Propagan-do

Judo, Aikido, and many of the other "soft" martial arts operate on a principle of redirecting your opponents attacks against them. There is a similar principle in the sphere of PR and propaganda, an idea that by stealing your opponents arguments one can in effect, use their own attack against them. When done well it is a frightfully effective tactic; when done poorly, its laughable. For years now feminist have had a Propagan-do saying, "Patriarchy hurts men too". Essentially the idea is that the traditional standards of manliness, by requiring men to cultivate, practise, and master the manly virtues, places an unfair and harmful burden on men. Its a beautifully crafted piece of Propagan-do, as it gives weak men a justification for their weakness and a channel by which to attack standards they can not meet. It's a very seductive idea, as all invitations to weakness are.

But Propagand-do attempts, when made by those without the guile, intelligence, or craft necessary to use it effectively is laughably transparent and inept. Such was the case recently when Ragnell the Fat (AKA Lisa Fortuner at the newsarama blog) the eponymous grand dame of "When fangirls attack", attempted to use the MadMan's owns post on the feminine superiority agenda, to in effect, argue that no such thing exists.

I have the give the giant fem-beast an A for effort, even it was an utterly transparent and laughable attempt to buy her cause political cover. The problem of course is, the very attitudes she claims "make her want to punch something" are a natural outgrowth of feminist propaganda over the last several decades. After all don't all good feminists know that all manly men are really just violent, nasty, brutish, raping, misogynistic, cavemen? Don't we after all beat, abuse, abandon, manipulate, and oppress women in an effort to protect our privilege? Isn't that why domestic violence laws, family court laws, child support laws, divorce laws, abortions laws, employment laws, anti-discrimination laws, the sentencing and guilt gap and many others all have to be written to protect women from us patriarchal men due to the rape-culture we have created? If men are not, by nature, sexist, misogynist pigs who objectify women while simultaneously using and manipulating them for our own pleasure before beating raping and killing them; then why do women need so many specialised laws to protect, coddle and support and excuse them? If Men are not the partiarchal guardians of the rape culture then why do liberal colleges need "sexual harassment workshops" and why do corporations need to send men into "sensitivity training" anytime we offend some thin-skinned harridan? If men are not violent buffoons unable to control their brutish instincts, then why must domestic violence laws be written to assume the man is the aggressor? Why must judges award TRO's to any woman who requests one, no matter how ridiculous her argument? If men are not, in fact, insensate testosterone poisoned neanderthals, why then must family courts ensure the children are not raised by these oafs, in all but the most extreme circumstances?

What I find even more incredulous, and quite frankly ballsy about her attempt at Propagan-do, is her final line though, "And they say feminists hate men.". In what was the only piece of her work that showed any type of intelligence, Raggy attempts, after "decrying" the treatment of Wonderman, to use this line to cement the central thrust of her article in ones mind. Essentially this is "I am a feminist and I am complaining about this, therefore feminism does not endorse such a position" even more ridiculously it implies that those who wrote "Countdown #11", were not themselves feminists. The problem with that of course, is that Justin Gray, and Jimmy Palmiotti, the books creators, are both confirmed feminists themselves.

Sad, but then what can you expect? Feminists will not admit thier real agenda, untill all men who are not castrated are in chains.