nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Raised some money for Movember? You're a racist apparently

Foxhound38

Someone linked me to this article today from the New Statesman, and sadly it is no parody...

Apparently anyone who takes part in movember (which raised millions this year for cancer research) is a racist, a sexist, and an imperialist... and this isn't coming from some crank media outlet, the New Statesman is relatively mainstream...

So yeah, apparently it's racist because white people growing a mustasche is culturally appropriating and then ridiculing cultures where mustasche growth is a religious or cultural symbol.

It's also sexist because women and trans-men can't really grow them. Also some lads get drunk and did stupid things in the name of the craic at the galas associated with it, so obviously that means all participants are worse than Hitler...

I wish I was overstating the thrust of this article. On the plus side, I've never seen a comments section more united in derision in my life!

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

thats the great thing about feminism, you can believe any old contradictory bull**** you want and still say "hey, not all feminists think like that, stop being so racist. check your TERF privilege and quit the mansplaining"

Femme_Fatale

I am pie wrote: »

Do you agree with the article or not?

Direct question, you are making some vague allusion to the fact that rather than the author being a little bit foolish it's actually the people who disagree with her that are misinformed and misguided?

He clearly said he doesn't agree with it. His point though is that it's trolling from the fringe, from a publication known for same, and is a viewpoint that's probably held by this one person. Therefore, to make out it's the "way things are going" is just opportunistic pot-shot throwing at the "PC brigade".
And he's right - e.g. the article is being used here to have a go at all feminists, as if they're all loons. I take it the same people wouldn't call all men's rights activists loons.

The article is utter nuttiness - it's too mad to even get angered by; that would be feeding the troll. Although I can understand anger. But pretty much everyone agrees with cancer awareness initiatives, whatever way of carrying them out is used.

anncoates

One gets the feeling that AH waits for an instance of a single lunatic coming out with nonsense in the same way that my kids wait for Santa.

Femme_Fatale

anncoates wrote: »

One gets the feeling that AH waits for an instance of a single lunatic coming out with nonsense in the same way that my kids wait for Santa.

Shur the "The world is being smothered by liberal fascism" crowd love sh1t like this; it's their life-blood.

jank

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Ah Jank - I see you are still drumming out that 'All Feminists believe exactly the same thing' old rubbish.

Guess what - we don't.

No more than all men believe the same thing.

I am a feminist and I very very rarely agree with Ivana Bacik and I think the article which is the topic of this thread is a pile of steaming bull.

I still see we are getting value for money.

Regards the above, pot meet kettle. You love to pontificate your own musings on things that annoy you, making wide sweeping generalisations to back up your 'claims'. God, you love putting words in mouths as well, twisting what people say to make your 'point'.

OldGoat

I wear a moustache. I shall chastise myself for being a right 'tard. I apologise to any nations I've offended and a hearty 'Sorry' to the women that I've mocked with my follicles.

Femme_Fatale

jank wrote: »

I still see we are getting value for money.

Regards the above, pot meet kettle. You love to pontificate your own musings on things that annoy you, making wide sweeping generalisations to back up your 'claims'. God, you love putting words in mouths as well, twisting what people say to make your 'point'.

Why are you so keen to say all feminists think the way the lunatic fringe of feminism does? Do you enjoy it?
And you obviously therefore think all men's rights activists think the same Paul Elam does, correct?

Links234

Here's a great thought exercise for folks who think feminists are all a hivemind

Do you agree or disagree that Paul Elam is representative of the men's rights movement as a whole, and that his views are representative of men's rights activists as a whole? An example of one of his more tame moments:

Should I be called to sit on a jury for a rape trial, I vow publicly to vote not guilty, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that the charges are true.

anncoates

OldGoat wrote: »

I wear a moustache. I shall chastise myself for being a right 'tard. I apologise to any nations I've offended and a hearty 'Sorry' to the women that I've mocked with my follicles.

There's definitely a Get Back Into The Kitchener moustache/sexism joke in here somewhere...

Links234

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

And you obviously therefore think all men's rights activists think the same Paul Elam does, correct?

GET OUT OF MY HEAD CHARLES!!! :eek:

stevedublin

Foxhound38 wrote: »

.... so obviously that means all participants are worse than Hitler...

Godwin'd on the OP

jank

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Why are you so keen to say all feminists think the way the lunatic fringe of feminism does? Do you enjoy it?
And you obviously therefore think all men's rights activists think the same Paul Elam does, correct?

Only the lunatic fringe of feminism is in favour of gender quotas? Because that is all I mentioned about feminism. Claiming to want 'equality' where quotas are anything but. The vast majority of feminists support such quotas including many posters here, so by your reckoning they are 'lunatics'. Nice way to talk about your fellow woman

OldGoat

anncoates wrote: »

There's definitely a Get Back Into The Kitchener moustache/sexism joke in here somewhere...

Brillant. That's my next costume idea sorted out. I just need the military uniform and an ironing board.

Bannasidhe

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

thats the great thing about feminism, you can believe any old contradictory bull**** you want and still say "hey, not all feminists think like that, stop being so racist. check your TERF privilege and quit the mansplaining"

Hmmmm - only person using the term mansplaining I have seen is you...how strange.

Nor, do I recall anyone but the author of the article calling anyone racist... how strange.

Yet here we are with me being taken to task for stating a simple fact and told that apparently because I identify as a feminist I must agree with everything the author of this pile of dung said 100 % and to do otherwise is a cop-out of some description.

The only people who think that feminism is some sort of hive mind/group think ideology are people who have issues with feminism and desperately want it to be that way so they can complain about de wimminz.

Author of that article is not the only one with some deep seated issues m'thinks but apparently it's ok to make comments about 'lesbos' and 'trannies' cos that's different...that is men being men...

But it isn't.

****e is still ****e regardless of the gender of the author and there has been a lot of ****e of the 'ohhh the bad feminists is getting at us men again. They won't let us be MANLY MAN' verity posted in this thread.

Rabelais

OldGoat wrote: »

I wear a moustache. I shall chastise myself for being a right 'tard. I apologise to any nations I've offended and a hearty 'Sorry' to the women that I've mocked with my follicles.

You posted a picture of yourself in Know Your Nerds. It really insulted an Indian friend of mine, who said you looked like the 'worst sort of nasty Imperialist'. Brought back memories of his grandmother telling stories about the days of the Raj.

Daqster

FTA69 wrote: »

the idea that women face hurdles in society due to their gender isn't nonsense.

Never said it was.

Being disgruntled with feminism and having the above sentence thrown at you is akin to being disgruntled with the PIRA and being met with:

the idea that nationalists faced hurdles in NI society due to their religion wasn't nonsense

Both make about as much sense as the other.

Bannasidhe

jank wrote: »

I still see we are getting value for money.

Regards the above, pot meet kettle. You love to pontificate your own musings on things that annoy you, making wide sweeping generalisations to back up your 'claims'. God, you love putting words in mouths as well, twisting what people say to make your 'point'.

You want to take your personal little war with me to PM Jank?

hatrickpatrick

In our rapidly radicalized PC society, being accused of racism, sexism, or any other "ism" is fast becoming something of a badge of honour

If you manage to piss off the PC brigade you deserve a pat on the back and a pint, in my view

RDM_83 again

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Why are you so keen to say all feminists think the way the lunatic fringe of feminism does? Do you enjoy it?
And you obviously therefore think all men's rights activists think the same Paul Elam does, correct?

Difference is a lot of the mens issues groups make a good effort to move away from and condemn guys like that, obviously Ivana Bacik isn't half as bad as your man but the condemnation of her (by feminists etc) is always on an individual level and relating to specific statements.

RDM_83 again

Bannasidhe wrote: »

It ceases to be 'on an individual level' when terms like 'and her ilk' are used.

Apologies my point wasn't clear enough I was referring to condemnation of Bacik by Feminists.

P_1

So rightful condemnation of a very silly article has descended into a petty argument about feminism... Plus ca change...

FTA69

Daqster wrote: »

Never said it was.

No but you're trying to portray this stupid article as indicative of what feminism is when it isn't.

iguana

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

If you manage to piss off the PC brigade you deserve a pat on the back and a pint, in my view

You must have loved Steve Jobs so.:)

hatrickpatrick

iguana wrote: »

You must have loved Steve Jobs so.:)

I did indeed, and I'm ashamed that I didn't get it until half way through replying to your post

mike65

That is nearly as silly as the great Marco Pierre White West Indian Knorr scandal in the guardian!

wp_rathead

I genuienly laughed at that "article"

Load of waffle

Unfair to use this as ammunition for "femenism bashing" - don't know anyone who agree with that muck which was written

hatrickpatrick

To be serious for a moment, mainstream feminism in the media seems to have turned into a pro-censorship campaign over the last number of years, which while obviously something the majority of feminists seems to reject, is nonetheless sufficiently loud mouthed to be a genuine problems that people who adopt the label need to tackle somehow. Being a feminist used to simply mean being in favour of equality, now it seems to also mean (in the eyes of the mainstream media) wanting to have offensive Facebook pages banned, wanting to have people like Dr. Phil retract their comments when they make "offensive" statements, wanting to have "offensive" t-shirts banned, calling for the CEO of Yahoo Marissa Meyers not to do a Vogue photoshoot because she is "objectifying herself and setting women back", banning page 3 from newspapers even though everyone appearing is doing so of their own free will, etc etc etc. And this particular faucet of "feminism" is deeply hypocritical because it only calls for censorship when one particular demographic is being offended, and demands freedom for women only when that freedom is used in the "right" way.

This absolutely is not something the majority of feminists support, but the widespread coverage of these pro-censorship movements is completely poisoning the word itself, and how one deals with this I'm not entirely sure. It's akin to how the actions of terrorists have caused the word "republican" to become a dirty word - and so far, this is an issue I don't believe anyone has come up with a decent solution to. Most young people today value freedom of expression and the absence of censorship as a fundamental part of life and a value to be guarded closely, and this I believe is what's causing so many young people, women included, to vocally shun the label in recent years. Almost no one in Gen Y or Z wants to be associated with a movement which calls for there to be restrictions on what views a person can express. "I disagree with what you're saying but I will defend to the death your right to say it" is a value many young people today live by, and this seems irreconcilable with the aforementioned campaigns which have been widely reported in the media over the last few years.

[Deleted User]

Mod

Jesus I go for lunch and ye wreck the gaf.

Mit dem Auto, re reg troll, banned. He'll most likely return folks, he usually does, so please learn to report and ignore anything that appears to be a troll because it probably is. Posts deleted.

Everyone else, will ye relax, please. Personal digs aren't welcome. Offensive slurs won't be tolerated. Discuss it calmly and civilly, or don't discuss it at all.

irish_goat

Links234 wrote: »

David Cameron?! I thought that was Ron Swanson! :eek:

Had to go back to the article to double check that, coulda swore it was Swanson as well! :pac:

I can only grow a shockingly crap moustache, apologies to any 16 year old lads I have offended.

wendell borton

Trans man? What, like optimus prime.