Friday, December 16, 2016

Of Course, Butthurt "Men's Rights Activists" are American Neo-Nazis' Most Enthusiastic Fuckbois

According to an article by Claire Landsbaum in New York Magazine this week, butthurt "men's rights activists" are the American "alt-right" Neo-Nazi movement's newest and most enthusiastic fuckbois.

I read Ms. Landsbaum's article and all the fuckery in the embedded links so you don't have to, but here's the basic, top-line executive summary. Content warning: try not to throw up in your mouth.

Over the past few years, a creepy, sinister, and loose affiliation of rabid misogynists has been festering in the darkest corners of the internet, known as the "manosphere." Their misogyny takes on slightly different flavors, but they are all united in their bitter hatred and resentment of women and general belief that feminism is destroying society. Most of them also hate Jews and non-whites, although one of their most strident champions--a repulsive troll named Roosh Valizadeh who goes by "RooshV"--is of Iranian and Armenian descent.

There are "PUA's" or "pick-up artists" who specialize in the fine art of date rape. There are litigious types who successfully sue women's business ventures over women-only networking events. Most of them believe feminism is trying to "control male sexual behavior" and that women should adhere to traditional feminine roles and standards of beauty. 

Men who don't insist on this are "betas" (as opposed to "alphas"), "blue-pillers" (conformist sheep unwilling to venture into the "red pill" misogyny "Matrix"), or "cucks" (liberal cuckolds). In other words, they are a  bunch of pussies. So needless to say, these dudebros are PSYCHED about Trump and the rise of Neo-Nazism in 'Murica. 

RooshV wrote this to his wide network of followers about having a pussy-grabber in chief in the . . . ahem . . . "oval office:"
I'm in a state of exuberance now that we have a President who rates women on a 1-10 scale in the same way that we do and evaluates women by their appearance and feminine attitude. We may have to institute a new feature called 'Would Trump bang?' to signify the importance of feminine beauty ideals that cultivate effort and class above sloth and vulgarity.
I guess RooshV doesn't care that if he had his druthers, Trump would deport him and his entire family to a pile of rubble somewhere near the Fertile Crescent and refuse to let them board a commercial airplane on sight, but no matter. While I hate this expression, let's "unpack" this quote, because it's a fucking analytical goldmine.

It's almost trite to point out the obvious: which is that generally speaking, all misogynist rage is rooted in a fuck-complex. I've written about the Neo-Nazi fuck-complex before in the context of Steve Bannon: how hate, rage, frustration, and resentment toward women can all be traced to one thing: sex. Or, more specifically, the refusal of women to have it with these men or otherwise pay attention to them. To invoke the neoclassicism favored by Nazis new and old, all roads lead to Rome. 

Here's what I wrote earlier on this:
The rage that flows through the veins of men like Steve Bannon invariably boils down to a fuck-complex of some kind. Either women refuse to fuck them, they fuck women without their consent, they want to fuck men but hate themselves for it, they're fucking men on the DL and are scared of getting caught, they want to fuck kids or animals or some other deviant criminal shit, or they got fucked over by their mother, wife, sister, or girlfriend, or they are involuntarily celibate.
But by far the most interesting part of this quote is the presumption embedded within in that women exist only in relation to men. They are wholly referential, with no autonomous identity. That's why they need to be "evaluated" and "banged." That's what RooshV means when he talks about the 1-10 rating scale, and "the importance of feminine beauty ideals that cultivate effort and class above sloth and vulgarity."

The "effort," again, is extraneous. It is referential only to men and ceases to exist without them. It reflects the idea that women must always endeavor and strive to please men. This makes them "classy." If they don't do this--if, say, they decide to put more "effort" into their own education, careers, goals, or creativity than they do their bodies, hair, nails, and clothes with the ultimate goal of making themselves fuckable, then they are "slothful." They are being lazy by not doing their job, which is again one thing and one thing only: to fuck and be fucked. To be conquered by men.

When women challenge this, or assert their autonomy and express anger at these ideas or resist them, they become "vulgar." And that's because a key element of femininity through the male gaze is, has, and always will be women's silence. Only when women are silent and complacent can they be considered controlled, conquered, domesticated, and therefore no longer a threat to men. 

Shut up and look this way, is the message. We'll do the talking. We'll couch this debate. We'll make the rules. We'll tell you if you're good enough. We'll decide. Might makes right. We will punish you if you don't fall into line. We will evaluate and rank you. We will conquer you. We will "bang" you. We will tell you what your job is and if you're doing it right. We will spread this message around to any like-minded, like-blooded people who will listen and welcome them to our para-militarized cause.

Think about this in relation to Neo-Nazism and let the similarities marinate. They are stark. And they are terrifying.

Photo: Sam Armstrong/Getty Images

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.