Friday, April 1, 2011

Roy Den Hollander, ladies-night-fighting Difference Maker. Also: Scott Adams. And t-shirts!!!

A bunch of stuff :

1) Last night The Colbert Report did a segment on “Difference Maker” Roy Den Hollander, the douchebag MRA lawyer who’s on a crusade against the evil feminist institution of “Ladies Night” at bars. Here’s the video. He reveals, among other things, that he is currently single (hey ladies!), and that he is taking a hip hop dance class. He treats us all to a display of his dance moves, and, trust me, it is a treat.  (Oh, and here's Amanda Marcotte's classic take on the dude and his quest.) 
2    2) I’ve reposted my Scott Adams: I meant to do that piece on Feministe. It’s basically identical to the one posted here, but maybe Adams will show up again in the comments.

      3) The BAD BOY COCK CAROUSEL T-SHIRTS ARE HERE!!! Well, here. The art,  by JohnnyKaje,  is officially AWESOME. There are several  variations,  some with the phrase “bad boy cock carousel,” and some  without. (Either way, the shirt will make an excellent conversation piece.)  I haven’t yet gotten around to putting the graphics onto other products yet, but will soon. If you want any product in particular, let me know in the comments below.


--

If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly* use the "Share This" or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.

*Yes, that was a Bioshock reference.

42 comments:

  1. Now that one I will buy and wear on my cruise.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Best manboobz T-shirt evar!!!1!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Amanda Marcotte did a really good post about Ladies' Night a while back. Roy Den Hollander comes up, too.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Oh, and I love the shirt. Johnnykaje is a fantastic artist.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Added the link to Amanda's post. Thanks, tp!

    ReplyDelete
  6. You may think Lady's Nights are no big deal...but we here in California think otherwise. Under California's Unrue Act, upheld by the California Supreme Court in Angelucci v. Century Supper Club, if you have a ladies night that discriminates by gender, the agrieved, i.e. the man, can sue and win damages up to $4,000. The man doesn't even have to make a demand that you treat him fairly. All he has to do is go to the door, and be told that he has a cover, when the women don't.

    It's amazing how people trivialize discrimination against men.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Our buddy Scarecrow even showed up to comment! The money quote:

    "Your attempt to ridicule this will fail. I'll see to it."

    Well, there you have it. No institution can survive once ol' Scarecrow is on the case. Ladies Night, you're history!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Can those come in a sweatshirt?

    ReplyDelete
  9. It's amazing how people trivialize discrimination against men.

    To be fair, this is a pretty trivial issue--especially since, as Amanda points out in her post, men are the intended beneficiaries of the system.

    As far as I'm concerned, let Ladies Night be banned everywhere. I doubt it will set back the feminist movement as far as this guy hopes.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Just no whining from men over the fact that bars remain complete sausage fests forever and ever.

    And they do! Awesome!

    ReplyDelete
  11. I'll go one step further: ban Ladies Nights, AND the song Ladies Night. Life is short, and I've heard it too many times already.

    ReplyDelete
  12. It's amazing how people trivialize discrimination against men.

    Step 1: Be an obnoxious chauvinist
    Step 2: Notice that women don't want to hang out with you
    Step 3: Ply women with free drinks
    Step 4: Piss and moan about having to pay for drinks when women don't

    ReplyDelete
  13. "It's amazing how people trivialize discrimination against men."

    Not really.

    ReplyDelete
  14. David, I'm going to have to ding you for the use of the following words in your post:

    "douchebag" is offensive because of the insinuation that women are unhygenic.

    "crusade" is offensive because of its association with religious warfare.

    "boy" is offensive because of its past use as a racial slur.

    and I think maybe "dance moves" is homophobic and/or racist in some way. I'll have to get back to you on that.

    ReplyDelete
  15. If it's not too much trouble, how about a keychain for this one? Usually, I have the pithy sayings kinda keychains, but this would be far more awesome instead. I don't know if it would work, but if you could, that would be great.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Well, there you have it. No institution can survive once ol' Scarecrow is on the case. Ladies Night, you're history!

    And a darn good thing, cuz all that cheap, watered-down booze will end up giving you diarrhea!!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Excellent definition of Men's Rights Advocate in the comments section of Amanda Marcotte's article:

    Men's Rights Advocate: N. A man who finally realized that patriarchy hurts men too, and devotes his life to making sure it only ever hurts women.

    ReplyDelete
  18. @Elizabeth: can those come in a sweatshirt?

    You mean the design? Because actual bad boys can come in anything.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Actually, it's been argued that "douchebag" is an appropriate insult, since douche bags are 1) unnecessary; and 2) harmful to women.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I do not like bad boys though Raoul. I like men who can hold jobs, are reliable and responsible. And are fat.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I second captain bathrobe's statement.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Elizabeth, somehow I missed your question earlier. Yeah, you can get any of these as a sweatshirt. On the Man Boobz store, just click on the t-shirt with the design you like, and then click on the "see all" link when it asks you to choose your style and color. There are 50 different sorts of shirt/sweatshirt that these designs can go on.

    ReplyDelete
  23. You mean the design? Because actual bad boys can come in anything.

    ...eeeeeeewwwww...

    ReplyDelete
  24. @the Feministe posting: Don't open the comments! Not unless you've got your popcorn popped for a long, all-out, somewhat intelligent and principled but mostly garden-variety fanatical thrash about whether David used ableist language.

    @Elizabeth: I resent your discrimination against those of us who are self-employed and only slightly overweight. Neener neener.

    ReplyDelete
  25. "David, I'm going to have to ding you for the use of the following words in your post:"

    David establishes the community norms on this blog and at the moment that doesn't include any particular care around words that the anti-ableist movement is asking people to be careful about. I don't mind reading here anyway; it follows, though, that some people are being excluded from this space on that count.

    Feministe is a space where there are a number of readers who are PWD or allies and who are strongly invested in the arguments around language that the disability movement is currently making. (I don't mind reading and writing there, but again, some people will be excluded on that count.) Is alienating and hurting those regular community members really awesome? Is tailoring one's words to one's audience really so onerous?

    Part of the process of starting to act against one's oppression is taking control of defining the vocabulary used to refer to it. A misogynist society will have many slurs related to misogyny; an ableist society will have many slurs related to disability; a racist society will have many slurs related to race, and so on.

    Ultimately, the language isn't going to be scrubbed of all terminology with misogynist, ableist, racist, etc. roots--there's too damn much of it. So a few words become symbolic. Not using "shrill" or "hysterical" in their traditional contexts demonstrates willingness to acknowledge that the language stems from misogynist routs, and to act on that acknowledgment. Since it's not feasible to remove all the gendered past from our language, words like "history" generally remain. And that's fine.

    It seems to me that the disability movement is in the process of defining their symbols. Some of what's policed now will probably return to neutral (see also: womyn, herstory), some may not. Are they the words I'd have chosen to make symbolic if it had been my choice? Some are. Some aren't. Do I feel a little miffed because I feel like I should have ownership of some of the words? Vaguely. But on the other hand, I don't have the desire to spend a great deal of time working on social justice in that movement, so I bow to their choices. I don't always agree with them. Oh well.

    Symbols are frustrating because they don't actually solve problems in their entirety--there's no way that all the ableist foundations of the language are going to be rooted out and discarded, not without making a new language anyway. But that doesn't mean that it's pointless or time-wasting or horrible or cruel or whatever. Symbols have their uses--in this case, establishing that one respects the self-determination of PWD, acknowledges their oppression, agrees to their right to influence (preferably even determine) the vocabulary used to refer to them, and acknowledges their feelings as meaningful.

    That's my long-winded analysis. The short one is basically: Johnny, that comment was douchey. :-P

    ReplyDelete
  26. Careful, Raoul, she's trying to fatten you up!!

    ReplyDelete
  27. Curses! My nefarious plan has been discovered.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Yes, Elizabeth, your matriarchal, misandrist plot has been exposed!!

    ReplyDelete
  29. Baconbaconbaconbaconbacon!

    (I also have a weakness for outspoken women named Elizabeth.)

    ReplyDelete
  30. Since it's not feasible to remove all the gendered past from our language, words like "history" generally remain.

    Okay, see, I'm fine with the word "herstory" as a sort of play on words intended to point out that our historical narrative is overwhelmingly male-centric.

    But the word history itself is not gendered. As an amateur linguist this claim has always bugged me.

    ReplyDelete
  31. I was thinking of my namesake-Elizabeth I who was an outspoken redheaded woman named Elizabeth.

    Granted she had to go without sex for her entire life.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Okay, see, I'm fine with the word "herstory" as a sort of play on words intended to point out that our historical narrative is overwhelmingly male-centric.

    But the word history itself is not gendered. As an amateur linguist this claim has always bugged me.


    I'm with trip on this one. When I first encountered the word "herstory", I thought the person using it had made a typo.... but after seeing "herstory" utilized quite few times after my initial encounter with it, it dawned on me why the deliberate misspelling. I readily admit that I can be quite obtuse at times, but my lack of quickness in catching on to the new word had more to do with my learning the English language at the same time as learning a great deal of the French language (I'm not nearly as fluent in the French language as I am in the English language). Interestingly enough, the word "story" or "history" in the French language (histoire) is a feminine noun.
    The word "history" in the English language appears to be gendered because the masculine possessive pronoun in the English language is "his", but "his" is not one of the masculine possessive pronouns in the French language.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Thought I'd add that I'm not trying to say that the etymology of the English word "history" is from the French, was just pointing out the similarity in spelling and definition of the word in both languages. The pronunciation is quite similar, also.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Indeed. The English and French words both come from the Latin historia, which in turn comes from Greek.

    At any rate, our English word "story" is derived from "history," not the other way around. It does not mean "his story."

    ReplyDelete
  35. Roy Den Hollander isn't listed on the New York roll of attorneys -- which means he isn't licensed to practice law in NY. He was a member of the DC bar, but got suspended for non-payment of dues. Must be women's fault.

    ReplyDelete
  36. @Elizabeth: "Granted [Elizabeth I] had to go without sex for her entire life."

    Thus her nickname, "The Librarian Queen."

    ReplyDelete
  37. It's not the language issue at Feministe that's the problem: it's that they assume bad faith from allies, eagerly make dogpiles and derail discussions, and do more of that than actual discussing. And the arguments about words get pretty damned stupid. I've seen fights over "dwarf star" for fuck's sake. On my blog, I had a person once take to task for an offhand---and longstanding-----joke about kidnapping from actor.

    ReplyDelete
  38. But porn told me librarians are complete nymphos? I iz confused.

    Fun fact from Cracked.com the only event in recent history to stop the constant viewing of naughty stuff on the interwebz was the day that President Obama was elected.

    ReplyDelete
  39. But porn told me librarians are complete nymphos? I iz confused.

    Growing up almost all the librarians at the libraries I patronized were little old ladies. They may have been nymphos for all I know - that's their business - but they certainly didn't fit the porn image.

    In recent years, however, I've met two librarians who are young, attractive, and sexually adventurous.

    I'm not sure what my point is. I'm probably just bragging. More to the point, the two latter women were sexually adventurous because they wanted to be, not because their lives are a show for horny men, and that's why I don't like most porn.

    Or something.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Sociable

ShareThis