alt-right citation needed civility entitled babies evil SJWs men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA oppressed men oppressed white men playing the victim racism ridiculous baby men tucker carlson white supremacy

Tucker Carlson: White Men’s Rights Activist

White men can’t poop

By David Futrelle

In recent days, Tucker Carlson — the whitest of Fox News’ many white supremacists — has taken a break from calling immigrants “dirty” to focus again on one of his other favorite topics: How gosh darn unfair the world is to men, especially white ones like him.

Here are few, er, recent highlights from his show.

In this clip, he suggests that when women earn more than men, society falls apart.

And here he is the next night doubling down on his comments — then providing “evidence” for them in the form of studies that don’t actually examine the issue of which gender earns more. 

He continued with some nonsense about how criticizing the sort of bullshit he regularly says is leading to the “death of creativity,” the end of serious science, and a “new dark age.” I guess he’s feeling the sting now that advertisers are dropping him over his ever-more-blatant racism.

Then he spoke with a right-wing ideologue who, among other things, suggested that war was a male virtue.

Of course, Tucker has been spouting these MRA talking points for a while now.

Here’s a handy — yet mercifully brief — compilation from Media Matter for America.

Here he is complaining that while people talk about female empowerment all the time, we never hear how men are doing. Which I have to admit is a pretty bold claim, given that men never fucking stop talking about themselves and how their feelings are hurt by everything up to and including animated shows for girls that make their main characters’ titties smaller than they used to be.

Here he is complaining that Democrats are destroying society by refusing to acknowledge that men and women are different, dammit!

And here he is claiming that Democrats think all men are automatically guilty.

Well, that’s probably more Tucker Carlson than anyone needs to watch in a day.

If you want to know what’s going on over on Fox News without having to sit through that shit on a nightly basis, I’d strongly recommend following both @ndrew_lawrence and @peltzmadeline, both of whom monitor Fox News for Media Matters for America, and who regularly post clips and screencaps of Fox nonsense.

We Hunted the Mammoth is independent and ad-free, and relies entirely on readers like you for its survival. If you appreciate our work, please send a few bucks our way! Thanks!

34 replies on “Tucker Carlson: White Men’s Rights Activist”

He continued with some nonsense about how criticizing the sort of bullshit he regularly says is leading to the “death of creativity,” the end of serious science, and a “new dark age.”

Weird, I always assumed ‘a “new dark age”’ was somewhere in Fox News’s mission statement…

I would ask why Tucky-wucky always looks like a particularly dimwitted dog who’s just had his chew-toy yanked right out from under his nose, but hearing his “insights” into the nonexistent problems of privileged white men pretty much answers that question for me.

@WWTH: I’ve read that Tucker has mommy issues. I don’t want to run afoul of the blog rules, so I won’t say any more than that.

He’s an aggressively stupid-looking human being, in my opinion.

Carlson is such a poster-child for white male gormlessness that whenever I think of that infamous “how is babby formed” Yahoo Answers post in the future, I am going to see the header image for this post in my mind’s eye…

Valor, courage, chivalry, heroism and war [are] uniquely male

Which means that from this moment, he can never acknowledge or recognize heroism or courage or valor or chivalry in any woman…not in a woman who risks her life to bear a child or in a woman who sacrifices her self-respect to spare a man’s feelings or in a woman who shoulders a solid load of insult which would crush a man like Carlson to the earth in order to break into the kind of field from which he’d like to bar her. All these women are destitute of courage and are strangers to chivalry and never can be brave. That’s his story; he picked it voluntarily; nobody held a gun to his head and forced him to take up this particular line of guff.

So, since he picked his story and since he had his choice, let him stick to his decision from now on. Let him never ever change his mind. Amen.

(As for Brett Kavanaugh, no man has acted that guilty since John Wilkes Booth yelled “Death to tyrants” — or words to that effect — and jumped onto the stage.)

I love all the solutions Mr. Carlson offers to resolve this problem, such as studying astrophysics and becoming a scientist, as opposed to watching cable “news” all day… oh, wait… nope, it was all just whining.

@weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

It reminds me of a story that showed that one of biggest predictor of sexim amongst men was being of low status and feeling of inferiorities, especially toward women. I don’t think Carlson is attacking women because he hates them (not that this cannot also be the case) so much as he’s trying to reassure himself and his audience of their status. It’s a bit like a bullied kid who says he could so kick his bully’s ass so easily if he wanted to when the bully isn’t around to hear it and despite all evidence to the contrary.

“Tonight he doubled-down & went a step further calling modern society the “dark ages” and crediting women with killing science, art & comedy.”

Translation; people have stopped laughing at his racist and sexist jokes.

“They’re drunk on power and looking for new people to hurt.”

Just a little while ago, the alt right was drunk on power. Not so much since the midterms.

But they’re still looking for new people to hurt.

Oh wait. This idiot is talking about women.

To me Carlson’s expression always screams ‘I just shat myself!!!’ to me.


It’s a bit like a bullied kid who says he could so kick his bully’s ass so easily if he wanted to when the bully isn’t around to hear it and despite all evidence to the contrary.

That analogy is non-illustrative and factually incorrect. Women are not bullying Tucker Carlson. He is not the victim here.

“Valor, courage, chivalry, heroism and war [are] uniquely male”

Oh dear lord so much wrong in such a small space –
1 -courage – so say Joan of Arc and Rosa Parks to name two were really men? Interesting Tucker – do go on.

2 – Chivalry – First the rules of Chivalry as they were first laid down applied only the members of their own class – peasants infidels and heretics could and were killed tortured and raped at will. And of course it didn’t really work = that the Morte de Arthur written at the end of the middle ages had to include in it’s list of the vows of Chivalry a promise not to rape women. One would assume a knight wouldn’t need to say that out loud no?

3 – war Jesus you’re claiming this as a good thing? War may be a necessary choice but it’s never a good one. It’s a brutal horrible thing that does damage to everyone involved even the winners – only a cosseted fop like Carlson would celebrate it.

” If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,—
My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est
Pro patria mori.”

Dulce et Decorum Est
– Wilfred Owen.


By that I meant his entire bit against women is pure and unsupported bravado. Carlson mentionned valor, courage, chivalry and war as uniquely male traits, yet he displays none of those. He never soldiered, has made no feat of significant valor or courage and his propency of insulting the poor and women goes against the values of chivalry (you are supposed to defend, or at the very least not attack, these people above all others idiot). Basically, Carlson small ego and loser mentality leads him to fear women’s successes, especially when they display things like valor, courage, chivalry and war (which they always did) and now do so more and more openly. He’s also terryfied by the idea that our society might relativise those values and make them not more important or worthy of admiration than kindness, tenderness, love, patience, grace, pacifism, humility or any other value commonly associated with women in our society. Note that Carlson isn’t great with his “male values” he isn’t exactly any sort of paragon of the “female values” either. In any hierarchy, a man like him would sit at the bottom. At least, in a patriarchal world he can claim superiority to women by structure.

Is Little Tuck not aware that his contentions make men appear to be feckless morons who are incapable of looking after themselves?

@Professor Fate

1 -courage – so say Joan of Arc and Rosa Parks to name two were really men? Interesting Tucker – do go on.

I want courage, I come here and see folks living their lives. Getting on with it in spite of everything against them. Just re-read the ’16 election live thread (happened on it), and I can tell you one thing for sure – Tucker knows shit about courage.

Oh no, lower wages for men lead to higher rates of incarceration and drug abuse? If only there were some way to mandate higher wages. We could set some kind of minimum amount that people could be paid, maybe. I’m sure Tucker, who is so concerned about these issues, wouldn’t fly into a frothing rage at the mere suggestion.

@Ariblester : the comparison as exposed by Epronovost don’t work as he expose it, but in no small part because the aforementioned bullied kid tend to not lash out at the bully, but at people he feel inferior, and Carlson behave like that, too.

Tucker Carlson don’t lash out at whoever mock him nor at the source of its insecurities. He lash out at whoever he feel inferior, which is everything who isn’t a stereotypical WASP man.

(I *do* take the maybe generous hypothesis that Carlson believe his own crap and isn’t 100% hypocritical. Then again, I have seen few of them not drinking their own cool-aid)

I’m gonna have to chastise you for comparing Tucker to dim witted dogs.


You are duly chastised!

I love dogs, and they really shouldn’t be mentioned in the same sentence as him, no matter how dim they may be, lest their reputations be sullied. 😜

He’s such a stupid little shit. It warms my heart to know that his tombstone will read “got his ass kicked by Jon Stewart on live national television.”

@Professor Fate

It’s been a while since I read Morte de Arthur but my memory of the chivalrous behaviour of the knights was: come upon another knight, challenge knight to duel, one knight wins but the other asks if they can remove their helmets to see the face of the brave foe who bested them, remove helmet and discover their opponent was their long lost brother/cousin/neighbour etc, then proclaim while dying that it is a tragedy to die but at least I’ve been killed by a friend. In other words, chivalry was stab first, ask questions later, and accidentally kill those you love. So not exactly a great model for society.

@Goddess Asherah

I say trust some white men– just not the reactionary, constipated ones who think they’re owed everything by everyone else on account of being well… white men.

I may be biased. I’m married to a white dude.

@reggie, the neighbour’s cat and rare mutant

Actually chivalry was a concept mostly born out of Christian doctrine in the 12th and 13th century. Several “codes of chivalry” were written and they represent basically the first written “rules of warfare” in the western world designed to limit the extand of bloodshed and cruelty in wars. Of course, there are many codes of chivalry and they did change over time. They were also very informal, not laws, more like customs or moral philosophy to be more accurate. The only large point in common to all those codes was the idea to spare as much as possible civilians from harm (namely women and children), fighting fairly (no ambush, betrayals or assassinations) and treating prisonners with dignity (no torture and public humiliation). Chivalry also extanded to peace time by encouraging warriors to value loyalty to their word (the cornerstone of the medieval legal and political system), self sacrifice and gentleness toward women and children above all else. Arthurian legends, and other chanson de geste, did help cristalise these concepts in military and popular culture. The specifics varied tremendously and their application even more. Chivalry was also intended to be a universal concept that should and could be shared by warriors of all nation and religion despite being largely informed by Christian theology and morality. Saladin, a Kurde and a Muslim, was cited often as an example of chivalrous warrior and commander in medieval Europe. Ironically, by mentionning courage, valor, war and chivalry, Carlson display his ignorance of chivalry since it encompass the three others.

Anybody surprised that Carlson is ignorant about chivalry please raise your hand… anybody? Anybody? I don’t see any hands out there…

Really, it’s unlikely Carlson’s idea of ‘chivalry’ extends much past ‘hold the door open for a lady (and consider her an ungrateful b***h if she complains about it)’. Purely the paternalistic thin-skin version of ‘benign sexism’.

@Jenora Feuer

If he actually knew what chivalry was about, he would probably dismiss as a “feminine” thing if it weren’t for the part about martial valor (and even then, the part about martial valor is overshadowed by a lot of rules to limit violence). It was a frequent mention in medieval litterature and philosophy to imply that chivalrous thoughts arised more naturally in women hence why a knight should look-up to his lady for moral strength. This isn’t that surprising when you take into account that the principles of chivalry and courtly love were spread a lot at the impulse and with the support of the powerful French and English monarch Eleanor of Aquitaine who was a patron to art and philosophy during her time. So much for it being “uniquely masculine”.

I think your assesment of Carlson’s idea of chivalry is pretty much spot on. If you show Carlson the moon, he will look at your finger.

He looks like he needs some Dulcolax, and picture books explaining basic history.


So, basically the revisionist Victorian concept of “chivalry” as opposed to the actual chivalry of the time where a bunch of insecure rich jerks decided they were special and slapped each other with gloves.

On a more serious note, I think Michael Brooks of the Majority Report is correct that Tucker is taking what is an obvious class critique of society (feminism can’t just be “let’s appoint women as CEOs”) and is channeling the anger in the direction of the vulnerable as opposed to his corporate masters. But on a less serious note, if I invent a time machine, I’m dropping him off in 12th Century England to deal with The Anarchy.

“Everybody’s saying how great Empress Matilda is, but have they thought about how this is affecting Stephen of Blois…?”

@eprovonost, Katamount:
There’s a quote I liked from Peter David’s book, Knight Life (in which King Arthur wakes up in the modern world and runs for Mayor of New York), where Merlin is describing to someone (I think Gwen deVere; yes, bad pun names abounded) about chivalry and Arthur’s court:

Men were treated like men and women were treated like property, which was still a damn sight better than either had been treated previously.

Not exactly historically accurate, of course, and elides the fact that even ‘men’ only really included ‘men with some noble standing’.

Honestly, I think part of the problem is that the modern concept of ‘chivalry’ like Carlson’s tends to draw exclusively from various interpretations of Le Morte d’Arthur (which was already fanfic on top of the older Arthurian legends). So, knock out all the background support under this deliberately romanticised version of the idea, then try to rebuild history from preferred principles to look like that ‘ideal’.

I’m hardly an expert on chivalry. But history has some fascinating texture to it, and so much is kind of applied psychology… human nature really hasn’t changed much over the last many centuries even as the context around it has.

I’m sure someone’s mentioned it, but the Russians in WW2 had women fighters, and the Germans were shit-scared of them because they were VICIOUS.

Also, Boudaccea? Amazons? Someone’s not even trying to make a valid argument.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.