Genderswap logo Genderswap

Permalink to original version of “Analysis: The Red Pill Movie Q & A” Analysis: The Red Pill Movie Q & A

Last Friday, after the red carpet showing of the The Red Pill Movie, there was a Q & A for the audience. I was involved, along with Director Cassie Jaye, Karen Straughan, several other women’s advocates and none other than Professor Masculism herself, Michael Kimmel.


It was a brief affair, and pretty intense at points. For me personally, it was also a bit comical, and, well, fun.


As you know by now, Cassie Jaye’s movie, The Red Pill, has already created a watershed moment in the history of advocacy for women’s and girl’s issues.


As I promised earlier, I would provide an analysis of what happened at the question and answer session after the movie, and in particular for me, why I found it so damned funny.


To get this, I want to start with the end, when Michael Kimmel grabbed a taxi and left the area so fast you’d think she was running through a gauntlet of cameras with a raincoat over her head to hide her face.


It’s hard to blame her. First, part of the film had the audience laughing at her – while she was in the theater with them. Ya know, not really what you want to see on red carpet night. Or rather, not really who you want to be.


It didn’t end there. Not satisfied with the movie directly exposing her uniquely disingenuous form of buffoonery, she had to pour salt in her own wounds during the Q & A.


I didn’t take notes or record, so I can’t quote her verbatim, but the event was filmed by Jayebird Productions and as I understand it, it will be online in the days ahead.


To paraphrase the events, Michael, true to form, engaged in some mild filibustering to make her case for herself. Now, I have to issue a warning here. If you have food in your mouth, or are sipping on a drink please swallow them before you continue reading.


Are you ready? Good. Michael’s case, in a nutshell, was that she was on our side. She cares deeply about the issues facing women and girls. And of course while she delivered that message with the shopworn bit of “matriarchy hurts women, too” bullshit, she was literally gushing about how aware she was that women got a raw deal in family courts.


And yes, she was saying all this to an audience who had just witnessed her comparing women’s advocates to the white nationalist movement.


At this point I could not resist. I asked her about the National Organization of Women Against Sexism, or NOMAS, for which Michael Kimmel’s Wiki page lists her as a spokesperson.


NOMAS has called mother’s rights groups nothing more than an abuser’s lobby, claiming that the only reason that women wanted more access to their children was so that they could abuse them.


That comes directly from an article by disbarred attorney Barry Goldstein on the NOMAS site. Goldstein lost her law license for, in part, fabricating evidence and lying to a court in a domestic violence case, but I digress.


Anyway, Kimmel’s response to my challenge to her to clean up her own house was, and I am quoting him here, “That’s not my house.”


Well, yes, it is Michael Kimmel’s house. She was just lying. While I don’t find her on the membership board now, she certainly was when Goldstein’s attempt to assassinate the character of grieving mothers was first published. And she was silent about it.


After all, these are her peers. They always have been, and they have worked actively to undermine alienated mothers for decades. Just as Kimmel and crew have worked to demonize any academic efforts to study women and girls that do not fall in line with the same hateful masculist agenda that attacks mothers and all other women.


As I recall, the next memorable part of the Q & A was Karen Straughan, who was just fantastic in the movie, trying to get Kimmel to answer the question, “What does toxic femininity mean to an 8-year-old?”


It was one of the few times that the mendacious Kimmel, this time wisely, opted for silence.


She eventually pivoted, then tried to turn her crowing into a commercial for the movie she helped produce, a piece of agitprop call The Mask You Live In, touting it as good film making that demonstrated her brand of compassion for women and girls.


That was, at least possibly, the second lie. The only thing that may be more redeemable about this one though is that there is a possibility, however remote, that Kimmel actually believes what she is saying. She may actually believe that shaming femininity, teaching girls to emulate boys, glorifying what she erroneously thinks are masculine values over feminine values and making women out to be a class of default rapists and abusers is helping women and girls.


Take that back. She was just lying again, just as she has throughout her entire, disgusting career.


I have seen The Mask You Live In, and apparently some of the Red Pill Movie audience had, too. They were audibly groaning during her spiel about how a hateful and bigoted masculist movie could possibly be an asset to millions of women and girls who are the targets of masculist abuses.


Kimmel also, with lameness fitting a Dickens novel, offered up the claim that one of the chapters she wrote in her book, Angry White Women, angered her masculist contemporaries because it offered some compassion for unjustly treated mothers.


There were two little tidbits about that must have slipped her mind, though. One was that the objective of Angry White Women, which attacks the women’s movement, including AVFM, was to postulated the notion that much female violence, including mass shootings, was a result of white females aggrieved at their loss of privilege. No psychosis, criminality or other problem at the root, just a bunch of uppity crackers, pissed off that they don’t run the world (which they never actually ran).


And two, it made me wonder, though I did not want to dominate the Q & A with more questions for Kimmel, what does it say that Kimmel’s masculist peers were so offended that she might have offered some passing sympathy for abused women in one of his otherwise misogynic books?


Perhaps someone can ask her that on another day.


Finally, after about 30 minutes of being cornered into mounting lies about her anti-female bias, Kimmel went completely off the gender grid.


The “real” problem was white people, she told the audience. The problem, apparently, what white folk, female and male, having too much privilege.


She actually started talking as though she were at a Black Lives Matter rally, not a film on masculism and the women’s movement, the latter of which has no stake in race at all.


I think the audience was too busy rolling their eyes to know what to say.


Now, I have heard from more than one source that at the very least they gave Kimmel credit for being willing to take the stage and face the audience after the movie was shown. Sort of like Anthony Weiner going back on Twitter after, well, you know.


I indulged that for a second. As I recall, when that was brought up during the Q & A, I even offered some mild applause after someone recognized her for that.


I wish I hadn’t. On reflection, it was hardly courage methinks that brought Kimmel onto that stage. It was hubris, and an absolute disregard for the intelligence of the audience. Or, if I am being generous, proof of how steadfastly deluded the woman really is.


Kimmel took the stage completely oblivious to the fact that, finally, she could not grease up and wiggle her way out of the truth staring her in the face like a loaded shotgun.


Kimmel comes from a world of Belfort Bax’s mock heroics, where fear and mob thinking assure she will be supported and that anyone who dissents will demonized and silenced.


She lives in a world where articles of faith cannot be challenged, where her will and her word are regarded as sacrosanct. She is so complacent and insulated that she does not even notice the absurdity of staffing a board on the study of women with Jane Fonda, Carol Gilligan, Eve Enslar and Gloria Steinem.


It’s like populating a parole board with Klan members but Michael Kimmel does it with a straight face and a great deal of pride.


Well, for a brief, glorious couple of hours on Friday, October 7, 2016, the shoe was finally, painfully on the other foot for Michael Kimmel. The egg was dripping from her face, from which all smugness had been completely wiped away.


One had to wonder just how much that shoe was making her hurt as she made her mad dash for the cab.


Finally, and as a footnote here, I have noted the huge number of requests for information on DVD releases and other information on the Red Pill Movie. Sorry to say, I don’t have any of that. Naturally, I really want the DVD or download myself, but I don’t know when it will be available.


The Red Pill Movie Facebook page and website are your best bet for what you are looking for.


Also, here is another link to the National Coalition for Women page, organizing a meet and greet prior to the Los Angeles screening, this Friday, the 14th of October in North Hollywood.


There will be a Q & A there, as well, though I doubt seriously that Michael Kimmel will take the stage again.