Things they think are "feminism" that are actually sexism

Super succinct thread title, huh? But I've been noticing a lot of these. Ideas that the MRAs blame on feminism, even though in reality, they're parts of the larger culture and actually bother feminists too.

-The idea that women are somehow more "pure" than dirty horny men.
-The idea that the mother should always be the primary caregiver for children.*
-Everything involved with "chivalry."
-The draft being male-only.
-Sitcoms with bumbling men and sensible women.
-Men doing all the spending in a relationship.**
-Men always initiating dates and sex.
-Women being valued for their looks.
-Ladies' night.

It's extra frustrating to want to say to them "yeah, actually, I agree, that stuff does suck," only to hit a brick wall of "it only hurts men" and "it's all because feminism."



*If the mother has been the primary caregiver for the kids until a divorce, then she should continue to be after the divorce, for reasons that aren't about gender.
**Then again, with unequal wages sometimes I feel like maybe he should kick in a little more. But in my perfect world we'd have equal money and spend equal money.

Whats hilarous about the sitcoms about bumbling men is misandry is well...those sitcoms are written by men and have a male fanbase! Like Family guy, Three Stooges, Adam Sandler movies are by men for men(not that women don't watch these shows, but the demographics are heavily male)...so maybe quit blaming feminists for that one!
And yeah if you read feminist blogs, its pretty clear feminists are pretty much against all those things! It is shit like Cosmo that says...don't listen to those evil feminists!!! MEn HAAAAAAATTTTEEEE it when you ask inituative...

errr take initiative

**Then again, with unequal wages sometimes I feel like maybe he should kick in a little more. But in my perfect world we'd have equal money and spend equal money.

Yeah, this is why I have nothing bad to say, in a vacuum, about a woman who allows men to pay for her dates. We pay more for clothes (Both per piece, and need to buy more pieces, the latter whether we want a large warddrobe or not because by and large they're not as durable as dude's clothes), makeup, spend more time on appearance than most dudes (And time can be money), and make less (on average). Specifics can override that, sure, but societally, it's perfectly okay that dudes pay given all that. Maybe stop screwing women on wages and that'll start to change, dudes? XD

Sitcoms with bumbling men and sensible women.

...which didn't really happen until the straight men stopped being the primary force in the comedic relationship. XD
Plus, it's about the dude. The women are at best secondary characters. Everyone Loves Raymond kind of centers everything around Raymond. Even when he's stupid, he's often right because the universe works itself out around him, f'rex. FFS, they had a plotline where the wife was faking her orgasms for their entire relationship, and the storyline focused on how awful that was to raymond. Not how bad all that bad sex was for her. This is misandry, people XD

Sitcoms with bumbling men and sensible women.

And adding to what everybody else said above:

Another thing about the "doofy husband" thing is that a lot of guys LIKE that stereotype (and it's also why it exists) b/c it gets guys off the hook for doing housework AND that if they do it's this amazing task they should be rewarded for. Also, another part of it is that it was created as a way to keep women in the traditional role once those roles started expanding. "Oh, the house just wouldn't FUNCTION if you went to work honey! You're SO important to keep it together!"

A lot of the stuff MRAs take at straight face with no analysis as "oppression" of men, isn't at all. There are lots of examples of putting up a marginalized group in order to benefit the dominant group. :\

And like Rutee said, the other thing is that in comedies the "clown" is the main character that we're supposed to be watching for and enjoying. It's like saying comedians are oppressed b/c they're not athletes. They both have their own jobs with different requirements, but ultimately they are the stars.

Honestly, if given the choice between being the buffoon clown that has fun and everyone loves and being a naggy killjoy wife...I would defently choose to be the bufooon.

MRAs generally define feminism as "anything that could conceivably benefit a woman or hurt a man, and also some random other stuff I don't like."

Oh, let's add forcibly transitioning cis men into what feminism is. >_> Which is what they believe is going on, that doctors and psychiatrists pressure depressed men to transition to be trans women in order to prove feminist ideas of gender being a social construct.

Interestingly, TERFs believe that doctors and psychs pressure depressed men to transition to be trans women in order to prove patriarchal ideas of gender being biological.

xD

Nut shots! Remember that guy who was totally trying to get feminist cred because he laughed at a nut shot?

Another bit of idiocy to go under the "bumbling male" trope.

The nagging shrew and domestication tropes, as part of the "bumbling man" things.

You have to wonder what these guys think a male-dominated world would look like, if they think the one we live in now is thoroughly female-dominated.

Naira wrote:Another bit of idiocy to go under the "bumbling male" trope.

lol, and the second commenter is eoghan

As a man, I'm naturally better at navigating the supermarket than my wife, due to my superior sense of direction. No getting lost on the way to the fresh produce for me!

Eoghan is one of the trolls that I missed. Is he actually saying that seriously? I can see bragging about a "superior sense of direction" as demonstrated through orienteering, or navigating a boat without GPS, but finding the way to the produce section in even the largest supermarket in the US is not exactly a challenge for someone who is able-bodied.

Somebody actually married Eoghan?

Good luck to them...they will need it o_o

A superior sense of direction whaaa? I've never heard that one. I thought the stereotype about men was that they got lost all the time specifically because they never asked for directions. Not that that's any truer as far as I know; I've had guys ask me for directions plenty of times. I guess they kind of fit together if you assume that there must be some guys who are so invested in their sense of direction as reflecting on their manliness that they refuse to ask?

Leeloo Dallas Multipass wrote:A superior sense of direction whaaa? I've never heard that one. I thought the stereotype about men was that they got lost all the time specifically because they never asked for directions.

I'm pretty sure the idea is they're *both* true and if you push the topic people just get like "don't be so serious!"

The "nut shots are misandrous" was a surprise to me. As someone who was raised female by feminist parents who play-fought with me, and currently does muay thai in a very male dominated club I always saw "laughing at people hurting themselves" as a function of humour where you're volunteering to get hurt for shits and giggles. And a traditionally masculine behaviour (see Jackass for example).

My partner and I are currently in the process of teaching my little brother that sure, it's funny to see your friends get electrocuted by a cattle prod, but only when you're willing to be the one being laughed at too. He's a bit hesitant about the latter part.

Sharculese wrote:lol, and the second commenter is eoghan

As a man, I'm naturally better at navigating the supermarket than my wife, due to my superior sense of direction. No getting lost on the way to the fresh produce for me!

I have never been in a supermarket where the produce isn't the first thing when you walk in the door. It takes more than merely a bad sense of direction to get lost looking for it. Which leads me to believe this is hyperbole/he's never been in a supermarket/he never goes to the produce section (pick one).

There are a number of stores grocery stores that often do not keep the produce in the front including big bargain chains like aldi and savealot

WinCo and CostCo both have produce in the back, as do WalMarts and Targets that sell groceries.

It's still not like it's hard to find.

I have never been in a supermarket where the produce isn't the first thing when you walk in the door.

Of course, because this is a FRESH shop! Everything here is FRESH! I shall do well here.

The freshness thing is true though, ones less likely to have quality fruits and veggies are the ones more likely to put them in the back, on average.

@Pervocracy I don't know if this is true of all of Canada, but in Toronto, all the Wal-Marts that sell groceries, put them at the front

I've never been in any grocery store that didn't have its produce by the front doors. I don't know if that's a Canada thing or if it's just a coincidence.

This is third-hand and I don't have any sort of citation, so take it with a grain of salt; but when my step dad worked for a secret shopping company they did a couple of major grocery chains, and he was led to believe that they put the produce at the front because it increased profits. I guess many customers who are trying to eat healthier foods will feel good about themselves after picking up fresh produce, which makes them more inclined to reward themselves with that box of cookies that they really wanted or whatever. Whereas, if they passed by the cookies before the produce, they might think "nope, I'm trying to make healthy food choices" and walk right by. Packaged/prepared foods have higher profit margins than produce does (generally speaking) so that's what they're hoping to sell.

Me, I love cookies. I'm buying them either way. Mm.

Female rapists/male rape victims not being taken seriously is a big one. Obviously, it's a result of sexist tropes like women being too weak and men wanting to screw everything that's not nailed down. But in MRAland, it's because the evil feminists plotted around an evil table, twirling their evil fake mustaches which they purchased just for the purpose of twirling...evilly, of course.

It should come as no surprise to our MRA friends that the time I grew a goatee was roughly around the time I started actually identifying as feminist.

It's actually because I'm evil BlackBloc from the alternate Feminazi 12 dimension.

The twirling mustache BlackBloc is from the Cowboy dimension, and ties bourgeois to railroad tracks.

My friend Trish suggested an alternative theory for Eoghan's strange statement: His wife isn't lost, she's just not going to the aisles he wants her to go to, and shopping for the things he wants her to, or in the order he thinks she should.

A similar theory I just came up w/ is that Eoghan doesn't go shopping himself but sends his wife to do it with orders on all sorts of stupid things to get. She comes home without them and tells him that she forgot, couldn't find them, or didn't have enough time to get them, and he concludes she must get lost often. >_>

You know what this whole subject boils down to? MRAs think life is a zero-sum contest between "men" and "women." The obvious consequence is that they think "for women" = "against men," and vice-versa, but more to the point, just as a zero-sum contest cannot result in a double win, it also cannot result in a double loss. Anything that damages one "team" must benefit the other. So MRAs interpret anything that hurts men or that men don't like as existing in order to benefit women, and thus being the work of feminists.

Oh, yeah, and some of the things on that list are also just racism (and cissexism and classism). The purity thing, for example, is only ever applied to rich white cis women--with the "dirty horny men" usually not being white and upperclass.