Sunday, February 12, 2012

Swedish feminists: men must sit with their legs crossed

I wish I could state confidently that this is some sort of a prank. But it seems to be serious. A Swedish feminist group has set up a website in which they post photos of men sitting with legs apart on public transport. This they consider to be an act of masculinist power over women. From their manifesto:

Macho in the public transport system is a standard critical action group. We were created to draw attention to a normalized and often invisible and unconscious power of expression in a casual and communal area. The trains, buses, commuter trains and subways take more space than you physically have, by example, by spreading your legs or falling down on the seat is a concrete example of how power and masculinity co-create. Taking over someone else's site is a symbolic and active recreation, not only of power but also of a stereotypical masculinity.

We believe in a world where gender does not play a part in the opportunities, rights and responsibilities we have. Male, female, power and non power is created by social structures. Who can and will power is not a biological fact but a natural occurrence and re-created all of us.

It may not sound like a much problem when there is rape, starvation, beatings, sexual harassment and unequal pay for equal work. That's not true. In a world that is so clearly marked by a gender power structure all the little details are important.

Guys are taking more space in many situations, particularly in public transport. We want to highlight and problematize why girls and boys are different.  Why does the stereotypical macho man sit more widely?  How does the way one sits in public areas recreate a structural advantage for men?

The google translation may not be perfect, but it gives you an idea of what the group is about.  They believe in the standard left-liberal idea that society has been constructed to enact male power over women and that therefore both masculinity and sex distinctions ought to be deconstructed in order to bring about equal rights.

They seem to take this left-liberal idea so earnestly that they believe that a man sitting on a train with his legs a little apart is an expression of male power over women. Here's the kind of photo they take to demonstrate their cause:

Naughty Swedish male

The first comment placed by a Swedish woman, Jenny, under the photo above reads:

My guy usually sits cross-legged because it is so easy! Just like me...and he is super manly! Cheer him!

Unless I've missed some irony in this comment, Jenny seems to think we should applaud her boyfriend for sitting with his legs crossed just like she does.

The reaction from Swedish men? Some seem to have reacted too defensively, arguing they have to sit with their legs apart for the sake of comfort or health. That's giving these feminists way too much ground.

But to give Swedish men some credit, someone went to the trouble of setting up a spoof site - see here.

28 comments:

  1. Feminism is a giant shit test. Obey their rules and disqualify yourself as a potential suitor.

    ReplyDelete
  2. That spoof site is really well done. I think they nailed it with this line:

    "This woman may seem to look happy. She is not, it's a forced smile that is part of the gender order..."

    Lol, that's pretty much perfect.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "Feminism is a giant shit test. Obey their rules and disqualify yourself as a potential suitor."

    QFT

    ReplyDelete
  4. This is going to sound a little vulgar, but I don't know else to make the point. Isn't it ironic how much, er, crotch-watching these man-hating feminists end up doing? I mean each of their photos pretty much zeroes in on you know where. Talk about paying homage to the patriarchy.

    Also, regarding "Jenny's" comment,

    "My guy usually sits cross-legged because it is so easy! Just like me...and he is super manly! Cheer him!

    Isn't the very concept of "manliness" tabu to these types? If I remember Twisty correctly, don't the radical feminists (and I think the trainnazis have qualified themselves) think sex distinctions should be abolished altogether? If that's so, then why does Jenny expect them to "cheer" on her boyfriend for expressing whatever attributes of manhood they haven't gotten around to forbidding yet?

    That's one thing that obscene commenter on the other post had right: Most people really don't think through the consequences of their politics. That's why, as you said too, Mr. Richardson, it's important to persuade the political class. Regular Joes just aren't likely to care, and God bless them for it. Otherwise, this world would be far more freakishly out of whack than it already is.

    ReplyDelete
  5. " they believe that a man sitting on a train with his legs a little apart is an expression of male power over women"

    They're right. Ask Roissy. It's a physical expression of self-confidence. As Anonymous says above, feminism is a shit test.

    Although, having read Roosh's thing about Danish women sincerely hating confident men, if Sweden's anything like that, maybe it's not a shit test. Screw 'em, either way.

    ReplyDelete
  6. " they believe that a man sitting on a train with his legs a little apart is an expression of male power over women"

    They're right. Ask Roissy. It's a physical expression of self-confidence. As Anonymous says above, feminism is a shit test.

    Although, having read Roosh's thing about Danish women sincerely hating confident men, if Sweden's anything like that, maybe it's not a shit test. Screw 'em, either way.

    ReplyDelete
  7. No doubt this applies only to native Swedish men. They wouldn't dare try to pull this on Muslim men.

    Multiculturalism trumps feminism . . . every time.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I'm going to make a point of sitting with my legs apart and scratching my crotch next time I ride the subway.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The spoof site is Awesome!

    ReplyDelete
  10. I can't physically do this.
    Hasn't it been noted that US politicians all cross their legs.

    ReplyDelete
  11. My guy usually sits cross-legged because it is so easy! Just like me...and he is super manly! Cheer him!

    Translation: My guy is soooo super-conservative... but he supports so many liberal things!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Isn't the very concept of "manliness" tabu to these types? If I remember Twisty correctly, don't the radical feminists (and I think the trainnazis have qualified themselves) think sex distinctions should be abolished altogether? If that's so, then why does Jenny expect them to "cheer" on her boyfriend for expressing whatever attributes of manhood they haven't gotten around to forbidding yet?

    Great highlight of the contradiction and the paradox of the first commenter (probably a feminist) cheering on her "manly boyfriend".

    ReplyDelete
  13. There are feminists who do seem willing to employ appeals to manhood as an emotional persuasive technique. But they use it to try to persuade men to adopt some kind of non-mascline goal of androgyny, e.g. "If you were really a man you wouldn't mind doing this non-masculine thing we want you to do".

    But, yes, the emotional appeal to masculinity does contradict the general feminist emphasis on masculinity as a fictive and oppressive category.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Feminism is a giant shit test.

    (Warning: teal deer crossing.)

    If so, apparently its bluff is never going to be called. The "traditional right" or alt-right or whatever you want to call it keeps analyzing and re-analyzing every feminist lunacy that comes down the pike, as if there were yet something meaningful and useful that could yet be winkled out by re-hashing the babble over and over and over again...(Hmmm, of whose behavior is that reminiscent? And this from the sort of guys who will advise you that listening to what women *say* is a complete waste of time.)

    Mark, I like your stuff and respect you, and I regret it if I come across here as hypercritical and dismissive. I don't even disagree with you...but, we already know Swedish feminists are crazy. That they (along with a host of other things in the West) just keep getting crazier and crazier ought to indicate that further brow-furrowing and chin-pulling and efforts at analysis and rational persuasion, from what is after all a quite marginal group of "alt" or "traditional" rightists, isn't going to effect much.

    Let me expand - a week or so ago you reported on the outrageous anti-white comments of a Dr. Teo in Australia. Here was a man from another group, with serene arrogance, and with no indication that felt he was doing anything imprudent or at all dangerous to his comfortable place in society, instructing the members of your group that it was now time for you to f*** off and die, and leave your patrimony to a better sort.

    Infuriating? Yes. What was your response? Well, apparently you thought the most important thing was to clarify how this tied in with feminism, and feminism's dehumanization of men, and
    how feminist self-serving and unfairness provoked such a visceral response in men, and the tremendously important points of difference between conservative traditionalists and liberal MR groups in their shared visceral response to the dehumanization of white men by feminists. All fine and well, but, oddly, the jaw-dropping effrontery of a man who was waving you and yours out of history, with all the apparent blessings and support of the men, white and non-white, who control the levers of power in this world, was reduced to a mere introduction or digression. A warm up, if you will, unimportant in itself, before getting on to the real issues.

    (character limit reached - cont'd)

    ReplyDelete
  15. (cont'd)

    But I'm starting to wonder if feminism, which was a natural progression of the liberal worldview (endorsed and promoted from the beginning by plenty of white men), has gotten crazier and crazier because it's now a part of a vicious feedback loop wherein the critique of white men, which may have burnt itself out as a passing social phase in more homogeneous white societies, has developed, by virtue of the importation of large numbers of non-whites into white countries (itself an extension of the liberal project), into an out-of-control, virulent, plague. A virulence that at this point has to be addressed by confronting the offending men precisely on their anti-whiteness, not arguing with feminists.

    After all, white women do not derive any real benefit from the emasculation and dehumanization of white men, so one would expect the "infection" to be self-correcting. But non-whites derive enormous and obvious benefits from being able to waltz in and claim the (very fine) patrimony of white men.

    Did Teo's serene, confident, massive in-your-face insult to white men receive anything in the way of a confident, masculine pushback from outraged white men? I'll bet that, apart from perhaps a flurry of impotent online newspaper comments and blogger foot-stamping, there was nothing. Do you think that women, who we're assured are always unconsciously evaluating status and alpha-hood and responding to it, regardless of the rationalizations they feed themselves, don't notice this?

    Shit test, indeed. I suspect that the accelerating craziness of feminism is precisely that - an unconscious recognition that white men aren't responding in any meaningful and organized way to real outrages from other males. If fact, the majority of women, who are never exposed to any but "mainstream" views, see even the most powerful white men constantly either putting down less powerful white men, or themselves groveling and endlessly apologizing to ever-more-aggrieved and obnoxious non-whites. So just patiently explaining the flaws of the feminist worldview, or just standing up to feminists only, isn't going to do anything to stop the crazy. (And I don't wonder at all that this lack of normal masculine response is the source of the accelerating aggressiveness - of all forms - against whites by non-whites.)

    ReplyDelete
  16. "I'm going to make a point of sitting with my legs apart and scratching my crotch next time I ride the subway."

    Ditto

    ReplyDelete
  17. I'll be taking the bus home in about half an hour. And, thanks to this article, I will finally be aware of just how oppressive I'm being to those around me.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Rohan Swee,

    The best form of confidence, male or otherwise, comes from a sense of power and belief that you can overcome obstacles. This belief simply by itself can give you the confidence to overcome obstacles and as such can be self fulfilling. Such a belief should not come out of thin air, or wishful thinking, and should be supported by society, but most importantly it should develop from the sense that the individual has in their skills to overcome life issues. This can be contrasted to strategies which allow men to opt, and for instance, play computer games, which doesn't let you build any useful skills at all.

    The sort of "victim competition" that I suspect you guys engage in in the MRA movement is not conducive to building a sense of power or improving men's skills at life. Having said that the one area you do seem keen to encourage men to grow in is in "game". Which is a game of ruthlessness and "chicken" with the opposite sex, "I'm going to push you to the limit, will you blink first or will I?" These sort of tactics have the potential to morally impoverishing to men. Again this will not build them up into strong people but instead can lead them into being potentially opportunistic thieves.

    There is no room for the Golden Rule in game, therefore I suspect there is no room for Christianity in it. Please feel free to counter this if you like. Despite many weaknesses in the practice of modern Christianity, Christians still tend to have substantially greater longevity in their marriages today. Why is this? Because Christians don't, or shouldn't, put themselves first and this goes for either sex. Putting "me" first is of course a founding principle of the Men's movement is it not?

    Given this priority we shouldn't be surprised that one of your first instincts is to criticise a traditionalist site, a movement not focused on individualism, and indeed extend this logic to see traditionalism as the cause of every problem in society.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I agree with Rohan Swee. Something will eventually have to give for this trend to stop. It may very well be the genocide of whites.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Obviously Rohan Swee has got better things to do than reply to posts.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Men are not actually able to cross their legs at the knee like women do - our hip joints are set differently.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Good post by Rohan Swee. Jesse_7, I don't see the relevance of your "response" to what's he's written here. Are you referring to his post here or to other things he has written in the past? Also, I didn't see his post as an attack on Mark or those who identify with the philosophy of this site. I thought he was just trying to take the argument to the next level. He can speak for himself, but when he referred to "the 'traditional right', the alt-right or whatever", I assumed he was including himself under that general rubric.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Complete and utter bullshit . End of .
    Taking photos of someones crotch is sexual harassment and viewing that person as an object. The so called feminists on this website obviously see men as objects unfree to choose a posture in a free society merely because of their gender who should not have freedom of posture and movement. When someone sits down on a train or bus or chair and if they are the first person to get there then they enjoy the space and stretch out and relax. Then those with good manners offer their seat to an old or disabled person etc or simply make space for others. This kind of criticism has it's roots in some kind of dystopian Nazism.
    Theres no need for overnanalysis either . The women or feminists who set up with a website with crotch pictures are disgusting neurotic pigs.

    ReplyDelete
  24. All i can say is.. If someone says comes up and says that to me... I will quite literally say " Stop looking at my crotch, you filthy fuck!"
    I just sit like that, cause if i sit cross legged, my balls fucking hurt.

    ReplyDelete
  25. These 'women' are pervs
    Next they'll be 'examining' how little boys express their sexual power by their crotch displays..and taking plenty of photographic evidence for 'research purposes'

    ReplyDelete
  26. Thanks a lot.
    This is a very useful blog. and it is a real scenario.
    Sildenafil Citrate

    ReplyDelete
  27. these girls are asking for war since much time ago and we havent taken seriously. Damn.

    ReplyDelete