Log in

View Full Version : MRA tools loose their shit over new MadMax movie



Sasha
13th May 2015, 14:02
Furious about Furiosa: Misogynists are losing it over Charlize Theron’s starring role in Mad Max: Fury Road

May 12 (http://wehuntedthemammoth.com/2015/05/12/furious-about-furiosa-misogynists-are-losing-it-over-charlize-therons-starring-role-in-mad-max-fury-road/)

Posted by David Futrelle (http://wehuntedthemammoth.com/author/manboobz/)

https://manboobz.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/madmax1979.jpg?w=604 (https://manboobz.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/madmax1979.jpg)Original poster for the 1979 Mad Max

So you may have heard vague rumors that there’s a new Mad Max film coming out. You also may have heard that it stars Charlize Theron as a shaven-headed postapocalyptical badass (http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/may/12/charlize-theron-women-will-survive-the-apocalypse) named Furiosa alongside Tom Hardy as Mr. Max.
Well, the manly men of the Manospshere are having none of it. On the always terrible Return of Kings, the most-trafficked blog in the Manosphere, Youtube bloviator Aaron Clarey issues a clarion call (http://www.donotlink.com/f3g7) to his fellow right-thinking men, urging them to

Not only REFUSE to see the movie, but spread the word to as many men as possible. … Because if [men] sheepishly attend and Fury Road is a blockbuster, then you, me, and all the other men (and real women) in the world will never be able to see a real action movie ever again that doesn’t contain some damn political lecture or moray about feminism, SJW-ing, and socialism.
Er, “moray?”
As Clarey sees it, the central flaw in this film that he hasn’t seen is, well, it’s going to be starring Charlize Theron as a shaven-headed postapocalyptical badass named Furiosa. And that’s just not right, because everyone knows that women are just too damn womeny to be postapocalyptical badasses.
Even worse: in one of the trailers for the film “Charlize Theron’s character barked orders to Mad Max. Nobody barks orders to Mad Max.”
Clarey also reports, with a kind of growing horror, that none other than Eve Ensler, of Vagina Monologues fame, was brought in to consult on the film. (And trust me, Clarey’s discomfort with Ensler has nothing to do with her issues with intersectionality (http://www.dailydot.com/politics/rosie-odonnell-eve-ensler-twitter/).)
Sure, Clarey acknowledges, Fury Road — at least on the surface — “looks like that action guy flick we’ve desperately been waiting for where it is one man with principles, standing against many with none.” But, he warns, despite not having actually seen even a minute of the actual film, nothing could be further from the truth!

[L]et us be clear. … This is the Trojan Horse feminists and Hollywood leftists will use to (vainly) insist on the trope women are equal to men in all things, including physique, strength, and logic. And this is the subterfuge they will use to blur the lines between masculinity and femininity, further ruining women for men, and men for women.
Lines between masculinity and femininity blurring! Rivers and seas boiling! Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes. The dead rising from the grave! Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together… mass hysteria! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3ZOKDmorj0)
Clarey worries that

men in America and around the world are going to be duped by explosions, fire tornadoes, and desert raiders into seeing what is guaranteed to be nothing more than feminist propaganda, while at the same time being insulted AND tricked into viewing a piece of American culture ruined and rewritten right in front of their very eyes.
You might think that someone this worried about the legacy of the original Mad Max might have noticed somewhere along the way that Mad Max is not actually a “piece of American culture” at all. It was an Australian film, filmed in Australia, directed by an Australian, and starring an American citizen who’d been living in Australia since the age of twelve.
I’m guessing that the director of Fury Road might have a somewhat more nuanced understanding of the original Mad Max than someone who doesn’t even know what country the movie was made in, especially given that the director of Fury Road, the director of the original Mad Max, the director of The Road Warrior and the director of Beyond Thunderdome are actually all the very same person (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0004306/?ref_=tt_ov_dr).
But over on Return of Kings the fellas are as furious about Furiosa as Clarey is. In the top comment to Clarey’s piece, with several dozen upvotes, someone calling himself “truth” complains that the evil feminists who run Hollywood are ignoring the immutable truths of gender.

Hollywood is a garbage propoganda machine which spews out this feminist drivel filth into the minds of today’s young audience. Even though science has told us and proven, that men are physically stronger than women, it is nonetheless discarded by the forces driving this feminist nonsense.
There is a sick agenda at play here, and it only continues to get worse over time. First this, and now the upcoming “Terminator Genisys” which shows Sarah Connor in a more heroic and superior position to that of Kyle Reese, really makes me wonder how much further down the toilet society is going to go down, in it’s ridiculous attempts to try and reverse the traditional gender and biological roles.
Because “traditional” and “biological” roles always seem to be the exact same thing to these guys.

It is clear that the brainwashing of the masses will continue to go on with the promotion of these absurd movies in conjunction with the whole “girl power” themes that are present in these films. Furthermore, factor in the indoctrination of the liberal schooling and educational system, there is no doubt, that masculinity will be attacked from all sides in attempt to make the female gender more superior. …
I guess from the damage that I am seeing on a daily basis being inflicted by the feminist movement, there is really no turning back. Men will continue to opt out of society and by rejecting to watch these kind of movies, can help to further cement this narrative. And if ever, should the manginas and white knights reach that epiphany when they realise they are not perceived as a credible voice in this feminist driven gynocentric matriarchy that we live in, then even they will opt out of society.
Huh. And, let me guess, once the men all “opt out of society,” it’ll collapse in a giant heap and desperate women will turn to men for help? No wonder these guys are so angry about Fury Road; it challenges their favorite apocalyptic fantasy. Call it Mad Max: I Told You *****es You’d Come Crawling Back to Me.

Women and feminists in general have without a doubt, proven that they are dysfunctional by nature and cannot be trusted with anything. And this movie helps to prove it.
FWIW, dude, the movie was directed by a man. It was written by men (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1392190/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_wr#writers). And even though it’s got a lot more women in it than your typical action movie, most of the named actors in it are male. But apparently, to guys like Clarey and “truth,” it only takes a few drops of female blood to contaminate an entire action film.

Always maintain your masculinity.
And once again it’s the guys who think of themselves as the most macho who are the ones most anxious about their masculinity.
Truth is also horrified by one of the posters (http://a.disquscdn.com/get?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn2-www.superherohype.com%2Fassets%2Fuploads%2Fgallery %2Fmad-max-fury-road_1%2F11110866_658246694280855_1682386295316885 693_o.jpg&key=TL3mT3-ZcPspmagA8BeiqQ&w=480&h=545) he’s seen for the film:

Even though the movie is called “Mad Max”, the poster clearly centres around Charlize Theron, while Tom Hardy looks like some ordinary guy in the background.
A woman’s face … in front of a man’s face! Can masculinity survive this terrible assault?
Slashfund complains that in the poster it “looks like he is wearing a muzzle like her *****.”
Well, not really. Anyone who’s seen the original Max Max and its first two sequels may remember that a lot of the characters wore weird headgear and creepy masks; this was intended to make them look scary and, you know, postapocalyptic. Max’s new mask is no different.
Clark Kent whines

Where I can’t stand these female characters in kickass movies is when it is so damn obvious that they are forcing the female character in just to appeal to the blue-pill masses. The whole point of Mad Max is that he is the most hardened self-respecting man in the post-apocalyptic world. He lived through the decline, and thus carries all the grief of having been strong enough to see what the world has become.
To turn Mad Max upside down and make it into a feminist flick is horribly telling of our times. Rather than creating new films to depict the world from a women’s perspective, we take the great myths of men and boys and rewrite them to make women happy.
What? Mad Max is a “great myth of men and boys” now? It’s a movie made in 1979, not a tale told around the campfire by our ancient ancestors. And don’t any of you Return of Kingers remember Beyond Thunderdome, the second Mad Max sequel, released six years after the original? You know, the one co-starring Tina Turner, stomping around like a badass as the ruthless ruler of Bartertown?
Like it or not, fellas, but badass women are part of Mad Max canon.
MajorStyles, for his part, suggests that the film may be part of a sinister plot to con men into liking women with (gasp!) short hair — a major (http://wehuntedthemammoth.com/2014/01/23/return-of-kings-beware-the-insidious-danger-of-the-short-haired-girl/) Manosphere bugaboo (http://wehuntedthemammoth.com/2015/04/15/pickup-guru-roosh-v-women-who-cut-their-hair-short-are-committing-self-harm-and-should-be-monitored-by-authorities/).

And what’s the end game of all this horse shit? That Alpha men will start finding bald, androgyonous women with anger issues attractive? Yeah, when pigs fly…
Again, another fail on the part of Team Feminism. As it has been noted many times, they do not get to order men what to be attracted to. Erections cannot be legislated. Only a man of supreme thirst would find this angynous thing attractive.
And the women who choose to impersonate Theron’s look in this movie will always be relagated to the same position – bridesmaid, cat lady, or beta male abuser.
TS77RP1, meanwhile, wants his fellow men to think of the children. And what he thinks about the children — specifically, those of the female persuasion — is genuinely horrifying.
Seriously: if you’re having a decent day so far, or, hell, a crappy one — basically, if you’re a having any sort of day so far, you may want to skip the rest of this post. No joke.
.
.
Ok, if you’re still with me, here we go:

The only way back is to begin punishing ambition in our daughters and in all female children. They need to be physically and psychologically disciplined to be servile and deferential and they unfortunately need to have it beaten into them that they should NEVER trust their own judgement and always seek guidance and permission of their male headships.
Please tell me this monster doesn’t have a daughter.

My daughter would be turned out with nothing but a shirt on her back if she so much as looked at a college website or played with her brother’s educational toys.
Aw, fuck.

She would be belted to the point of being unable to sit if she exhibited confidence in decision making.
Fucking hell. A proud abuser.

I don’t want my wife to step foot out of the house unless her every dime and minute spent can be accounted for and executed in conjuncture with my approval. My daughter will exude obedience and timidity for whoever her future husband is and it’s imperative that all Christian Men demand nothing less within their own homes. Playtime for feminazis and the left is over. This is our world and our heritage to protect. Let the cultural war begin!
No words.
In a followup comment, he assures one skeptic that his wife and daughter are indeed real.

I do in fact implement this in my own home and practice what I preach vehemently. I have a daughter and sons and they are being raised to know that they are unequivocally different and 100% not equal. My wife is from a highly devout family and she was cowed long ago into obedience by her powerful, alpha father. I kinda won the life lottery >:^)
I can only hope that he’s bullshitting in an attempt to impress the Return of Kings regulars.
But impress them he does, winning upvotes and an awestruck comment by englishbob:

Wow! Its like you have a mini Saudi Arabia right in your home!
Apparently hatred of women trumps hatred of Muslims on Return of Kings.
I have no idea if Mad Max: Fury Road is actually going to be a good film. But I hope it does well, very well, if for no other reason than to spite these assholes.


http://wehuntedthemammoth.com/2015/05/12/furious-about-furiosa-misogynists-are-losing-it-over-charlize-therons-starring-role-in-mad-max-fury-road/

Armchair Partisan
13th May 2015, 15:03
Please tell me this monster doesn’t have a daughter. [...] Aw, fuck. [...] Fucking hell. A proud abuser.

I wonder if it would be possible to involve child protective services in this case? Someone really should try.

On the other hand, I'm skeptical of giving too much attention to Roosh V and his little misogynist cult. The real misogynist threat IMO comes from the moderate wing that "opposes feminism and supports gender equality" and "are no sexists, but...". They are the ones that understand how to use ambiguous language and selective (mis)use of information to dupe people. The ones who openly brag about enslaving women and complain that not turning into a decaying, rotting, half-dead mess is a sign of increasing feminization (http://www.rooshv.com/men-must-groom-more-than-cats-to-get-laid) are way too much on the fringe to be relevant.

Sasha
13th May 2015, 15:13
the fringes define the space in the center...

just look at US abortion opposition, just because they are not blowing people up or executing them the people harrasing women in front of clinics and the repubs drafting insane laws get to play as reasonable participants in an equal democratic debate.

Anglo-Saxon Philistine
13th May 2015, 15:19
The thing is, the open anti-abortion bigots are a sizeable and organised movement in the US. M"R""A"s are a bunch of manchildren who cry on the Internet. I imagine that without people publishing stories about them they would slink off into their corner to have a cry and a wank at the same time, and the world would be pretty much the same as it always has been.

Sasha
13th May 2015, 15:47
anti-abortion bigots here cry in their little religious tracts because anytime they come near an abortion clinic or the political debate they get doused with cold water and hounded of the street (figuratively in the later case, literally in the former)

Rafiq
13th May 2015, 16:08
Oh, thank Christ of this is to be the place of the movie! The original Mad Max movies, while excellent movies, had a reactionary undertone that was typical of the time period.

I most certainly hope this one doesn't resort to the same obnoxious cliche themes about human nature or whatever, especially since it heavily features sexual slavery. What I heard was that the villain in this owns everyone's access to water - so that would definitely be good Communist propaganda! (Joking of course) but in the previous one some community owned the oil and the objective was to defend it against the barbarous hordes of the insane. So the shift here might be something to look forward to seeing: from defending private property to destroying it.

Sasha
13th May 2015, 16:18
haven't seen it yet myself but this review [SPOILERS] goes into both the political/feminist undertones of the movie and the fact that its apparently also heaps of cinematic brilliant high octane fun; http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2015/05/11/mad-max-fury-road-review-a-modern-action-masterpiece

Counterculturalist
13th May 2015, 16:18
I have no idea how major a force MRAs are "on the street," but it doesn't matter. Their talking points - that feminism has "gone too far," that women often falsely accuse men of rape, that men are a persecuted minority - are becoming increasingly part of mainstream public discourse. It's starting to be taken for granted that opposition to women's rights is a reasonable "other side" that has to be presented in the interest of "balance," much in the same way that climate change deniers or creationists are often given equal time in the media.

We need to show that there really are no "moderate" MRAs who don't want to turn the clock back to the Victorian era. And, especially in light of MRAs appropriating language that's usually associated with social justice, we need to highlight the sickening links between MRAs and anti-semites, homophobes, anti-immigration activists and other bigots.

Armchair Partisan
13th May 2015, 16:33
Their talking points - that feminism has "gone too far," that women often falsely accuse men of rape, that men are a persecuted minority - are becoming increasingly part of mainstream public discourse.

If we view that more optimistically, though - that means that feminism has already achieved some successes and some 'notoriety' (in the good sense). Such a political climate is to be contrasted with the situation 1-2 decades ago, where there was no discourse over the matter from either side because what counts as explicitly anti-feminist and misogynist today was viewed by many as self-evident truths. There can be no reaction without something to react to.

Sasha
13th May 2015, 16:52
Also MRAs still more relevant than 9 out of 10 of the letter bingo trot sects this board obsesses about...

The Garbage Disposal Unit
13th May 2015, 17:30
Enh. Still no Tank Girl.

BIXX
13th May 2015, 17:57
"Only a man of supreme thirst would find this androgynous thing attractive"

I wish this sentence was about me.

Anglo-Saxon Philistine
13th May 2015, 18:10
anti-abortion bigots here cry in their little religious tracts because anytime they come near an abortion clinic or the political debate they get doused with cold water and hounded of the street (figuratively in the later case, literally in the former)

And to the extent that that's true, I would expect socialists in the Dutchlands to focus, not on this allegedly insignificant fringe movement, but on the very real threat that the Dutch bourgeois state poses to women - which includes restrictions on abortion. If, instead, they focused on these nobodies, I would find that strange to say the least.

I mean, as far as I can tell the reason for the obsession is the belief that:


I have no idea how major a force MRAs are "on the street," but it doesn't matter. Their talking points - that feminism has "gone too far," that women often falsely accuse men of rape, that men are a persecuted minority - are becoming increasingly part of mainstream public discourse.

And first of all that's not even true. As any dyed-in-the-wool macho man what they think about "men's rights activists", and first they'll look at you funny, then they'll laugh as you're explaining what the MRA are, then they'll conclude that they're a bunch of whining [insert homophobic slur]. There is no reason for the average right-wing man (or dinosaur "leftist") to retreat into this paranoid fantasy where men are a poor persecuted minority because they're well aware of the fact that, if we ignore other factors like class (a big thing to ignore! but that's how they think), they're on top of society.

And second, of course, many of us are Marxists, and we don't think society is changed by "discourse", but by the movements in the material base. How have the "MRA" affected women negatively, in a structural sense? I mean, sure, individual MRA have hurt women and I wouldn't object to a brick being thrown in the direction of their servers or their heads, but taken collectively, they're not this massively important malign influence. I think many people imagine a past full of love and respect for women that just wasn't there. I mean, god's sake, I've heard people refer nostalgically to the New Left era, apparently blissfully unaware that the New Left was reacting to a horrifying degree of oppression, of women and other minorities.


Also MRAs still more relevant than 9 out of 10 of the letter bingo trot sects this board obsesses about...

Yes, socialist groups - not just Trotskyist groups (most Trotskyist groups are garbage anyway) - are irrelevant. But there you have it, this site is ostensibly about socialist politics, which means they're going to be mentioned quite a lot. But as far as I'm aware, this site is not about arguments between various manchildren on the Internet. MRA, like the "Dark Enlightenment", the Horse People, otherkin etc., need to be filed under N for Neckbeard and we need to move on.

Counterculturalist
13th May 2015, 18:48
And second, of course, many of us are Marxists, and we don't think society is changed by "discourse", but by the movements in the material base.

Understood, and honestly, I'm not saying that arguing against MRAs is the #1 task of the left, or that it will single-handedly eliminate misogyny for that matter.

I know you're not seeing an increasing backlash against women's rights, but it is happening, and has been for years. Maybe most people don't know about MRAs, but they sure know their talking points.

A possible basis for the popularity of these talking points might be - as you say - the invisibility of class issues. A man who struggles to make a living might be unaware of the class division that keeps him from living the life he feels he should be able to live. Without this knowledge, he looks for a scapegoat, and that's where men's rights rhetoric starts to look appealing.

Of course I'm oversimplifying, and, again, I don't mean to say that this is the be-all and end-all of revolutionary praxis. I do think that arguing against reactionary ideas is useful.

Mr. Piccolo
13th May 2015, 19:52
A possible basis for the popularity of these talking points might be - as you say - the invisibility of class issues. A man who struggles to make a living might be unaware of the class division that keeps him from living the life he feels he should be able to live. Without this knowledge, he looks for a scapegoat, and that's where men's rights rhetoric starts to look appealing.

Of course I'm oversimplifying, and, again, I don't mean to say that this is the be-all and end-all of revolutionary praxis. I do think that arguing against reactionary ideas is useful.

You are correct. Many MRAs fail to realize that their unhappiness is caused by the capitalist system. Many of the battles between men and women are the product of having to live under a stressful and alienating system that displaces frustration onto others.

Its like the scene in Saturday Night Fever where John Travolta talks about his father's boss dumping on his father, then his father comes home and dumps on his mother, then his mother dumps on him, then he dumps on his girlfriend.

That being said, some MRAs, like the ones with ties to racists, religious extremists, and other right-wing movements are just outright reactionaries. There is probably no reaching these people.

Redistribute the Rep
13th May 2015, 21:18
I like David a lot, his blog gets kind of trite after a while though.

As others have said, MRAs don't really have much of a real world presence. I sometimes use MRA as an insult with my friends, especially when the situation has nothing to do with gender. I would say "Mens Rights Activist" because it sounds sillier but I can't say that without laughing.


I have no idea how major a force MRAs are "on the street," but it doesn't matter. Their talking points - that feminism has "gone too far," that women often falsely accuse men of rape, that men are a persecuted minority - are becoming increasingly part of mainstream public discourse.

Some of their rhetoric has seeped into the mainstream, but I wouldn't say they've had much of an influence in terms of actually introducing novel ideas to the mainstream. That women lie about rape is a view that's been around long before MRAs, it wasn't really caused by them. They just take mainstream sexism that's always been around and give it a more narrow, sociopathic focus.

Counterculturalist
15th May 2015, 12:40
All of this aside, I saw the film last night, and all I have to say is: GO FUCKING SEE IT.

Anglo-Saxon Philistine
15th May 2015, 13:20
Understood, and honestly, I'm not saying that arguing against MRAs is the #1 task of the left, or that it will single-handedly eliminate misogyny for that matter.

The point is that it won't affect the structural oppression of women (most of it due to people who are not misogynist in the sense of openly hating women) at all. And even if you are concerned strictly with the attitudes people express, M"R""A"s are insignificant, and most of the "arguing" consists of trying to prove that women's liberation is good for men as well. Which is hardly surprising - to argue with someone, you have to agree with them on something, here on the idea that the relation of men to women's liberation is important.


I know you're not seeing an increasing backlash against women's rights, but it is happening, and has been for years. Maybe most people don't know about MRAs, but they sure know their talking points.

The rollback of reforms won in the sixties and seventies started as soon as the formerly militant, street-level movement for women's liberation, for all its occasional faults, turned into a pressure group for the Democratic Party. This has nothing to do with this particular group of Internet-based manchildren. I don't see anything special about the last few years - perhaps if I wanted to be morose I would speculate that reality has finally caught up with academic feminists in their little bubble.

And I think it's silly to suggest that most people "know their talking points". If you started talking about red pills and male abortions and whatever, do you think you would get anything but blank stares? I think people on RL consistently overestimate the extent to which people care about crap on Internet.


A possible basis for the popularity of these talking points might be - as you say - the invisibility of class issues. A man who struggles to make a living might be unaware of the class division that keeps him from living the life he feels he should be able to live. Without this knowledge, he looks for a scapegoat, and that's where men's rights rhetoric starts to look appealing.

Of course I'm oversimplifying, and, again, I don't mean to say that this is the be-all and end-all of revolutionary praxis. I do think that arguing against reactionary ideas is useful.

No, you misunderstood what I was trying to say. My point was that men generally feel like they're the ones in a position of power vis-a-vis women, so they don't need these paranoid fantasies about how they're a poor persecuted minority. That's why "MRA" idiocy will never resonate in a wider social context; they want to uphold traditional gender roles but fail at being traditional men themselves.

Counterculturalist
15th May 2015, 13:46
I more or less agree with most of your response, but I'm not so sure about:


That's why "MRA" idiocy will never resonate in a wider social context; they want to uphold traditional gender roles but fail at being traditional men themselves.

You may be right, though. I think there is a section of people who would relish the chance to blame their inability to live up to "traditional" gender roles on women in general. Maybe their influence will end up being negligible; we can certainly hope so.

Sasha
17th May 2015, 19:12
Still think MRA's are harmless? RoK going full anti-Semite now; http://www.returnofkings.com/62716/the-damaging-effects-of-jewish-intellectualism-and-activism-on-western-culture

Atsumari
17th May 2015, 20:16
top comment
"This is an article geared for "that which needs to be said, but it not".
I'll say this much: the Germans didn't just wake up one day and decide to hate Jews for no reason. The Germans had a front row seat to what communism was doing to Russia and German Jews were big on communism.
Let the sparks fly. Let the heavens fall. Truth must be known. This must be discussed once and for all."
What annoys me more is that he used my signature.

Anglo-Saxon Philistine
17th May 2015, 20:18
Still think MRA's are harmless? RoK going full anti-Semite now; http://www.returnofkings.com/62716/the-damaging-effects-of-jewish-intellectualism-and-activism-on-western-culture

I don't think individual M"R""A"s are harmless. They have been known to hurt and kill women over their sick paranoid fantasies. I think their "movement" is insignificant, and that focusing on the manchildren over more important factors means a bad analysis of women's oppression. I don't see how what you've posted is supposed to change my mind. I'm not surprised that M"R""A"s are generally anti-Semitic, as well as anti-Black, homophobic etc. Bigotry is like cockroaches, there's never just one or two. And I don't think it would be any better if they were "just" misogynists. But they don't have any street presence, any social power to make their sick dreams a reality. To focus on them is tantamount to focusing on "National Bonehillism" (anyone remember that from back in the day on RL?).

Lily Briscoe
18th May 2015, 00:36
Still think MRA's are harmless? RoK going full anti-Semite now; http://www.returnofkings.com/62716/the-damaging-effects-of-jewish-intellectualism-and-activism-on-western-culture

LOL


The book proposes that Sigmund Freud, a Jew, pushed psychoanalysis to break down traditional pair bonding in gentiles
Wow, these guys are playing to an even more marginal group of nutjob cartoon characters than I originally thought.

OGG
18th May 2015, 01:14
Infuriating