But a younger generation of feminists has embraced what Slate writer Amanda Hess calls “ironic misandry”. Hess wrote last year that the rise in popularity of “male tears” mugs and man-hating inspired shirts and crafts serves as a sort of fuck-you to the constant barrage of harassment that feminists often face: “On its most basic level, ironic misandry functions like a stuck-out tongue pointed at a playground bully.”Which is to say, it's okay for her to be unpleasant to men, to hold things they consider affronts in utter contempt — but entirely wrong for men to do the same to her. Hypocrites like Valenti have no self-awareness, and represent a very real form of entitled behavior, that of the spoiled brat.
Tuesday, March 24, 2015
Winning The Victimhood Lottery
It's an easy and fun game to replace a lot of feminist screeds with "black", or in Janet Bloomfield's latest piece at ThoughtCatalog, "Jew", and see just how awful they sound. They're not all equally terrible — some map poorly because, yes, there are qualitative differences between men and women. But one clear winner is shiny hate machine (and first entrant) Jessica Valenti, whose column claiming it "wouldn't matter" if feminists hate men provides an interesting insight into how bigots justify their bigotry. She lazily wheels out the Eliot Rodger killings as evidence that "[w]hen men hate women, they kill us", conveniently eliding the fact that four of the six people he killed were men (PDF). But the really fun part is this passage: