Of Course, Weeping Nazi Chris Cantwell Started as a 'Men's Rights' ...

Amanda Marcotte argues that "the world of online anti-feminism has become a gateway to white supremacy." In this horrible age of feminism, liberated women date whomever they want and leave bad marriages. It's so hard for entitled misogynists to get and control the submissive female partners that they need to boost their egos.

image source: Pepe, Cantwell (the article), text mine

... the world of online anti-feminism has become a gateway to white supremacy. While there hasn’t been any rigid academic analysis of this phenomenon, sites like We Hunted the Mammoth, which started as a way to monitor the various and overlapping worlds of online misogyny, have tracked that when men get together to gripe about their resentment of women’s growing independence, they often start drifting toward talking about “white genocide” and other white supremacist ideas.

The world of online misogynists is a complex maze. Some of the communities are geared towards older, divorced men. Some are “pick-up artist” sites, geared towards younger men who think they aren’t getting the female attention they believe they’re due. Some identify as “men going their own way,” which is to say giving up on women altogether. But what brings them together is anger over the fact that feminism has liberated women to date whomever they wish and leave marriages that aren’t working. This makes it much harder, in the “men’s rights” misogynist view, for men to acquire or keep the submissive female partners they feel entitled to.

Why hating women would lead so many men to hating nonwhite people is difficult to parse in logical terms. But racism and sexism aren’t rational ideologies and really aren’t bound by the basic rules of logic. At the root of both lies a thwarted sense of entitlement and a sense that women and people of color are somehow stealing what is the white man’s due. [emphasis mine]

We already know that online trolls were the early nucleus of the resurgent hate.

Views: 19

Replies to This Discussion

My thoughts now. Suppose it were possible:

1) to correct for the many differences in what boys and girls are taught from birth to puberty, and

2) to measure what might be hormone-caused selfishness for men and for women at various ages.

Suppose then the results, age on the X axis and selfishness on the Y axis, were shown as a line for men and a line for women.

There would be similaritues and differences. What might we conclude?

The differences in what boy and girls are taught are so many in kind and in degree that correcting for their effects might be impossible. What then?

... the many differences in what boys and girls are taught ...

I've heard of research finding that parents unconsciously treat girls and boys differently -- even as infants, in such things as how long parents let a baby cry before going to comfort her/him.

In "A Call to Men", Tony Porter speaks of how the all-too-ubiquitous, restrictive "man box" of rules "real men" and boys "should" follow led him to hurt people in his life. Read more at "Men who challenge men to stop violence".

RSS

line

Update Your Membership :

Membership

line

line

Nexus on Social Media:

line

© 2017   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service