Categories
a woman is always to blame anti-Semitism antifeminism conspiracy theory dan perrins drama kings dude you've got no fucking idea what you're talking about entitled babies evil SJWs men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA none dare call it conspiracy oppressed men post contains jokes post contains sarcasm straw feminists

New Men’s Rights conspiracy theory replaces the Illuminati with Teen Vogue

The hand that holds the golf club controls the world?
The hand that holds the golf club controls the world?

Most conspiracy theorists are surprisingly uncreative in their choice of villains, blaming all the ills in the world on one or more alleged evildoers in a fairly short list: the Jews, the government, the Illuminati, space aliens, and a handful of other familiar suspects.

One Men’s Rights activist wants to add a few more names to the list: the women’s magazines Glamour, Allure, Self, Vogue, and, most terrifyingly, Teen Vogue.

So how did the MRA in question — Dan Perrins of Ontario, Canada — arrive at this particular conclusion? Earlier this year, you see, GQ magazine ran a rather scathing piece by investigative journalist Jeff Sharlet about the Men’s Rights movement, centering around the weekend Sharlet spent amongst the convention-goers at A Voice for Men’s first (and probably only) International Conference for Men’s Issues last year.

Perrins made a brief appearance in the article. He’s the guy Sharlet quoted as saying, about an ex, that “I should have killed the bitch five years ago … I’d be out by now.”

But that’s ancient history now, because there’s a new GQ outrage that has the MRAs up in arms: namely, a cartoon depicting a Men’s Rights Activist as a loudmouthed middle-aged guy that no one wants to listen to. 

gqmracartoon
Huh. Which MRA does this cartoon remind me of? Oh yeah: All of them.

Now, it’s true that not every single MRA is a loudmouthed middle-aged guy that no one wants to listen to. Obviously, some of them aren’t middle-aged.

But Perrins thinks something more sinister is afoot. In his mind, this cartoon doesn’t reflect the normal revulsion most human beings feel when confronted with a Men’s Rights activist. No, in his mind the GQers are doing the bidding of their evil puppetmasters.

While Perrins’ screenshot is a little blurry, he’s highlighting a list of the women’s “fashion and lifestyle” magazines owned by Conde Nast: Vogue, W, Glamour, Allure, Self, and the dreaded … Teen Vogue.

Apparently, in order to appease the vicious feminazis that read and run these magazines, the editors of Conde-Nast-owned GQ need to do all they can to denigrate the true male heroes of the Men’s Rights movement.

Presumably, all other Conde Nast magazines need to follow the feminazi editorial dictates of GLAMOUR and SELF and TEEN VOGUE as well. In other words, don’t expect to find any positive accounts of, say, Dean Esmay’s groundbreaking Twitter campaign against cavernous feminist vaginas, or whatever other important human rights activism that the MRAs are up to today, in the pages of Architectural Digest or Bon Appétit.

But wait. What is this I see in the list of Conde Nast publications?

golf

Is it possible that the feminazis at Teen Vogue aren’t really the ones in charge, but are merely a front for the true puppetmasters?

Could it be that all of Conde Nast is in the pockets of BIG GOLF?

 

94 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Falconer
6 years ago

Falconer, come lie on the floor with me. I need someone to mop up the tears after that last episode of Steven Universe coupled with that episode of Gravity Falls.

Okay, so long as there are no spoilers.

Falconer
6 years ago

What are feels?
Sugar, don’t hurt them
Don’t hurt them, no more

weirwoodtreehugger
6 years ago

SFHC,
I certainly don’t have a problem with anyone personally believing that they’re too problematic to deal with and never being interested in them. I just think both the history and the content of these magazines are too complex to just dismiss them as evil and the their readers as stupid and shallow.

Pandapool -- The Species that Endangers YOU (aka Banana Jackie Cake, for those who still want to call me "Banana", "Jackie" or whatever)
Pandapool -- The Species that Endangers YOU (aka Banana Jackie Cake, for those who still want to call me "Banana", "Jackie" or whatever)
6 years ago

You feels will be broken into tiny baby pieces and there will be no glue to fix them because the show is PART ONE OF FIVE so enjoy having those feels grinded down and down and down for the next week.

I was a big girl and didn”t cry…much. T3T At least not as much as the Connie swordfight episode or the flashback episode about Greg, Rose and fusion.

Pandapool -- The Species that Endangers YOU (aka Banana Jackie Cake, for those who still want to call me "Banana", "Jackie" or whatever)
Pandapool -- The Species that Endangers YOU (aka Banana Jackie Cake, for those who still want to call me "Banana", "Jackie" or whatever)
6 years ago

And DEFINITELY not as much as the Lars episode or the video tape episode. Def.

GrumpyOldSocialJusticeMangina

I am certainly glad to hear that some women got something positive out of the magazines — that there was, in fact, maybe not a pony, but at least a kitty under that pile of shit. And I probably was a bit harsh on the content editors, who were probably sneaking in as much good stuff as their bosses would let them. It’s just that their co0mplicity in the cosmetics industry’s attempt to make every woman totally insecure about her body image seems to me to embody the worst aspects of capitalistic greed. I hate to seem anyone ANYONE manipulated and exploited for the purpose of making some people rich.
WWTH, I admire you for your ability to sift through and find the good and ignore the bad. I wish everyone had a good shit detector.

Pandapool -- The Species that Endangers YOU (aka Banana Jackie Cake, for those who still want to call me "Banana", "Jackie" or whatever)
Pandapool -- The Species that Endangers YOU (aka Banana Jackie Cake, for those who still want to call me "Banana", "Jackie" or whatever)
6 years ago

I know in Seventeen there was good stuff. I remember reading several articles when I was younger about teenagers overcoming odds and doing work, although I don’t remember the specifics. They also had a couple of articles about condom and birth control, so it wasn’t too bad sometimes.

Paradoxical Intention
6 years ago

Jackie, did you know about the fan theories floating around that Lars is a transman? I thought they were pretty interesting.

Pandapool -- The Species that Endangers YOU (aka Banana Jackie Cake, for those who still want to call me "Banana", "Jackie" or whatever)
Pandapool -- The Species that Endangers YOU (aka Banana Jackie Cake, for those who still want to call me "Banana", "Jackie" or whatever)
6 years ago

@Paradoxical

No. I didn’t. No exactly sure I can see it, though. Can I get a link?

Falconer
6 years ago

Trans man or not, Lars is kind of an asshole.

I haven’t seen much of the theories, except someone claiming that carving one’s name into something is a trans thing.

But I mean, if someone wants to see Lars as trans, that’s fine, they don’t need to make a case for me.

pecunium
6 years ago

Don’t forget that Condé Nast owns Reddit, which is why MRAs dare not post ANYTHING there.

Oh, wait….

freemage
freemage
6 years ago

the discussion of women’s magazines, for me, parallels the way ‘chick lit’ and romance novels are critiqued. Yes, there’s often a lot of very problematic content, but again, it’s often what’s available for many women, and most in my acquaintance are quite capable of filtering out the good stuff for themselves–because it’s very often in there, alongside all the crap.

Pandapool -- The Species that Endangers YOU (aka Banana Jackie Cake, for those who still want to call me "Banana", "Jackie" or whatever)
Pandapool -- The Species that Endangers YOU (aka Banana Jackie Cake, for those who still want to call me "Banana", "Jackie" or whatever)
6 years ago

@Falconer

Carving one names into things is a trans thing? I don’t…think so? I mean, the chances of all those stupid tourists carving their names into historical monuments being trans is staggering PLUS puts transpeople in a bad light.

I don’t mind if someone has headcannon that he’s trans but there are theories which means there’s proof of it, so, I mean, that’s different. I would like to see proof that he might be transgender but I really doubt, if any character is transgender, it would be Lars. Because he’s an asshole who’s really drenched in a pool of toxic masculinity and puberty. You know, regular teenager stuff.

You don’t make an asshole a transgender individual in a children cartoon, especially a cartoon like Steven Universe, especially if they’re the only one, especially since Steven Universe doesn’t actually do straight-up representation of LGBT+ people but more allegory shit to get around censors and tightass asshole parents.

Headcannon, I can see that. Actual proof that he’s transgender? I really can’t see that without someone pointing it out for me.

brooked
brooked
6 years ago

@pecunium

Hey, good to see you back, I hope you and yours are well.

mildlymagnificent
6 years ago

pecunium !

Great to see you. Hope life is good for you.

Falconer
6 years ago

Welp, I’m caught up through “Road Trip.”

http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/964/402/ba4.png

Carving one names into things is a trans thing? I don’t…think so? I mean, the chances of all those stupid tourists carving their names into historical monuments being trans is staggering PLUS puts transpeople in a bad light.

The argument was it was an assertion of identity, tagging things with the name he’s chosen for himself. But I saw the argument on Tumblr, so … yeah.

Falconer
6 years ago

Hey pecunium! I hope it’s all going well.

Orion
Orion
6 years ago

WWTH,

Your comment on the value in women’s magazines struck me as insightful, and I wanted to make a supporting comment. Then I saw SFHC’s response, which I think also has merit; I’d say you’re both right, and I think the seeming discrepency is solvable.

Anyway, since I dug in so hard against you two last time around, and then found myself wanting to address you again, I figured I’d ask you two your guidance on what I ought to do. Would you prefer that I not comment here, or that I apologize for my excessive aggression last week and let it go, or that I hop back on that thread and try for a quick explanation of my perspective and what I was really upset about?

Anyway, if interested, take on this subject follows:

I’m kind of with Weirwood on this one. I’m a cis male, but I learned a few things from women’s mags, so I can easily believe they were important vectors for some girls. The only thing I’d add would be to note that today, in America, we’re still living “before everybody had internet access.” A quick google suggests that 73% of American families have broadband service, but among those 73 are families with just 1 shared computer, or 2+ computers that are shared by multiple users and/or set up in public spaces. If we’re concerned about teenage girls’ access to information on sex and sexual health, I think the question is “how many teenage girls have routine, unsupervised, unfiltered internet access?”, which is probably well below 70%.

SFHC,

I think I sense the same condescension you do, but I don’t see it as either/or. I think it can be true that both the magazines’ publishers and the magazines’ loudest critics have some contempt for, and some privilege over, the target audience. The paradox of poverty (and probably all marginalization?) is that one is forced to depend on those who victimize or exploit them. Even with something like payday loans, we try to understand both why they are very bad for borrowers and why people take them. Women’s magazines are nowhere near as bad as payday loans, but I look at it the same way: to get the whole story, one needs to see both what’s legitimately valuable in them and what’s condescending and harmful.

Sandra Goodick
6 years ago

I agree with WWTH on the potential for women’s magazines to inform women in the pre-internet era.

I read Glamour fairly regularly between ages 16 – 24 (before the advent of the internet) and every month they had the article on a “women’s issue” that always delivered with a feminist perspective. Glamour was where I learned about female genital mutilation, equal pay for equal work and bodily autonomy issues such as the right to choose. Perhaps I came across Glamour in a particularly feminist era but it was decidedly pro-choice and feminist.

This is not an ad for Glamour. I haven’t read it in 20 yrs and my daughter has access to information everywhere.

%d bloggers like this: