MEMEDAY continues with the pic below that I also found on the Twitters.
While not technically a “meme” per se, it’s one of those things that antifeminists like to pass around amongst themselves — and that no one outside their little world will really understand, largely because it makes no damn sense.
Ok, so, a couple of Channers are talking about the eeeeeevil Anita Sarkeesian:
— Victor Zen (@VictorZenMHRA) October 23, 2015
The first delightful thing to point out about this little exchange — and I’m using the word “delightful” to mean the total and complete opposite of delightful — is that Anita’s haters apparently really think that her speeches, videos and whatnot are little more than than excuses to say bad things about men.
She might say something like, well, to pick a random example from a recent blog post of hers about the Netflix show Jessica Jones:
To its credit, as one critic observed, Jessica Jones conveys the horror of Jessica’s past without ever depicting it. In this way, it avoids sensationalizing sexual assault, acknowledges that trauma leaves a lasting impact on people, and relieves the audience of the burden of having to bear witness to the worst of what Jones has endured.
But what Anita’s haters apparently hear is something like this:
Men are bad. Blah Blah. Blah They are all a bunch of patriarchal poopyheads. Blah. They should be put in jail just for being men. Bla Blah. Did I mention I hate men? KILL ALL MEN.
The second delightful (see above) thing about this little screencap — and the one that prompted Mr. Zen to post that triumphant “REKT” — is that supposed racial “gotcha.”
Anita’s haters (and internet antifeminists generally) have such a poor understanding of the basics of intersectional feminism that they think they can trump anything an SJW might say by accusing them randomly of racism.
If she says bad things about men, ask if she means black men as well.
Well, that would kind of depend on what she said, wouldn’t it?
Some things are true of all men. Some things aren’t. Sometimes race makes a difference. Sometimes it doesn’t.
It’s certainly not racist to say, for example, that men generally benefit from unexamined privilege — at least if you acknowledge that this is not the whole story, and that other things (race, class, sexual orientation, and so forth) affect men in huge and complicated ways that can overshadow gender.
But the belief that feminists aren’t allowed — according to some imagined SJW rulebook — to include men of color in their analyses because that would be RACIST is a fairly common one amongst internet antifeminsts.
Take, for example, the case of one Dean Esmay — Twitter “activist” and former A Voice for Men managing editor. Several months back he posted a series of Tweets in which he essentially tried to argue that feminists who include men of color in their analyses are inherently racist.
He put it a bit more bluntly than that:
Even aside from the jarring line about “their women” — suggesting that black women are rightfully the property of black men — this is a bizarre claim. Feminists aren’t the Klan. They don’t argue that black men are uniquely violent; they simply note that, yes, there are black men who rape and beat women — just as there are white men and indeed men of every complexion who do.
As Esmay sees it, his charge not only applies to white feminists allegedly throwing shade at black men. It also applies to black feminists who criticize black men in any way.
And black feminist men as well.
The weird thing about Esmay is that he doesn’t seem to be playing a game of “SJW gotcha” here; he seems to actually think he’s making some sort of rational argument.
Internet antifeminists are weird.