Delicate patriarchy victim Amanda Marcotte is learning to think

I still remember the look in my father’s eyes when I first learned to ride a bicycle.

It was rough going – I crashed and crashed but I was determined to get it right. Dad both encouraged me and made it clear that I could always try again tomorrow with no loss of his love or respect. Finally – finally – the wobbles damped out and I made it all the way down the street, and back, without falling.

Dad was crying. I didn’t understand his emotion then, but his little boy was growing up. The milestones of life are often wet with tears.

As one grows and matures, one’s understanding of life’s complexities grows more profound. Whether riding a bike, mastering the nuances of formal logic, chess, forensics, video games, quantum physics, or individual spirituality, the growth of our mental and physical processes is a remarkable testament to our humanity, our humility, and our roles in community.

Our growth gives us valuable, and even critical insights into both the world and the people around us. The cost of growth can be high – we shed the innocence of youth, the idealism, and the friends we can no longer relate to. Often, those former friends misunderstand our growth as a betrayal of those core principles that informed those friendships.

If, for example, you were friends and allies with Suey #CancelColbert Park, but you come to the startling conclusion that white men are people, too, then Suey will hate you like the treacherous sea swallows ships:

Salon: What is the best way to work with white people, to get them on our side?

Suey Park: I don’t want them on our side.

You don’t want them on your side.

This is not reform, this is revolution.

So what do you want to see happen in your revolution?

I mean, it’s already happening I think. The revolution will not be an apocalypse, it’s gonna be a series of shifts in consciousness that result in actions that come about, and I think that like, at this point is really like, ride or die, in terms who’s in and who is out. I don’t play by appeasement politics, it is not about getting my oppressors to humanize me. And in that sense I reject the respectability politics, I reject being tone-policed, I think we need to do away with this idea that these structures are … that the prisons can undergo reform and somehow do less violence as a structure. But any example like that.

Wait, can you ask that question again, I got distracted real quick, there was a bird outside my window.

Ah, the sweet, easily distracted idealistic stupidity of youth! Oops – I just humanized that bigot. Yikes.

Many Men’s Human Rights Advocates despair of debating with feminists and I share their concerns – feminists seem trapped in a stage of moral development devoid of the understanding of either societal morality (obeying laws as a part of the social contract) or universal morality (principles of justice that require us to treat the claims of all parties in an impartial manner, respecting the basic dignity of all people as individuals).

Instead, feminists are mired in a care-and-concern group-based morality where “relations of special obligation to family, friends, and group members…often include or presuppose general obligations of respect, fairness, and contract”. Because men are demonized through the feminist “patriarchy theory” (or “rape culture”; take your pick), men are the OTHER in the feminist world, and hence, NOT worthy of respect, fairness, nor contract – nor even basic human rights.

That is how and why feminists laugh at male suffering, ignore the intense misandry of other feminists, protest and pull fire alarms at lectures about men’s problems, and treat accusations of  the rape of a woman as equal to a conviction – men are the ENEMY, guilty by default, and worthy of less respect than a slug. Men bad, woman good.

This wretched state of moral development is identical to racism – othering a person because of his differing race and embracing a bigot of a similar race. It is identical to religious hatred – the extremist Christian who hates all Muslims, or the extremist Muslim who hates all Christians.

Without a universal understanding of morality – one that values all people, man and woman alike – feminists doom themselves to an eternal echo-chamber of hatred, and engaging in any sort of dialog with them seems both pointless and hopeless.

But as much as feminists try to “other” me as a man, I reject the urge to other them as women, or even as feminists. I choose to hold on the hope – however faint –  that they can, as individuals, grow out of their group hatred into a more nuanced understanding of the problems we face – the human problems.

One feminist, at least, is now showing signs that she is breaking out of this echo-chamber. Who could believe it would be legendary man-hater Amanda Marcotte?

Marcotte is famed in feminist circles for her othering of men: “misandry”, to her, is a nonsense word,  She insists that “women aren’t raised in a culture that tells them they’re entitled to attention from men” but God help you if you disagree with her or tell her “no”.

Marcotte even tried (and failed, spectacularly) to rape-shame RAINN – the Rape Abuse & Incest National Network – into buying into her beloved rape-culture crap.

But recently, Marcotte has been tinkering with a more nuanced tone to her writing about men and feminism. The differences are small but telling, and once other feminists figure out that Marcotte is going a bit soft on man-hating, they are going to go insanely angry, like Jessica Valenti did when the New Republic wrote about Paul Elam and A Voice for Men

The specific article by Marcotte was published by Slate, and relates to the sexual peccadilloes of U.S. Representative Vance McAllister and a married female staffer, Melissa Hixon Peacock, who were caught kissing for 30 seconds on camera.

Marcotte rightly questions the judgment of other feminists (Rep. Jackie Speier and Jarvis DeBerry, among others) who characterized the obviously consensual face-sucking as “sexual harassment”. A veteran of the John Edwards presidential campaign, Marcotte has experienced enough on-the-job high jinks to where she can distinguish between actual harassment and plain old screwing around:

This difference is not trivial. Anti-feminists already love to accuse feminists of being uptight prudes for speaking out against coercive and harassing sexual behavior. It’s probably wise to avoid giving them ammunition by tying the word harassment to a situation where both parties appear, on tape at least, to be throwing themselves into it whole-heartedly.

Now, of course, the supposed “prudery” of feminism has never been a major concern of the Men’s Human Rights Movement – the lunacy of the “all Penis-in-Vagina sex is rape” crowd is obvious to everyone who is not a feminist, and Marcotte is not signing up for the Sammich Mines just yet, but look at how far she’s come:

  • Instead of ignoring or dismissing (othering) “Anti-feminists” out of hand, she engaged their concerns in open discourse.
  • Instead of blindly supporting her feminist allies, she called them out on their logical (and tactical) fallacy.
  • Instead of blaming hegemonic male sexuality, she recognized the sexual agency and enthusiasm of that Peacock woman.

Small victories, and perhaps short-lived ones, but cracks in the foundation of feminism have a way of spreading – and Men’s Human Rights Advocates are the ones swinging the sledgehammers to good effect.

You haven’t earned a big old Texas hug and a smooch yet, Amanda, but here is a small nod to the growth of your moral and mental maturity, and we can hope that there is much more to come.

And no, those aren’t tears on my cheeks. It is hot in here; it is raining; the sprinklers went off with the fire alarms.

Feature image by James G. Milles

About August Løvenskiolds

Once he stumbled onto GirlWritesWhat's videos, August Løvenskiolds, aka The Bibo Sez, started eating red pills like they were tic-tacs. He likes debating feminists, but knows this stage will pass soon enough.

Main Website
View All Posts
  • Jared White

    I wouldn’t give her a nod. But this is one instance where I might keep my middle finger from popping up in her general direction.

    The word might would of course have to be stressed in this situation.

    • Jesse James

      Basically, when I start turning the imaginary handle on my middle finger jack in the box, this time, it was broken. I’m sure it will be working the next time she speaks.

    • Paul Elam

      That is progress! If I can read a quote from Marcotte and not send a bird flying it is a great day! :)

      • Jared White

        Well you know I’m all about the progress. :)

  • Stu

    No hope for someone like her. Any little concession she makes to logic or truth, and slight bit of sympathy shown for any suffering male, under any circumstances, is merely strategic for her. Even the worst of Nazis will tone it down while surrounded by Jews. She is irredeemable. It’s as impossible for her to turn into a fair minded person as it is for a white pointer shark to turn into a fluffy white kitten.

    She senses that the tide is turning, and the masses are calling bullshit on man hating radical feminists and their bullshit theories. She’s starting to pretend to be a more fair, equitable person, just in case there is a price to pay in the future…….and there is…..and she wont be getting off the hook no matter what she does from now on. She has engaged in promoting enough hatred of men and boys to damn her to hell along with all the other man hating scum of her ilk and caliber. She’s up there on the top level of professional man haters. There is no way back for her……never.

    • mike gibbs

      I agree….

    • Peter Wright

      “It’s as impossible for her to turn into a fair minded person as it is
      for a white pointer shark to turn into a fluffy white kitten.”

      Hahaha….. beautiful description. 😻

    • Susie Parker

      Strategy notwithstanding, those small concessions to “toning it down” are exactly what paved the way for Civil Rights and Feminism to happen.

      I grew up in the Segregated South – I fully remember Before and After “toning it down”. I remember when men began “toning it down”.

      This isn’t the first reported “toning it down” by a staunch feminist.

      It isn’t gonna be the last.

      • Stu

        Oh yeah, it wont be the last, in fact I’m expecting a flood of toned down feminists. And that is good. But what I’m pointing out, is that there is no change on the inside of these people. They have been operating in an environment where they can be their true hateful selves, and show their true hateful colors. That is changing, and it is starting to become possibly detrimental to “them” to continue in the style they have in the past. But there is no change of heart. But it’s a good sign that even the most hateful anti male bigots, are starting to realize that their views are repugnant to more and more people, and that the future will see them branded as the bigots they are, and possibly even held accountable for the damage they have done to millions of peoples lives by pushing the sexist policies and attitudes, along with creating and supporting cooked up bullshit statistics and such.

        If they are changing their tune for the better, it is for self preservation and nothing more. That doesn’t mean it’s not good, but lets not mistake it for sincere change of heart. That will never happen.

        • Susie Parker

          Same can be said for racists and misogynists(yes, misogynists really exist, just as true man haters certainly exist).

          I don’t care what they really feel inside – as long as it stays contained, inside where it belongs, and not made into public hate policies that punish and harm those who don’t deserve it.

          • Adam McPhee

            Yes, keeping it to the inside helps keep the hatred from effectively spreading. Sure, misandrists will still have their circle-pokes about how awful men are and such, same as devout myalgia it’s have their similar circle jerks.

            However, by keeping it to the inside when on their larger and more public soap boxes, the uninitiated will have more open and inclusive thoughts of the issues which affect all people. Toeing the line brings about those who never even heard of the line to now straddle it and see a more equal view of it. Totalitarian control of the discussion starts to wax and wane.

          • Bewildered

            I don’t care what they really feel inside – as long as it stays
            contained, inside where it belongs, and not made into public hate
            policies that punish and harm those who don’t deserve it.

            This is how a true liberal talks.

        • Scatmaster

          Aminda is an accessory to murder. She didn’t put the barrel of the gun down the man’s throat or hang ten feet of rope from the nearest pillar but she sure as shit is culpable.
          She is a vile, despicable piece of protoplasm who will never change it’s spots. No quarter from me. I wouldn’t waste a good piss on its grave nor to put it out if it was on fire. She has caused too much damage. I will come out of the crematorium and still see her rot. Start your quote mining Fartrelle you and her are birds of a feather.

    • 98abaile

      I agree, you can’t logic someone out of a stance they didn’t logic themselves into in the first place.
      I’m more willing to suspect that this is an accidental ideological faux pas on her part, accidentally letting her real world experiences override her fantasy dogma.

      • Matthew Lane

        “I agree, you can’t logic someone out of a stance they didn’t logic themselves into in the first place.”

        Yep, its like trying to science a creationist out of creationism…. The only “science” they will accept is the science that supports there ideology, even if the personally have to invent the “Science” first.

  • 2cyar

    I wouldn’t be so quick to give Marcotte kudos…

    Let’s see

    If the congressman’s wife decides to divorce him over this, then he is fucked

    If the staffer’s husband decides to divorce his wife over this, then he is fucked

    Wow, looks like a win/win for the wyminz….why wouldn’t Marcotte support it?

    • Susie Parker

      Female staffers are not in a position of power, or so the feminist theory goes. Women must submit sexually to male superiors or they could lose their job and THEN where would they be?

      I remember women making out like Monica Lewinsky was a helpless infant, practically still in diapers at age 23, tied to a railroad track and ravaged by a mustache twirling Presidential Villain crowing “I’m King Of The World”.

  • Lastango

    I suspect Marcotte is helping pave the way for Bill Clinton to be a campaign asset for Hillary. So she’s dispensing with the notion that a boss groping a willing subordinate is engaging in harassment. That also lets Hillary off the hook for tolerating him; he may be an adulterer, but he’s not a victimizer.

    That last bit is critical. If he was the latter, Hillary — who will be running as a WOMAN and a feminist — should have dumped him. Feminists everywhere profess to be fighting on behalf of victims, and to be vigorously in favor of victimizers getting their just desserts.

    Further, the incidents with Monica in the Oval Office are a proven allegation, so that’s what Marcotte et al., know they have to diffuse. The other incidents — in which Bill was accused of sexual assault — they countered by smearing the accusers and by denial. They’ll do that again, and claim it’s all just partisan politics, there’s no proof, nothing to see here, the nation moved on long ago, not even worthy of a response, etc.

    So, in a coordinating role which resembles that so often played by the New York Times, Marcotte is signalling the troops to back off from this one. The election is too close, so don’t try to have your cake and eat it. Electing Hillary, and eight more years of a Democratic Party administration, is more important than making an example on one Republican congressman in a chamber the Democrats are unlikely to retake anyway.

    • DEDC

      Excellent insight. Note that this renders all of her article as shoring up the ‘base'; and shows she is still firmly seated in her echo chamber despite her ‘concessions’ As if Hillary were in any political danger ‘because’ she is a woman, anyway. Rather, she is more likely to win due to her womanhood than she is to lose by it.

  • Xbillion

    Hmm, yes I’m sure she’d love this article. Chuckle. Love to hate it cause really it is clear many of these types love hating stuff, men especially. Anyways. And perhaps a radical-er than tho True Feminist or two will raise an eyebrow at their sister in arms.

  • James Huff

    Some of the commenters here need to look at the long strategy and read between the lines.

    • Scrufflecat

      Agreed. If we force our opposition to act more rational and humane, it doesn’t matter if we’re doing it for the right reasons or not, we’re still winning.

      • Scatmaster

        Do you truly believe that Aminda Marcotte is acting “more rational and humane”? She would stab you in the back literally (if she could get away with it and these days she probably would) and figuratively as well. She is despicable and this is only a strategy.

      • Introspectre

        What if such acts of rationality, serve to convince the masses, that Feminism is now under control and it’s former transgressions, can be safely ignored? Back in the 70’s and 80’s, Feminists were engaging in the complete takeover of gender discourse; seeding it with bigotry, all the while seeming nice, diplomatic and accommodating to the average person with a few exceptions like Solanis, who they distanced themselves from, at the time. Back then, people couldn’t see through the egalitarian act and as a result, there was little resistance to sympathizing with Feminism. And men who questioned them were socially flayed, by shame and popular opinion. They could get away with the most callous ridicule of men and boys and no one would even question it, because they used diplomatic rhetoric and in the next breath, they were seemingly nice and accommodating again.

        Perhaps they have realized, that their cockiness is exposing their true nature and wish to appear as the “good cop”, again. That way we can all, (the general public, that is), go back to paying no attention to those “nice egalitarian women”, and the Feminists can get back to the agenda, without fear of scrutiny. Once there is no open evidence of Feminist bigotry in the offing, society will revert to automatic sympathy for Feminist women and contempt for anyone who questions them. The truth will be re-swept under the rug and we, will be at square one again.

        To paraphrase Sun Tzu: When a former adversary appears to be making accommodations, they are likely in peril and buying time to regroup. Feminists have nothing to gain by moderating their message, except for the ability to hide in plain sight again.

    • Scatmaster

      Explain for us lower levels on intelligence!!!!!!

  • David King

    Sometimes I wish there were an up-vote button for the article.

    • Daniel Freeman

      That’s actually something that contributors can do for themselves when their article is published, by posting a comment saying “Tip Jar” and nothing more.

      • David King

        Yes, it’s an idea, but there’s no way to sticky that ‘tip jar’ comment without featuring it, which means we can’t feature any other worthy comment. Also, unless it’s done consistently, it’s fairly meaningless.

        I suppose I should make more use of ‘share’ links (eg on twitter etc), but social networking is not something I’ve ever really gotten into (mostly out of a lack of time and interest). I will not, however, ever touch facebook.

  • PaulMurrayCbr

    “Now, of course, the supposed “prudery” of feminism has never been a major concern of the Men’s Human Rights Movement”

    The prudery of feminism is not incidental. Feminism is neo-puritanism, with its horror of (heterosexual) sex. “Feminism is sexism” suggests that feminism is not new sexism, it’s simply old sexism: men are beasts, women fainting flowers of innocence.

    Worth a look, I think. Haven’t finished it yet:

    • DEDC

      Feminism is religion, in more than just its inability to question its a priori assumptions. It seeks to control narratives on acceptable sexuality as well. They rightly see the role that traditional religion has played in controlling sexuality (and want a coup de etat of religion, so to speak,- that is what A+theists are all about) but wrongly see it as pro-male and exclusively male sexualities reinforced in them, that need overthrowing and replacement with their polar opposites: “Anything and everything non-male please!”. This is justice to them within their retarded views of history.

      I am an atheist and greatly disturbed at the actions of these neofemitheists.

  • PaulMurrayCbr

    AVfM absolutely must keep an eye on the reaction to her article.

  • plasmacutter

    But as much as feminists try to other me as a man, I reject the urge to
    other them as women, or even as feminists. I choose to hold on the hope –
    however faint – that they can, as individuals, grow out of their group
    hatred into a more nuanced understanding of the problems we face – the human problems

    I woulndn’t hold my breath.

    Make no mistake, she was not being conciliatory, she was avoiding making a big deal out of this because it centers on a woman conforming to Briffault’s Law and unilaterally nuking her marriage by cheating on her husband with a wealthier, more powerful man!

    The feminist movement does whatever they can to sweep Briffault’s Law under the rug, because it stymies their “deadbeat dad” and “hubby ran away with the secretary” justifications for pillage and enslavement via divorce court: because if Briffault’s Law becomes widely-known enough, the public sentiment would turn against feminist’s primary vehicle for the collective punishment and divestiture of men.

    • DEDC

      I like the way you think plasmacutter, but in this instance, I think you are overthinking and giving Marcotte too much credit. I don’t know of any feminist capable of that kind of introspection, or one that would admit that Briffault’s Law is even valid or that it is used. Projection is their thing.

    • Scatmaster

      Make no mistake, she was not being conciliatory

      Yup, and I BOLDED the above quote.

      ABR and NLYGD!!!!

  • Kimski

    “Without a universal understanding of morality”

    Okay, for once I’ll try to do my best impression of being nice, and pretend that they actually have a basic understanding of morality, even though it is a highly flawed and dysfunctional version of that concept.

    They seem to unitedly only accept ‘Men’ as being this violent, rapey, homicidal faceless entity that constantly oppresses women whereever they go, and has formed this secret “Brotherhood of the Patriarchy” millennia ago, with the sole purpose of committing the aforementioned atrocities against women, and preferably as often as we possibly can.

    -When we’re not pulling wings off flies and burning ants with magnifying glasses, that is.

    Besides being an overtly overrated misconception of one’s value as an entertainment factor in the vast majority of men’s lives, the dysfunctional part in their understanding of morality – where it values all people alike – becomes apparent in their incapability of applying those negative values to the sons they gave birth to, prepare breakfast for every morning, and then drops off at school.

    -Or the brother that always help’s out when it is needed, and comes by with _his_ family every once in a while, to spend a cozy sunday afternoon in the backyard hanging out.

    -Or the father they call every two or three days to check up on, if their mother has not succeeded in driving him out of the home, and years of maternal parental alienation inevitably has taken it’s toll.

    Somehow, and in a so far unexplained and incomprehensible way, those men doesn’t seem to belong to the “Brotherhood of the Patriarchy”, but are valued and loved members of every single one of their individual spheres, for reasons that are then completely obvious, even to themselves.

    No, it’s the hate of those _other_ men that I don’t really get. You know, the _other_ sons, brothers, and fathers that love and support _other_ women to the best of their abilities, while radically shortening their lifespan in the process, and mostly never gaining very much from their selfless gestures of love.

    Well, that’s not entirely true, actually, because a great many of those men, including their own, gain the dubious pleasure of watching the women they’ve committed their life to growing into ever-demanding, ungrateful, unsatisfied and spiteful gorgons, incapable of returning even an ounce of the love they’ve received.

    Now, do those men return the hatred they’re constantly being bombarded with from all sides?
    No, amazingly enough, they don’t! Most of those who actually survive it just pick up the pieces and do the best they can with what is left. How’s that for inherently bad and evil?

    But, seriously, in the best interest of continued self-preservation, has it not been long overdue to simply let go of the metaphorical bike, watch those haters crash and burn, and simply walk away from the wailings certain to follow?

    If Amanda Marcotte is starting to realize she might actually still need roads to drive her bike on, and the men who engineered and invented that bike to perfect it even further, well, then, good for her. Personally, I think she should stick to tricycles and dirt roads for a long time to come, while considering herself lucky there’s still someone there, selfless but somewhat misguided enough to keep holding it for her, so she doesn’t drop off it quite as often.

    But, hey, I’m also one of those _other_ men.

  • Iron Duke

    Might be worth pointing out she also recently criticized Rick Perry for refusing to implement regulations intended to reduce incidence of prison rape.

    No little mean comments or caveats or take that’s against men in general in there. But I did see at least one commenter decrying men who have empathy for these men, specifically complaining that people have more empathy for men than for female rape victims. Some tried to explained that many rape topics brought up on that blog are simply more debatable than “let’s jail scores of young men for trivialities like marijuana possession and put them in a giant rape box”.

  • Ohone

    > the lunacy of the “all Penis-in-Vagina sex is rape” crowd is obvious to everyone who is not a feminist>

    There is actually a large schism between the all piv is rape and the 3rd wavers we are dealing with, google “sex wars” – they recognise them as lunatics. They just don’t realise they are lunatics themselves.

  • John Narayan

    The only thing feminists smell is money.

    • John Narayan

      Feminists would campaign for Burkas made from kevlar if a buck could be made.

  • 2cyar

    I think that what Marcotti was saying is that Feminists should refrain from calling this particular seemingly consensual relationship sexual harassment…at least until the staffer changes her mind and decides that it was.

    It was always predicted that feminists would start throwing MRA’s crumbs to distract them. Personally, I will never be satisfied with crumbs…especially not microscopic ones that I can barely even see.

    MRA: “Men should have equal rights and equal treatment under the law”


    MRA: “Look! Something shiny!…….now what was I saying again?”

    • Copyleft

      Don’t be silly; the lesson here is that it was TWO WOMEN. And a woman can’t harass another woman (who works for her), or be guilty of adultery with another woman, because then a woman would be in the wrong.

      What universe do you think Marcotte lives in? It would be like admitting that a woman can commit rape, or that a black person could be racist.

  • Andybob

    August Løvenskiolds has detected a very recent change of gears in Amanda Marcott’s approach to addressing some gender-related issues. It is especially noticeable because this particular behemoth of feminist bombast has always been notorious for traversing the public discourse on such issues with all the finesse of a
    runaway bulldozer. One could almost smell the soot she belched at the end of
    every sentence.

    Few feminists have loped across our landscape with a more bizarre combination of
    flat-footed clumsiness and high-handed arrogance than Amanda Marcotte. This is
    the woman who long ago dismissed the MHRM as the ‘Abusers’ Lobby’ with such vehement disdain that it encased her in a force field of impenetrable ignorance concerning every aspect of our movement. She always treated AVfM like a boil on her bum: an annoying inconvenience she knew was there, but was too lazy and inflexible to examine personally – I’m sure Hugo Schwyzer offered to help.

    What is most palpable in Ms Marcotte’s attempt to rape-shame RAINN (linked to in Mr Løvenskiolds’ article) is her profound shock that such an entity would publicly disassociate itself from the rape-culture hysteria to which she has adamantly clinged, like a nervous stripper doing her first solo pole-dance. Throughout her article there
    is the unmistakably plaintive cry of why-oh-why would this influential organization undermine a platform that was serving her and the feminist establishment so well. One sensed her profound sense of betrayal.

    For once in her life, this career bigot actually listened to a dissenting voice, and the experience appeared to leave her genuinely dazed and confused. While it is doubtful that RAINN’s single public statement has guided a hopeless buffoon like Amanda Marcotte to an epiphany of enlightenment, it is entirely possible that it has encouraged her to adopt a less stridently dogmatic tone in her published
    proclamations. The oafish abandon with which she thumped away at her keyboard
    has given way to a more thoughtful, less destructive touch.

    It has actually dawned on Amanda Marcotte that declaring the Melissa Hixon Peacocks of the world to be victims of rape culture-driven sexual harassment makes
    feminists like her sound shrill, hopelessly out-of-touch and, worst of all, ludicrous – especially when such women are caught on camera enthusiastically consenting to a barely satisfying thirty seconds of office hanky-panky.

    It remains to be seen if this new dawning lasts until lunchtime, or stretches out to hitherto unexplored horizons of logic-based thinking for the hapless Amanda
    Marcotte. She makes no bones about the tactical nature of her position by advising that it’s “probably wise to avoid giving them [anti-feminists] ammunition” to use against her beloved ideology.

    This indicates that Amanda Marcotte has switched gears, not direction. If nothing else, it demonstrates her awareness of the growing scrutiny that she perceives as a potential threat to the narratives surrounding issues such as sexual harassment. Bringing other feminists on board will depend on whether or not she is as influential as she obviously thinks she is. One suspects that Ms Marcotte is in for a rude awakening when Jessica Valenti starts shrieking at her in videos – watch the spittle flying sideways.

    August Løvenskiolds has offered some delightfully optimistic speculation on what may be something very special going on inside Amanda Marcotte. A discernible kernel of common sense has found its way inside the gargantuan moral vacuum of this woman. Whether it survives and thrives is anyone’s guess. Mr Løvenskiolds, good soul that he is, certainly hopes so. I, on the other hand, can’t help feeling sorry for the kernel – it must be dark and lonely in there.

  • P.Lowig

    I’m a victim of flying Ogons ! So and WHO helps meeee ?!

  • crydiego

    It is the 2016 elections in the USA that will color everything soon
    and this may be part of it. People like Marcotte don’t change their spots.

    I believe the left will try to dress the MHRM up as conservatives
    and the conservatives will help them do it. By doing so they will split the
    MHRM in half and nullify any power it has; the left will get half and the right
    will get half. The left side is already in place with The Good Man ass-hats.

    Beware of anything or anyone that wants to be in close and
    help the cause in a grand way.

    I worry about the documentary that will be coming out during campaign
    time. I hope that they will make it completely clear that the MHRM does not and
    has not indorsed or supported any political side. If it doesn’t do that straight
    out I would have reasons to worry.

    • 2cyar

      “I believe the left will try to dress the MHRM up as conservatives…..”

      Very perceptive of you, apparently.

      “They (MRAs) were all conservative, too, with 84% identifying as “strong
      conservative” and another 11% identifying as “independent”, which is,
      like “libertarian”, a code word for a strong conservative who thinks of
      himself as an iconoclast. (Another 2% were just plain “conservative”,
      bringing the likely number of conservatives to 97%.) No surprises there.”

  • Susie Parker

    I can tell you, this past week, I’ve been tag-teamed on Facebook by several female school teachers (with some males chiming in, I’m not sure are teachers or not) in their late 50’s and early 60’s, defending Common Core curriculum.

    The contempt they have for their male students is about as complete and disheartening as anything I’ve ever witnessed.

    I’ve been hearing a lot of negative commenting about Common Core, CC instigated and copyrighted by BILL GATES & co, millions of dollars in lobbying effort to institute it nationwide, with no input in the curriculum from teachers and educators themselves.

    It started with a posted video of returning soldiers, smiling children, set to smarmy music with the message to just “trust us”, but otherwise provided no meat and potato facts about CC. “Trust us” like in “just pass Obamacare and we’ll read it later”? Trust us like in “If you like your healthcare plan you can keep it? Trust us like in “Read my lips, no new taxes”?

    I have no dog in this fight, my kids are adults, my Grandkids too young yet for school. I wanted to hear both negative and positive sides before coming to conclusions.

    I simply asked if CC had actually been empirically tested, how the curriculum compared to countries that scholastically rank higher than the U.S.’s, and what is being done for the boys in their classrooms who are 4 Xs more likely to suicide, drugged more than twice as much as girls, have little male presence in their schooling, and only have a 37% shot at graduating from college.


    You are ignorant. You are a man boob who fears feminists, You have questionable morals and values, you are a sheep and not a free thinker, you’ve swallowed conservative propaganda,(for the record, I’m not a conservative)OUR education level is far superior to those other ignorant educators and Teacher’s Unions who disagree with CC, and we are going to agree to disagree “’cause I’m a girlie girl”.

    My final reply was, and I left it at this; Do the parents of your male students know how much you despise them? Are you going to be saying these same things your “ignorant” student’s parents when they question CC? Would you be writing this in a public forum where the parents of your students could read it, or will you be couching your answers in “Trust me. I love your kids as much as you do” placating teacher terminology?

    I am loath to check back for their answers. Like driving past a car wreck. In my heart of hearts, I fear the answer is it’s obvious those parents really aren’t concerned for their sons and those teachers very well know it. Most are mothers who put feminism over their own son’s futures, and the future of their country without giving it a second thought.

    • DEDC

      What does CC have to do with feminism or gynocentrism? Not saying that schools aren’t anti-male, just wondering…

      • Susie Parker

        I stumbled into a conversation with a group of teachers, mostly female, and one thing lead to another. It was the most shockingly blatant bunch of anti male comments I’ve ever heard – all by currently employed school teachers. I didn’t mean CC had anything to do with the conversation – it’s just what lead me into a discussion with real live teachers.

  • Michał Lech

    She’ll keep it right until the nearest elections.

  • Francis Roy

    “But as much as feminists try to other me as a man, I reject the urge to
    other them as women, or even as feminists. I choose to hold on the hope –
    however faint – that they can, as individuals, grow out of their group
    hatred into a more nuanced understanding of the problems we face – the human problems.”


    • Scatmaster

      But never, ever, let our guard down!!!!!

  • Stephan Brun

    Heh. Sammich Mines. Good one.

  • Old_Fart_Henry
    • Mike Hunt

      She’s a professional troll.

  • Turbo

    John, I think Susie’s point here was that some people into their 50’s and 60’s can still hold these radical ideological views, and learn nothing about life outside of that ideology, even though they have grown older. I think Susie related the conversation about Common Core curriculum with these supposedly mature people as a way to demonstrate that point. I do not think Susie has intended to insult you in anyway at all. Respectfully John, I think you may have misinterpreted her comment. The only insults I see in her comment is the ones she was receiving in her Facebook conversation. Cheers.

    • Susie Parker

      Thank you.

      • Turbo

        No problem Susie. Just a misunderstanding I think.
        I liked August’s article, it shows that some positive things are happening even in the bowels of the toxic feminist hive. I think Marcotte will always be a man hater, it just seems to be in her blood. But if she feels she needs to tone down her bullshit to regain some credibility, then this is a good thing. People can think what ever they like, but it is what they say and do that is important. But your point here is also important as well, some never change, some are just too hateful, and some just never recover from the indoctrination. I will just throw out two names to support your point. Germane Greer, Alice Schwarzer.

  • Mike Hunt

    She doesn’t make a very attractive man either.

    • Damian

      I can see how she could be a very successful lesbian and considered attractive in that world.

  • Jason Gregory

    August, it’s interesting that you mention the Banhabib paper on the generalized and the concrete other. Banhabib actually makes an excellent critique of Platonic>Kantian>Rawlsian ethics here, but notice how she, like most “feminist-philosopher,” fails to fully acknowledge how these ethical systems are harmful to men.

    Instead, she paints men as the beneficiaries, even though it is men who primarily suffer the alienation, atomization, separation, and dehumanization (the Othering) of these systems. She fails to acknowledge that the primary beneficiaries of these systems are the women who are enabled by the men who suffer them to experience the close familial bonds of mothering, caring, and the particularistic relationships and interrelatedness of the “private” sphere.

    The alienation of these men from their families while away at work financially props up the ethics that she cherishes because those ethics exist only in the contextual setting of someone privileged enough to be at home and in the private sphere of family and children. Those ethics only exist for folks privileged enough to have a context in which that kind of self can develop through a rich experience of particular others, rather than through a shallow experience of “general others.”

    As such, the moral development of women, in terms of an “Ethics of Care,” has depended on the ability of women to procure for themselves an environment which allows for their development of self through their relations of self to particular others. In order for a man/father/husband to experience these close bonds, the woman/mother/wife has to grant him access to her particular sphere and often this access is contingent upon the hierarchical status of the man/father/husband. As such, his experience of self in relation to particular others is relegated to a proxy experience–his utility as a “labor machine.”