenon like JudgyBitch is born. I imagine she's been bored and flailing about for something beyond family responsibilities to give her life meaning and purpose. Maybe she's always been the kind of gal with plenty of outrageous opinions, the kinds of opinions that are offered more for shock value than real insight ("the life of the party" so to speak), and now she's found a way to get a lot more attention for them. The validation comes from making people gasp (Oh no she didn't!) rather than making them reflect or engage in honest debate. She's found a forum where she is made to feel exceptional ("A woman in a man's world") and is accorded special recognition and privilege as such. As she is egged on, she goes farther and farther out on the limb, she exposes more and more, her position becomes more and more tenuous, she seems more and more deluded... But that attention! That masculine attention! It is as addictive as crack, and she just can't stop.
One recent commenter on Manboobz alluded to this as a way of explaining the "manosphere." For the most part, it's an internet phenomenon, which has linked various and numerous unhappy and disenfranchised white men. Unable to form a coherent platform, they have united behind a common enemy, which they call "feminism" but which really is femininity in general (including, as we have recently seen, female children and transsexual women). Much has already been written about this elsewhere, and much more eloquently than I could.
Members of the manosphere post, for the most part, anonymously. They have to, because to openly espouse the views they claim to hold would be to commit social and professional suicide.
A handful of leaders do identify themselves (Roosh V aka Daryush Valizadeh, Paul Elam, Matt Forney aka Ferdinand Bardemu), and a few have had their true identities made known against their will (Roissy "Heartiste" and the guy who went by "violentacrez"). Of course, any semblance of a "normal" life is over for them: they are now officially and irrevocably married to their online personae. In some ways, they have paid the ultimate price for their narcissism (or "martyrdom" as their acolytes might frame it).
Yet in order to maintain readership, they must keep producing more of what their readers want, which is ever more outrageous material. The "outrage" comes from the overtly hateful nature of their ideas, the hateful expression of these ideas, and sometimes from a potent and disturbing stew of fantasy, entitlement, resentment, and violent retribution. In other words: hate porn.
Then there are people like JudgyBitch, who is torn between the demands of her compulsive exhibitionism and the need to protect her personal life. From what I have seen, exhibitionism usually trumps prudence in these cases. Hence, she uses pseudonyms, but "vlogs" on YouTube; being recognized and outed is but a matter of months. And that is not a threat, since I have neither the means nor the interest in doxing her. It is simply a prediction and perhaps a warning. We may enjoy the anonymity of the internet, but we are foolish indeed if we think that it is guaranteed.
Personally, I'm not sure the threat of exposure is an entirely bad thing. Perhaps it's a reflection of my age, but I don't hold anonymity to be sacrosanct. The internet is not the confessional. A blog is is not your analyst's couch. Writing about, or for, other people affects them. Words can be as influential and powerful as actions, and they should be treated as such. People should be held accountable for what they say. Free speech is not free of consequences.
Right now the Internet is The Wild West and anything goes, so naturally it is a fertile ground for the worst of people and the worst kinds of people, but in time I am confident we will develop some respect for its power; we will demand and adopt standards of behavior and responsibility. Meanwhile, we are left with vigilante groups like Anonymous, which is perhaps better -- or perhaps worse -- than no moral order whatsoever.
At the same time -- and getting back to the title of this post -- I do understand the merciless thirst for recognition, and how blogging plays to that. That's because I understand The Quest for Immortality and The Denial of Death. What's more human and existentially poignant than to counter the inevitability of death by howling in protest? Of course, ranting and raging avails us little -- often makes everything worse in fact -- but it makes us feel powerful, and distracts us from the unbearable knowledge that all of this -- and all of us -- will be dust in a hundred years.
As one hostile commenter unkindly and needlessly pointed out, I have a very "obscure" blog. Indeed, I'm thrilled if five people look at it a day. I'm pleasantly puzzled by the number of visitors I do get. I'm not trying to make a name for myself here, much less a profit. I'm just practicing my writing skills, and I find it more motivating to write for an audience (even if it's only an imaginary, potential audience).
Like Hansel and Gretl, I've littered my blog with so many crumbs that it would be fairly easy to figure out who I am, if anyone cared (and I am very, very sure that no one does). And not that it matters because it really, really doesn't, in part because I am not only old, but also (like my heroine Jane Eyre) plain and poor and obscure and have no family or reputation to protect. Also, when I write critically about the New Misogynists, I only write what I would say to their faces, given the opportunity. I would be happy to meet with Roosh V or Janet Bloomfield in person and tell them what I think. Hell, I'd buy the first round!
However, a few years ago, I had a very different blog. It was a kind of confessional, recounting with humor and some salacious detail a year spent pursuing casual encounters on craigslist. (Frankly, I was more than a little inspired by A Round Heeled Woman by Jane Juska.) Well, as you know, Sex Sells, even sexual escapades as weird and pathetic as I was often describing in my crazy little blog.
As my readership took off, I found that more and more I was living my life in service to my blog. Consequently, I was engaging in behaviors that were increasingly humiliating and risky (both to my physical and emotional well being) just to have something to regale "my readers" with over their morning coffee. It got a little out of hand. Sometimes I said and did things I didn't really believe in or feel good about, just for the "copy." Inevitably, I got more than a little burned out. And, as fun as it was to shock and delight a lot of random strangers in cyberspace, I had to let it go. (Also, I happened to meet someone I loved, thereby putting the final kabosh on pursuing or reporting what I might call "My Slutty, SluttyYear.")
This experience gives me a little personal insight into -- and real sympathy for -- why and how a phenomenon like JudgyBitch is born. I imagine she's been bored and flailing about for something beyond family responsibilities to give her life meaning and purpose. Maybe she's always been the kind of gal with plenty of outrageous opinions, the kinds of opinions that are offered more for shock value than real insight ("the life of the party" so to speak), and now she's found a way to get a lot more attention for them. The validation comes from making people gasp (Oh no she didn't!) rather than making them reflect or engage in honest debate. She's found a forum where she is made to feel exceptional ("A woman in a man's world") and is accorded special recognition and privilege as such. As she is egged on, she goes farther and farther out on the limb, she exposes more and more, her position becomes more and more tenuous, she seems more and more deluded... But that attention! That masculine attention! It is as addictive as crack, and she just can't stop.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)