Hey now, it’s not my fault I have a phallic obsession. I just so happen to have been born with one!

The entire notion of a men’s rights movement is just plain silly.

I should not be surprised to see Funisnow in this number.

At one time, there was a “tender years presumption”, which dictated that, unless a mother were affirmatively proven unfit, she was the preferred guardian for children “of tender years” (generally below puberty). It did result in miscarriages of justice, but its total abolition has resulted in worse.

There is a presumption in courts of law that both parents will seek the well-being of the child, and that they need only be educated as to what that is. Not so in abusive relationships. An abusive spouse will use a child as a hostage and as a proxy for the departed partner, and where that abuser is male, he frequently has all the financial power in his hands. In such a case, even if the mother gets custody and any kind of financial assistance in the first instance, he will come back and back until he wrests both away from her. He’ll hound her at work until she gets fired; he’ll make trouble with her landlord until she gets evicted; he’ll do everything he can to destabilize her until he can prove her an unfit parent. This will be easy, because if she tries to prove this course of conduct, many courts not only won’t listen, they’ll dismiss her as a hysterical female who is poisoning the child. Once he has primary custody in a “joint custody agreement”, he’ll take the child out of state, asserting that his profession requires it, and then she’ll not only never see the child again, he’ll come after her for child support. The courts have been so primed by the “manosphere” that most of the time, they go along with the assumption that she is hysterical, vengeful, and mendacious; he is rational, objective, and manly. Yes, even female judges buy into this.

By no means do I wish to buy into the myth that all mothers are angels and all fathers are vindictive tyrants. Yet that myth caused less harm than its reverse, because men still have a financial advantage over women, and where the husband is abusive, he has often destroyed whatever resources and earning capacity the woman had. It’s a rare woman that ever had that power, and tornado sirens from the manosphere notwithstanding, any court that truly has the best interests of the child at heart must bear that in mind.

Some of the DV groups in my area have made it clear they want to exterminate men and especially men of color.

I for one, wholeheartedly agree with Erika. It is really unnecessary and I think the SPLC might be wasting it’s time with them, and the “Feminist” groups. I don’t see how these groups pose any indication of a public threat. Much like the WN movement.

What doesn’t provoke outrage among men’s rights activists?

Why is it that all these “real”, liberated men seem to be butthurt whiners?

These idiots make cavemen look enlightened.

SPLC – with respect, I think your ‘cherrypicking’ tone of espoused reasonableness risks misleading readers into thinking you’ve some right to the moral high ground here.

Frankly it’s distasteful, deeply disingenuous and wrong to throw the examples of Anders Brievik and Thomas Ball at the mens rights and fathers rights movement.

It’s true that Brievik did write extensively criticising feminism. However while his trial is continuing, and all the evidence isn’t available yet, what is already obvious is that the overwhelming majority of his writing is anti-immigrant, pro-fascist, ultra-right-wing, anti-welfare state and apocalyptic in tone. He also condemns Christians, Muslims, vegetarians, people who wear sandals and socialists. He quotes Richard Dawkins approvingly.

Is the SPCL going to accuse prominent agnostics like Dawkins of inspiring Brievik’s actions? What about BBC ‘Top Gear’ presenter Jeremy Clarkson, or NYU historian Niall Ferguson, who Brievik also quotes?

Thomas Ball may well have ‘called for arson attacks on courthouses or police stations’. But you fail to point out that Ball was a deeply distressed, depressed and seriously sick man who’d been terribly ill-treated before commiting suicide in an act of self-immolation. Where’s your compassion or humanity for the despair he must have felt? You also fail to point out that no MRA has ever been convicted of an act of violence or carried out an attack of any kind.

The SPLC is guilty of the very thing it accuses mens rights of: favouring and minimising one side’s extreme speech, while highlighting and condeming the other.

You say: “We don’t really cut up men,” the tagline of the Feminazis blog cheekily declares. “Well, unless they deserve it.”

Why ‘cheekily’?

“…to characterize her essay as a well-developed plan… is not only ridiculous, it is willfully obtuse.”

I don’t think anyone thinks it’s a ‘well-developed plan’, I think most of us think it’s a key text for feminists though.

You can’t compare it to Swift’s ‘a reasonable proposal’ because Solanas went straight out afterwards and tried to stab two men to death. To the best of my knowledge, Jonathan Swift was never caught trying to cook a baby.

Quoting ‘gendercide’ in the developing world is willfully misleading. You know perfectly well that mens rights activists are pretty much exclusive to the west – as are feminists. Trust me, there isn’t much call for ‘slutwalks’ in Somalia.

As for ‘inspiring more self-criticism’ – well frankly the SPLC can take a running jump on that one. Some of us have had our children stolen from us, been reduced to poverty, been imprisoned and beaten.

You think our priority now is criticising OURSELVES? Are you completely befuddled?

Let’s be clear about this: the SPLC is in the same position as those who criticised Dr King back in the early 1960′s for ‘going too far’.

Let me help you out by summarising your piece in 40 words or less:

“Yes the mens rights movement has some good points to make, but they need to tone it done some, be a bit more reasonable, don’t play up so. Just stop being so damn uppity and crude.”

Yeah. Like that’ll work.

Cathy Brennan’s thoughts on the “Scum Manifesto” are a bit bizarre, in view of the fact that Valerie Solanas actually tried to kill Andy Warhol and shot other men as well.

“I view it as A Modest Proposal-type work of literature, a satire” she says.

Yeah, just like A Modest Proposal – if Jonathan Swift actually tried to eat somebody’s children.

This is the reason why we Americans should boycott Dr.Pepper 10 and the Snapple Corp putting out this anti women product. It’s time to stand up what is right and not supporting some misguided misogimistic viewpoints, but on the other hand. Has all these social engineering experiments is the reall for all the backlash against women,minorities and the white population as well. Go figure!!!

The mens movement is less misogynist on average, than feminism and the mainstream is misandrist on average.

Its just that they are held to very different standards of accountability. You can see the dissonance and sexism, in the different treatment of the two groups in this article. These articles about the mens movement, rely on misrepresentation, intellectual dishonesty and sexist double standards.

@Reynardine

Its called the tender years doctrine. It was successfully lobbied for by a feminist called Caroline Norton and to this day large feminist organisations are lobbying for it is some form or another and obstructing a presumption of access to the father.

It has been quite telling to sit back and watch the MRM blow gaskets over SPLC articles. I hope to see more to come.

This is the best part of the article which proves it’s biased nature:

Cathy Brennan owns the domain RadFem Hub. “I don’t hate men,” she told me. “I have a father, I have a brother, I have a son.

I also noticed she didn’t say husband. Perhaps that’s why she hates men.

So does that mean a man who has a “mother and a sister” can’t possibly be misogynist?

I think what Thomas Ball called for was wrong, but he had a “daughter and a mother.”

@Arthur Goldwag

In an earlier article you claimed that claims that the previous 12 months data from the Center For Disease Control 2010 NISVS showed that men and women experience forced intercourse, were false.

You can check it here, on pages 18 and 19, the claim is true

Here is an image explaining how to read the data.
^[14]

And here is an link to the survey itself to confirm.
^[15]

You also claimed that the mens movement made false claims about domestic violence rates.

Here is CDC data again, this time showing patterns and frequency of DV, and that women are significantly more likely to initiate and commit DV than are men.

*Results. Almost 24% of all relationships had some violence, and half (49.7%) of those were reciprocally violent. In nonreciprocally violent relationships, women were the perpetrators in more than 70% of the cases. Reciprocity was associated with more frequent violence among women (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=2.3; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.9, 2.8), but not men (AOR=1.26; 95% CI=0.9, 1.7). Regarding injury, men were more likely to inflict injury than were women (AOR=1.3; 95% CI=1.1, 1.5), and reciprocal intimate partner violence was associated with greater injury than was nonreciprocal intimate partner violence regardless of the gender of the perpetrator (AOR=4.4; 95% CI=3.6, 5.5).*

Read More: ^[16]

I think that its fair to ask you to address these serious and inaccurate accusations you made about us misrepresenting abuse data.

The “tender years” presumption was indeed that: a rebuttable presumption at law. It has not been the law in most states since the mid ’80′s.

The noise of spoiled squalls in even this forum and the demonizing of “feminism” speaks for itself. Feminism, without more, is simply the principle that no one should, without more, be disqualified, disenfranchised, disempowered, or disfavored on account of sex. Seen from that perspective, in an egalitarian society, there should be no “tender years” presumption beyond the time of lactation. We do not live in an egalitarian society.

There are, I am aware, women out there propounding vicious and crazy doctrines and acts. The number of them who ever carry out such ideas is so minuscule that only one or two have been mentioned in this column…or anywhere. Compare that, if you will, with the number of women and their children who are, every day, virtual prisoners of male heads of households who threaten, beat, violate, and even kill them; with the number of women and children who are victims of male violence on the streets. In physical strength and cultural position, men are better enabled to be oppressive, and though most are not, those who choose to be so are far more dangerous than their female counterparts. Men still control most of the financial resources, occupy most seats of power, and are the majority of the benches. No, “male” is not the root of “malevolence”, but the kind of thing being proposed on most of those manosphere sites is surely malevolent.

The Intelligence Report articles went to some length to distinguish between live self-help groups for husbands and fathers with legitimate wrongs and justified resentments, and these online sites. Of the latter, you get the impression that very few participants have, or care about, children at all. Anders Breivik was childless; the mass murderer in Canada, as far as I know, was childless. But women are one of many groups they see as taking away what they regard as their pre-eminence, and though most of us can manage to isolate ourselves from other groups we find offensive, even those of us willing to enter celibate religious orders carry our enemy within…for every woman is half male by ancestry, and every man half female. For God’s sake, don’t blow this off. Believe me, though you may never wish to harm your mother, your sister, your wife, your daughter, your co-worker, or your friend, someone out there wants to…and several someones on these sites are urging him to do it.

“I think most of us think it’s a key text for feminists though. ”

There’s yer problem — thinking that a text that very few feminists I know have actually read is a ‘key text’ — as opposed, say, to the actual feminist texts that feminists discuss at length.

“…in view of the fact that Valerie Solanas actually tried to kill Andy Warhol” If this were said of a man, no one would think anything much of it — it’s the rarity of the act for a woman that focuses our attention.

“I also noticed she didn’t say husband. Perhaps that’s why she hates men.” O dear, is the the best these saddoes can do, push the same-ole man-hating lesbian stereotype button? Or would you prefer the too-ugly to get a man twisted dried up old spinster button instead?

This comment just nicely illustrates the writers misogyny, whilst failing, yet again, to demonstrate that this supposed ‘man-hating’ threat exists anywhere apart from in their fantasies……….

I’m sorry, Sig. Where did we challenge the CDC’s statistics on “forced intercourse?” The statistic we cited from the CDC report was one in 71 (1.4%). The myth we questioned as to female inititiated violence was that “women attack men just as much as men attack women, if not more.” The subjects of the study on DV that you cite were some 11,000 young people (18-28); a quarter of whome (24%) had experienced DV. The study was attempting to determine whether reciprocity is related to violence frequency and injury.The breakdown is indeed as you quote it–but it hardly proves that women are more violent than men.

“Anders Breivik was childless; the mass murderer in Canada”

He had nothing to do with the mens movement. Its all false accusations and libel with you lot, I’ve been in this debate for years now. Everything is peppered with relational aggression, and stereotypical mean girl behavior.

Rey,

I believe that is the wisest thing I’ve read from you during the few years I’ve been active here. Brilliantly put.

I look forward to the future SPLC article highlighting misandry by feminist groups and even politicians and basically labelling the likes of NOW as hate groups, who’s members are so deranged they even physically assault fathers rights activists at domestic violence policy hearings (and get convictions for doing so).

An article highlighting hateful feminist groups will run into hundreds of thousands of words so you’re going to have your work cut out. Just covering Sweden alone would be one hell of a task to complete.

@Arthur

“The myth we questioned as to female inititiated violence was that “women attack men just as much as men attack women, if not more.”

Where are you getting your information from because its certainly not DV stats? The CDC 2010 you are citing like all large DV studies that are not known to have been biased since the 1980′s have shown that women are at least as likely to attack men in DV. Its confirmed in literally 100s of studies.

Here is a historical record, for you to check yourself ^[17]

You also claimed that the mens movement has been making false claims about the rate of rape by gender.

Can you please come here and show me how we are doing that.

^[18]

Thank you.

BadDyke:

You say about Solanas “if this were said of a man, no one would think anything much of it — it’s the rarity of the act for a woman that focuses our attention”. I beg to differ. A man writing a tract calling for the murder of women, who then tries to shoot women would catch a bit of attention, I think. And rightfully so! I doubt his fans would get away with calling his writings satire, either.

For the record, I am terribly fond of women and do not support misogyny in any shape or form.

Why do men need “Rights” when they just can just join the Republican Party? They are already waging their conservative Jihad against women. MRM and the Republicans make perfect sense.

Hi Arthur, feminist-types,

Thanks for being willing to engage in discussion on some of the issues raised. Here’s another one…

OP: “While men’s rights activists fantasize about existential threats to the male sex, real gendercide is being committed against girls in China, India, East Asia, the Caucasus and other parts of the world.”

You then provide a link to an Economist article on the distressing prevalance of sex-selective abortion in some parts of the developing world, as well as the suspicion that this may be an issue in some migrant communities in the west. ( ^[9])

This is absolutely wrong, and I very much doubt that any mens rights activist would do anything but condemn a decision to abort a foetus on the basis that it’s a girl.

What’s puzzling then, is to find that FEMINISTS campaign AGAINST legislation which outlaws sex-selective terminations (AKA ‘gendercide’):

^[19]

^[20]

Now, there may be different rationales for this apparent hypocrisy. In fact it may not be hypocrisy at all – it maybe that the feminist groups simply consider any attack on restricting abortion rights worth defending against, no matter what.

It may be that U.S. women’s groups don’t like the implication that women can’t be trusted (never mind the fact that sex and race selective abortions are illegal in the UK, Australia, New Zealand and most of Europe, and women there seem OK with it.)

Either way though, it’s probably a shaky, and rather flaky, basis for a criticism of the mens movement.

After all, if American women won’t put their own pride and ideology aside to save the lives of baby girls, why should anyone else?

Attention MRAs: Please keep comments under one paragraph, your SUPER LONG monologues are boring and without substance.

The paper referred to has to be read quite carefully. As the paper itself says in the conclusions:

“Some have suggested
that survey studies, such as this one,
likely exclude the more severely abused
women typically studied in clinical settings.
Thus, our findings may represent 1 form of
partner violence……….”
They were looking at self-reported violence, amongst a limited age-group (young adults), and what they were interested in was reciprocity versus non-reciprocity, and how conflict might spiral into violence.

Even for this sample, the conclusion that women attack men just as much as men attack women is too simplistic, and it should be noted that in this sample men were more likely to cause injury than were women.

And not forget that there are possibly MANY types of IPV. This sort of reciprocal partner violence (severity of injury not reported) is supposedly fairly common amongst adolescents, but “and likely
does not include the most severely abused
victims who are subjected to extreme control
by their partners”.

Cherry-picking the 70% female perpetrators figure from the abstract mis-represents what the paper as a whole actually says, and exactly what the paper is talking about.

Radical feminists and MRMers are both blowhards. The difference is that MRMers hold almost ALL THE POWER.

That would be like me saying ‘I’m a Jewish Rights activist who demands more Jewish power in Hollywood and the financial industry!’

It just makes no sense. (Also, I’m quite obviously Jewish. And that was quite obviously satire.)

“A man writing a tract calling for the murder of women, who then tries to shoot women would catch a bit of attention, I think.”

Interesting use of language — tract for example……

Heck, there are loads of men out there who murder women en masse, just that most of them don’t happen to have also written satirical texts beforehand. In a sense, they don’t have to, because the ideas behind male violence towards women and children are already so wide-spread.

So what do we have in this case? ONE little satirical text, one mentally-ill woman who commits an act of violence, but not the explosion of women-killing-men that some would claim that Solanas was aiming for. Despite how many radical-feminists supposedly see the SCUM manifesto as a key text.

Doesn’t really have ANYTHING to say about the real levels of violence between men and women, or the threat of violence, or even the current propaganda of violence.

@BadDyke

“Cherry-picking the 70% female perpetrators figure from the abstract mis-represents what the paper as a whole actually says, and exactly what the paper is talking about.”

No it doesn’t.

The paper says that women are more likely to attack men, that women are more likely to be injured and that reciprocal domestic violence, which women initiate more often is the strongest predictor of an injury. (similar patterns were found in 32 different nations ^[21]).

Which debunks the false accusation that the mens movement are spreading a myth that women are at least as likely to commit DV as men. Its not a myth, its backed up by most of the peer reviewed data.

Im not cherry picking at all. Please don’t make any more false claims about me.

For those with remarks regarding Breivik and the MRM – while the man never recognized himself as a MRA, some MRM bloggers were apparently fond of that idea and celebrated his notions AND actions:

^[22]

^[23]

^[24]

Granted, not all MRAs feel the same way. But the fact that some do – and the links provided there that display this kind of rhetoric – is something that raises a serious red flag observers can’t ignore.

BadDyke:

As I’m not a native English-speaker, my use of “tract” might be incorrect. If so, I offer my apologies. You understand what I mean anyway, I guess.

I get that the vast majority of violence is man-on-woman. As I pointed out, I don’t share the worldview of the men’s movement the SPLC articles write about. I am pro-equal rights for women, anti-violence against them. The men’s movement has legitimate grievances and points, just like feminists have, but when it gets mired in hatred and sexism it isn’t very productive.

I don’t know how many radical feminists see the SCUM manifesto as a key text or anything, but one of the reasons I find the more aggressive parts of the men’s movement interesting to read about is how its militancy mirrors that of the radical feminists they want to fight against. And I think it’s revealing how some radical feminists try to defend Solanas and SCUM, or make a joke of it.

@BadDyke

“because the ideas behind male violence towards women and children are already so wide-spread.”

With women presenting as at least as likely to commit DV and mothers as the primary child abuser. It would appear that family violence is female dominated, which runs contrary to patriarchal dominance theory.

You cannot just make false accusations that castigate men and infantalise women based on outdated and debunked theories like that, anymore.

Hello and Welcome to the Delegation of Dumbasses from the “men’s rights movement.” I’ll be your ambassador to the world of reality.

Let me start by answering a few of your queries.

” He also condemns Christians, Muslims, vegetarians, people who wear sandals and socialists. He quotes Richard Dawkins approvingly.”

What? Breivik hated Muslims and wrote that Europe should convert to Catholicism or something of that sort. If he quoted Dawkins, it was no doubt in regards to Islam.

“I”s the SPCL going to accuse prominent agnostics like Dawkins of inspiring Brievik’s actions? What about BBC ‘Top Gear’ presenter Jeremy Clarkson, or NYU historian Niall Ferguson, who Brievik also quotes?”

Well to be fair, Niall Ferguson is a dumbass.

“Thomas Ball may well have ‘called for arson attacks on courthouses or police stations’. But you fail to point out that Ball was a deeply distressed, depressed and seriously sick man who’d been terribly ill-treated before commiting suicide in an act of self-immolation.”

Oh those real men, always thinking with their hormones and emotions!

“The SPLC is guilty of the very thing it accuses mens rights of: favouring and minimising one side’s extreme speech, while highlighting and condeming the other.”

Whose extreme speech are they minimizing, exactly?

“You say: “We don’t really cut up men,” the tagline of the Feminazis blog cheekily declares. “Well, unless they deserve it.”

If I found that some group opposed to me gets butthurt at the drop of a hat(like the MRA), I would probably do the same. In any case, I doubt that blogger has cut up any men.

“I don’t think anyone thinks it’s a ‘well-developed plan’, I think most of us think it’s a key text for feminists though.”

Well then you thought wrong. I have frequented(and still do) a number of feminist sites and blogs, and I have never seen a reference to this document. In fact the first time I heard of it was from one of Rush Limbaugh’s books; after that I hear it brought up mainly by conservatives and folks like you- never feminists.

“You can’t compare it to Swift’s ‘a reasonable proposal’ because Solanas went straight out afterwards and tried to stab two men to death. To the best of my knowledge, Jonathan Swift was never caught trying to cook a baby.”

To the best of YOUR knowledge. Many authors of his day were known to eat babies. Charles Dickens was insatiable.

“Quoting ‘gendercide’ in the developing world is willfully misleading. You know perfectly well that mens rights activists are pretty much exclusive to the west – as are feminists. Trust me, there isn’t much call for ’slutwalks’ in Somalia.”

Soooo…Are you claiming that men have it better in those countries? Get on a plane.

” Some of us have had our children stolen from us, been reduced to poverty, been imprisoned and beaten.”

How does this get blamed on the feminist movement? It wasn’t the feminists who argued that mothers are best suited to take care of children. It wasn’t feminists that said that women should stay home and not work, thus necessitating alimony or child support when they get divorced.

“Let’s be clear about this: the SPLC is in the same position as those who criticised Dr King back in the early 1960’s for ‘going too far’.”

Oh I see, you want to compare your situation to that of black people in the 60s. Ok, tell me…

1. Are you forced to use different building entrances because you are a man?
2. Are you forced to give up your seat on a bus to any woman?
3. Are men routinely lynched?
4. Are men disenfranchised from the vote?
5. Have you ever been denied a home loan for being a man?
6. Are you told you can’t be in a particular city after sun down?

Do I have to go on?

“perhaps it did the Men’s Rights Movement a service.”

It certainly did, but not the way that the SPLC intended. I am a member of the /menrights group on reddit, and a large influx of new readers came to visit after the SPLC article. As always, most of the newcomers found /mensrights to be informative and welcoming.

The motives of the SPLC are clear, and their tactics are straight from the Feminist playbook – shaming and dismissal. SPLC will never take on the hate from radical feminists because there is no money in that. And, as I quickly discovered when looking up the SPLC – they are ALL about the money. And, just like Feminism, the SPLC has decided to squander it’s legacy as it fades into irrelevancy.

Sig your image showing “how to read the data” is utter nonsense. The important numbers in the table are that 21.8 million women are raped in their lifetime compared to 1.6 million men. More than twice as many women as men are victims of other sexual violence.

“Sig your image showing “how to read the data” is utter nonsense. The important numbers in the table are that 21.8 million women are raped in their lifetime compared to 1.6 million men. More than twice as many women as men are victims of other sexual violence.”

Nobody at my end has made a claim or has a beef the about the life time data. They are talking about the 12 month data, which corresponds with smaller modern studies that show women to be as sexual aggressive as men.

eg.

“Rates of sexually aggressive behaviors among women vary from one segment of the United States to another, but the evidence presented here shows that as many as 7% of women self-report the use of physical force to obtain sex, 40% self-report sexual coercion, and over 50% self-report initiating sexual contact with a man while his judgment was impaired by drugs or alcohol (Anderson, 1998)”
^[25]

Murphy: You can’t compare it to Swift’s ‘a reasonable proposal’ because Solanas went straight out afterwards and tried to stab two men to death. To the best of my knowledge, Jonathan Swift was never caught trying to cook a baby.

But you say the inverse is true… that Thomas Ball and Anders Breivik should be discounted, even though Breivik killed how many people?

Additionally trying to paint Solanas as being intentional ignores that she never published the manifesto. A man did, some years later.

Ball and Breivik both published their manifestoes, and intended their actions to be a spark to a more widespread uprising. Members of the “manosphere” have embraced the one, and pretended to distance themselves from the other (as you are doing here), but to say that Solanas is important, and they are trivial is to confirm the idea that what is driving significant chunks of the MRM is more hatred of women being men’s equals, than it is of any serious interest in redressing the structural problems of managing that equality may be suffering.

Also, Mitch, almost all grown men who are raped, are raped by other men, as well as (I would estimate) most of the male children. Other than that, this invasion of spoiled, squalling trolls from the manosphere demonstrates that these people feel threatened by exposure.

I would point out that, though I have, in my life, dealt with many female clients, quite a few of whom had been made to suffer by abusive men, I have met few female supremacists (apparently the sort that the manosphere means by “radical feminists”) and none who resorted to violence against males. The women I have known who were the most viciously vindictive against men were also profoundly antifeminist, pink-ruffle peter-eaters you could imagine. Why? They imagined men to be so highly advantaged by nature that, while obtaining one or more was the highest good, these (imagined) godlike beings deserved neither forgiveness for simple humanity nor any sort of pity for misfortune. It is those women- those fluffy, pleasing, sly, seductive, “real women”, boys, who are going to clean you out and leave you broken, because for them, that is the only triumph and power there is.

So when will the SPLC list radfem as a “place of suspected hatred?”. Just like what they did to MRM as few months ago.

I’ll be waiting… but I doubt they will, they seem to ignore hate groups that seem to be “progressive” or “liberal”.

Ruslan, babies are said to be not very good, as their unused muscles have neither texture nor flavor. My understanding is that English literary gentlemen of refined taste waited until they were four or five before counting them table-ready, and preferred that the tots had been fed a diet rich in parsley, sage, rosemary, and thyme for about a week prior to preparation.

And I bet everybody here thought “tater tots” was just a figure of speech.

@Pecunium

Why are you conflating a mentally ill far right nationalist serial killer with the mens movement? Can you not make an argument that doesn’t rely on false accusations?

For being a bunch of ‘big, strong men,’ you MRMers really are a whiney lot…

Here’s a thought: man up, grow a pair, and deal with the consequences your writings have wrought.

“what is driving significant chunks of the MRM is more hatred of women being men’s equals, than it is of any serious interest in redressing the structural problems of managing that equality may be suffering.”

Assuming that you believe there are men in existence who have a serious interest in redressing inequalities, what would you propose to them? They can’t go to feminists unless redressing the inequalities directly benefits women. If redressing inequalities might result in disfavoring women, where are they to go? Or do you then say they should suck it up or that women have it worse in so many areas that it’s ok to have it better in some?
Equality is not something you can apply selectively but if certain inequalities are not addressed by anyone then what do you do?

Am I the only one who finds it hilarious that the men’s rights activists are telling men to find the type of submissive doormat women they want to go to South America?

You men submissive doormat women like Lorena Bobbitt?

@ Aron
“Here’s a thought: man up, grow a pair, and deal with the consequences your writings have wrought.”

Using gender stereotypes to keep people from emancipation. If someone did the equivalent to women “be a real woman and quit your job and take care of your husband”, you’d be all over them about it.
THAT is sexism and that is what I’m against.

@ Reynardine

“…Mitch, almost all grown men who are raped, are raped by other men…”

Translataion:
Men do it to themselves so who cares?

AC, I’m sorry if you interpreted that as meaning men eff themselves, or even that male victims don’t matter. They do matter. You are the one who seems to believe that male victims only matter if the perpetrators are female.

AC,

What I used is a literal device called ‘irony.’ Perhaps you might wish to aquaint yourself with its definition?

And how are these men being kept from ‘emancipation?’ Last time I checked, the world tends to be patriarchic rather than matriarchic.

But keep on whining, it makes you look great!

Not sure why anyone wants to quote CDC statistics in reference to domestic (or any type of) violence. Here’s 2010 data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics:

Violent victimizations, by type of crime and victim-offender relationship, 2010:

Male victims, total violent victimizations: 1,956,320
– Intimately related (i.e., current or former spouses, boyfriends or girlfriends): 101,530 (5 percent of total)
Female victims, total violent victimizations: 1,854,980
– Intimate: 407,700 (22 percent of total)

Male victims, rape/sexual assault, total: 15,020
– Intimate: Too low to report
Female victims, rape/sexual assault, total: 169,370
– Intimate: 29,010 (17 percent of total)

Male victims, aggravated assault, total: 420,460
– Intimate: 29,290 (7 percent)
Female victims, aggravated assault, total: 304,720
– Intimate: 71,640 (24 percent)

Male victims, simple assault, total: 1,218,440
– Intimate: 50,140 (4 percent)
Female victims, simple assault, total: 1,204,620
– Intimate: 270,510 (22 percent)

The numbers speak pretty much for themselves, to anyone who’ll listen: Women are victimized by their spouses/boyfriends/girlfriends at far higher rates than men. Men’s rights activists will no doubt argue that it’s mostly girlfriends, not men, who are victimizing women, but of course the overall relationship statistics still indicate that female/female relationships occur far less frequently than female/male.

Also indicative, and also from the Bureau of Justice Statistics:

Sentenced male prisoners under the jurisdiction of state or federal correctional authorities as of June 30, 2009 (latest available number): 1,444,773
Sentenced female prisoners under the jurisdiction of state or federal correctional authorities as of June 30, 2009: 106,362

Imprisonment rates of sentenced prisoners under jurisdiction of state and federal correctional authorities, by sex and jurisdiction, June 30, 2009:
Total: 504
Male: 954
Female: 68

(Imprisonment rate is defined as the number of prisoners sentenced to more than 1 year per 100,000 U.S. residents.)

Sig: Why are you conflating a mentally ill woman with all feminists?

Can you make a coherent set of arguments, or is each one meant to be taken ex nihilo and we shouldn’t take the rest of your statement into account.

You say feminism must, “own” Solanas, even though she didn’t try to persuade anyone to follow her example (again, she is not the person who published the manifesto).

In the same breath you say the MRM is allowed to disown Ball and Breivik, even though they 1: did publish and 2: echo the sentiments of more well known/central members of the MRM.

Moreover, since you are being patently dishonest in this instance, why should we take anything else you say at face value?

Esp. since you have, in other places in this thread (re rape stats) made false statements, dressed with the statement that, “it’s all here in the study”. Trusting, I suppose that people who look at it won’t see the ways in which you have failed to give the absolute numbers; using the relative rates to make it seem a very small number of female on male rapes are an epidemic.

You’ve been lying, and I see no reason to let it slide, esp. because you are lying in way which encourages hatred.

Here’s a link to a more nuanced discussion of that study.

^[26]

Another thought: many of these MSMers seem to have confused WHINING with WINNING.

How typical.

Do you really think that 100 years from now fathers will still have no rights in family court? Male homeless will be denied shelter? Boys will be drugged in school for the “crime” of being born male?

The MRM will prevail. And we will never forget the SPLC. You chose the wrong side of history. You chose the side of oppression, sexism, and discrimination. You chose the side without mercy, without compassion, without humanity. You impeached your character, your identity, and your mission. You have become nothing more than greedy lawyers who bilk gullible fools out of money.

Arthur Goldwag,

These guys have no business calling themselves men’s rights activists. They’re not defending the rights of anyone. For the most part they’re just attacking women, and other men that they disagree with.

Zarat: Hey, nice to see you here. How is the plan to create artificial wombs, VR partners and move all the men to one side of the Mississippi, and all the women to other going?

Well, thank you for threatening us all with revenge, Mr. Zarat. You have just proven our point.

@Anthony Zarat: nice try, playing the victim card. Keep it up, you trolls are hilarious.

“Male homeless will be denied shelter”? Huh? Where did you come up with that?

Oh, don’t tell me, you pulled it directly out of your rear orifice, like everything else you said.

“…Mitch, almost all grown men who are raped, are raped by other men…”

This is false. In 2010:
1.27 million men were raped by women
1.27 million women were raped by men

^[27]

The reason you do not know this is: when a woman forces a child or man to penetrate her, she is not guilty of rape (under current feminist law). She is guilty of “other sexual violence.” Here is the FBI definition of rape, carefully crafted by feminists to make sure that women cannot be legally responsible when they commit crimes:

“The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”

Note that a man can be a victim (of another man), but legally it is not possible for a woman to be a perpetrator. She can hold a gun to a hog-tied 8 year old boy, it will not be called rape. You can thank feminist “egalitarians” for this.

@Reynardine
“I’m sorry if you interpreted that as meaning men eff themselves, or even that male victims don’t matter. They do matter.”

Then why did you point out that they’re mostly victimized by other men?

“You are the one who seems to believe that male victims only matter if the perpetrators are female.”

Where in the world did I ever say or even hint something like that? Eager to see the quote that made you think so….

@ Aron

“What I used is a literal device called ‘irony.’ Perhaps you might wish to aquaint yourself with its definition?”

Don’t try to use the “irony” excuse now – especially if you contradict that by finishing off with another ad hominem in the same very comment. At least have the courage and integrity to stand by what you said. And adding the condescending suggestion that I do no know the definition of the word “irony”, whilst perhaps making you feel like you’ve one up-ed me, actually hurts your case rather than supports it.

“And how are these men being kept from ‘emancipation?’.”

You just gave an example yourself with your so called
“irony” about telling men to act like men and suck it up. Even if you do insist on denying that you were serious, you cannot contest the fact that this is done a lot. It’s not surprising therefore that men are desensitized – one of the things that people like criticizing them for. Now THAT is irony.

“Last time I checked, the world tends to be patriarchic rather than matriarchic”

The sex of the political leaders is irrelevant. Whom they advocate for is what illustrates which sex has more political leverage. In other words, political power is about how much representation you have in a political office and not by who is occupying it at any given time. And, with that in mind, compare how often politicians speak out exclusively for men with how often they speak out exclusively for women and there’s your answer. Men have virtually no exclusive representation in politics. Women have a great deal of exclusive representation. Hence, women as a collective group have far more political power than men.
But I wouldn’t want to spoil your delusion of being in charge with the truth. By all means keep believing that if it makes you feel better

@ Pecunium,
I asked you a question earlier but forgot to mention you by name. I would be interested in your response.

@ CriticalDragon,
I’m not attacking women or men or anyone. Just bigots and sexists, they get attacked by me – guilty as charged.

@ Zarat,
“Note that a man can be a victim (of another man), but legally it is not possible for a woman to be a perpetrator. ….You can thank feminist “egalitarians” for this.”

Old fashioned gender stereotypes are probably to blame for this rather than feminists.

Sexual battery in Florida, as in many other states, is defined as acts that could be committed by either gender on either gender, and this has been so since the 1970′s. The FBI, except in federal enclaves, collects statistics on charges and convictions as defined by the laws of the various states. Meanwhile, Mr. Zarat, you appear to be quite a fanciful person, and if goose eggs were not so round, your cloaca would be sore. As for you, AC, you might consider turning down the forced-air volume in your head. Even if the white noise helps keep out things you don’t care to hear, the bellow of the blast is likely to dessicate your…oh, too late.

“Pecunium said,

ON MAY 16TH, 2012 AT 2:51 PM
Sig: Why are you conflating a mentally ill woman with all feminists?”

I’m not,

but at least she is a feminist, so if I was dishonest enough to conflate Solans with all feminists, or the genocidal feminists from radfemhub that this publication is in bed with it would make a much stronger and more accurate argument, than your conflating the Norwegian who is not a part of the mens movement, with the men’s movement. If you have legitimate arguments make them, instead if regurgitating the same things that aren’t true like all the other manboobz drones, and now the SPLC.

Why is it that these “real” men are so whiny and pathetic? It looks like they took the typical, false interpretation of feminism(that it is about victimhood), and decided to act as a mirror image of the stereotype they created in their minds.

And then there’s this:

“I’ll be waiting… but I doubt they will, they seem to ignore hate groups that seem to be “progressive” or “liberal”.”

Really? Name them.

I also laugh at these losers who think they’re going to find their ideal woman in countries like Russia and Ukraine. Son, you are fresh meat in those countries. If you thought American women were bad, you’re about to get picked to the bone. I suggest you brush up on your social skills and learn to deal with the women of the USA.

@Pecunium

“Esp. since you have, in other places in this thread (re rape stats) made false statements, dressed with the statement that, “it’s all here in the study”. Trusting, I suppose that people who look at it won’t see the ways in which you have failed to give the absolute numbers; using the relative rates to make it seem a very small number of female on male rapes are an epidemic”

What is wrong with you people that none of you can construct an honest argument? The one tactic is libel, false accusations and attempts at character assassination, usually to do with rape.

@ Reynardine
“AC, ….. Even if the white noise helps keep out things you don’t care to hear, the bellow of the blast is likely to dessicate your…oh, too late.“

What I don’t care to hear is lies – especially if they’re claiming I said something I never said. I asked you to show me where I said what you claimed I said but you responded with this cheap attempt to insult.

You were caught lying and now it’s time to be a little more mature and take responsibility for what you said.

I also asked you to explain why you found it necessary to state that men are overwhelmingly raped by other men. Your lack of response suggests that it was a reason you would not like to admit. Perhaps my initial interpretation that you were dismissing male victims was indeed accurate. Otherwise, by all means, explain to me what you really meant.

Your language, Sig, defines you.

Sig, by the way, was a frontier term for the stale urine they used in the preparation of indigo dye.

AC,

Again, keep on whining. It’s doing your side a WORLD of good. I know what feelings are. I’m in touch with my own. I consider myself an intensely sensitive person.

But you are just a little b*tch. All you do is moan and whine about how wrong we are. Yet you never try and change yourself.

And here’s another thing: based on my ability to compromise I AM superior to you. I made what was obviously a joke, and you took astonishing offense.

You are immature ‘victims’ who blame the entire world for your issues. At least that’s how you appear.

All I can say is that I hope your children have acces to a strong female figure in their lives. Because your opinions are liable to leave them as warped as you are.

Really, AC, your specious attempts to erect, inter alia, straw men, has ceased to amuse, and you are in an extremely poor position to accuse anyone of lying. So sorry, however, if what I said made you feel insulted. Perhaps, in that instance, I ought to have lied.

Ruslan, I previously told you about a man down the road who did exactly that. Even since I said that, the poor fellow has aged dog years.

Re: these whiny “real men”: ridgling, qv.

(Not specifically a white whine, though)

AC, no matter how you try to spin the numbers, the truth is that the vast majority of male rape victims were victimized by other men. Of male victims, 93% were victimized by other men while the other 7% were victimized by women. The 79% stat the MRA’s are using is 79% of male victims who were forced to penetrate someone at all, not all male rape victims. Of all male victims, only 4.8% were forced to penetrate, and of that 4.8%, 79% of them were forced to penetrate women. The MRA’s are showing a small part of the picture in order to try to say women rape men just as often as men rape women but if you look at all of the numbers, it just does not add up. There is no need to inflate the numbers of female on male rape in the first place. All rape should be taken seriously, and lying about the numbers makes the MRA’s lose credibility.

Hey, this article seriously hurts your credibility when you quote Cathy Brennan, a known transphobe who spends as much or more time spreading hatred of transpeople than she does supporting “feminism”.

Dear Mr. Zarat:

“Any body part” should be easily understood by anyone with an IQ above the average temperature in Fairbanks, Alaska during the month of February. Women in fact possess several body parts which could be inserted inside the body of another person. The fact that you are completely unaware of that suggests the following:

1) you are a really really stupid man;

2) just maybe some of your problems with women may well stem from the fact that you apparently lack any sort of imagination when it comes to matters of human sexuality. Trust me, sweetie – its not men who women are rejecting. Its you.

Very Truly Yours,

Erika

@thebionicmommy

In 2009, 40% of the people that forced another to have intercourse against their will were female according to the CDC.

The figures you are quoting, do not include forced to penetrate another, so of course most rapists appear male.

You are more than welcome to see the study and commentary and ask questions about on it here.

^[18]

To the theme from “The Bridge on the River Kwai”:

Hitler
Has only got one ball
Himmler
Has two, but they are small
Goering
Has one ball bearing
And Goebbels
Has no balls
Atall.

(WWII classic)

edit to the above. Sorry BM, I see you did give the lifetime data for forced to penetrate another.

Almost all rapes of adult males take place in correctional contexts and are conducted by other men. Prison rape is a legitimate major major problem – and it is seriously damaging to its victims.

Your fantasies about a large number of women running around raping men are just fantasies are are best left to fantasy websites.

Erika, I also dealt with a number of veterans who, as enlisted men, had been raped by commanding officers. In either case, it’s a domination trip and a symbolic castration of the victim, who is likely to suffer serious psychiatric sequelae for life.

Something that bothers me. Not too long ago there was an article that was posted on some news sites about a man who went to see his ex who was a dentist and she pulled out all his teeth. Now this story ended up being untrue but what bothered me was the reaction in the comments section in the article.

There were people making jokes, women saying things like and i’m paraphrasing because I don’t remember the exact wording, someone said something like “Is it sad that I think this is absolutely hilarious?” And I just find the whole thing disturbing, the attitude is like well he probably did something terrible you know how men are.

So yeah if as a man i’m a victim of a violent attack and the perpetrator is female it’s likely that people will think it’s hilarious instead of actually feeling empathy with me. And it isn’t just from that one article i’ve seen it a bunch of times.

I’m not an MRA but I do think that there is a serious problem with how men are viewed in society. You know, men are human beings too and i’ve seen a lot of terrible things online that have been said about men and it isn’t “whining” to complain about it. And men can certainly be abused by women too whether physically or emotionally abused.

Erika

It’s probably better you don’t start attempts sexual shaming, yourself and a few of the others here might want to think about not behaving like teenage mean girls instead of conversing normally.

You are more than welcome to look at the CDC data or this from the Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality –

“Rates of sexually aggressive behaviors among women vary from one segment of the United States to another, but the evidence presented here shows that as many as 7% of women self-report the use of physical force to obtain sex, 40% self-report sexual coercion, and over 50% self-report initiating sexual contact with a man while his judgment was impaired by drugs or alcohol (Anderson, 1998). Given these numbers, it is appropriate to conclude that women’s sexual aggression now represents a usual or typical pattern (i.e., has become normal), within the limits of the data reviewed in this paper.”

^[25]

Your own fantasy world, where women are morally pure and men do all the bad stuff, is that.

Rey,

I think you might like this: ^[28]

And Sig,

Why do you keep citing a CDC report? Either bring me back Justice Department report or kindly pipe down. Thank you!

Nick, most commenters on that kind of stuff are trashpots anyway. I don’t, for example, even view comments at CNN any more, because you can’t go there without a raincoat.

This man’s real-life situation was not funny, but it does call to mind a scene in the first film production of “Little Shop Full of Horrors” where the protagonist, impersonating a dentist, is visited by a genuine patient (Jack Nichlson) who happens to be a masochist. You next see the masochist walking out of the office with a huge grin displaying few teeth. That would be a terrible thing to do to an unwilling victim (remember “Marathon Man”?), but anyone who had seen the Nicholson scene would have to suppress a tickling feeling in the funnybone.

Aron, I tried to open the clip, but it froze too many times (weather and dead zone). I’ll try again later. It looks like a scene from “‘Allo, ‘Allo!”, though. Is it?

“Your fantasies about a large number of women running around raping men are just fantasies are are best left to fantasy websites.”

Are you saying that the CDC report “National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey” (NISVS) is a fantasy website?

I say again: according to the Centers for Disease Control of the United States 2010 IPSV survey, MORE women rape men, than men rape women.

^[27]

Why do feminists, when confronted with facts, resord to personal attacks? Did you learn anything at all about reason and critical thinking in your women’s studies curriculum?

^[27]

There is a very real threat to men in the West today. Most women are trained to be biased against men. Like fish in water, they swim in an environment of bias against men and aren’t even aware that they are wet.

Here’s one example:

“Women’s prisons should be shut down and replaced with small secure units, according to a report commissioned for the Home Office.

The plan is being recommended by Labour peer Baroness Corston as part of a 10-year reform programme.

She says women should be held in units near their families and not in large jails like the one in Holloway, London.

Her review was prompted by the deaths of six women at Styal prison, Cheshire, between August 2002 and August 2003.

If adopted by the home secretary, Baroness Corston’s approach would see Holloway and about 14 other all-female prisons in England and Wales shut down or converted into jails for men.”

^[29]

Stop and think. Really – THINK.

Can a system of justice be considered fair if half of the population is immune to going to prison and the other half is not?

Is it even sane to seriously consider closing down all of the prisons for one half of of the populace and converting them into prisons for the other half?

Yet, this was – and remains – a serious proposal.

Imagine if men’s right groups declared that all men’s prisons should be emptied of men and refilled with women.

It would be taken as an example of “hate”, condemned in shrill tones by all so-called liberals, and used as evidence that these are “hate” groups.

Yet, when women do the *exact same thing* with the genders reversed, it’s taken seriously as a viable proposal at the highest levels of the British government and soberly reported as a matter of routine politics by the BBC.

Anthony, stop providing jpegs and provide actual links to studies and papers. Some of us want to dig into those numbers you are claiming. See, critical thinking tells us we should get suspicious when someone will only post a jpeg of their claim.

Personally I think you have concocted this nonsense theory about women going around raping men all because you so desperately wish to lose your virginity.

Sig: than your conflating the Norwegian who is not a part of the mens movement,

What, you have membership cards? You are pulling a no true scotsman defense.

What is wrong with you people that none of you can construct an honest argument? The one tactic is libel, false accusations and attempts at character assassination, usually to do with rape.

It’s not libel, because it’s 1: fair comment and criticism under the principle of Times v Sullivan and 2: true. See thebionicmommy below, if the analysis at skeptical cubefarmer was too much work for you to read.

The math is simple, and you continue to misrepresent it.

Rey,

It’s from ‘The Armstrong and Miller Show,’ which is definitely up there with ‘Allo, allo!’ in terms of quality.

And Anthony, the reason we resort to ad homs is that to claim more women rape men than vice-versa isn’t even WRONG.

AC: I wrote one, and it was lost.

The answer is, work to address the inequalities.

That’s not what the MRM does. The complain that the game is rigged, because they don’t get to treat women like shit.

They demand the right to impose their will on pregnant women with the idea of, “paper abortions” where they can insist women get an abortion, or allow them to walk away from all responsibility for the child. They marry that to being against the social safety nets single parents need.

They pretend false rape is a big deal (sometimes even as they admit it isn’t [http://antimanboobz.wordpress.com/2012/05/13/manboobz-mocking-facts-since-2010-34/]. To combat this relatively minor problem they want to make rape a special category of charge. One in which the accuser is punished with the maximum sentence the accused would have faced were a conviction obtained.

Some would attach that jeopardy to the filing of a complaint. False conviction is a problem, but that’s not (contra the FRS) because of false accusations, but rather the structural flaws in our system of justice.

It would be best if the MRM were honest. When men contest custody, they win about 50/50. The reason women are usually granted custody is men aren’t that fond of petitioning for it.

VAWA (and other DV lawss) are gender neutral in the actual text (no matter what nonsense may be in the predicatory language). SAVE doesn’t care. They would replace it with laws that put women at a disadvantage in DV situations.

It would be swell if society didn’t make it hard for women to take the sorts of jobs the MRM says women “don’t want to do”. Structurally we have a society in which men are the favored class. Women are becoming more equal. This bothers a lot of men. They see the loss of status as a harm, and they want to keep women in the subservient role.

That’s bullshit. It’s morally indefensible. When they try to defend it they have to engage in sophistries, or lies.

It makes it hard for the real issues to be addressed, because the “movement” is full of bigots, misogynists, and liar, which both colors how it looks, and keeps those who aren’t bigots, misogynists and liars from taking part.

@ Aron
Apparently you think insulting somebody is the same as making a coherent argument. It’s not. If I’m so wrong, then it should be easy for you to show us where and why but you didn’t. Therefore your conclusions are invalid and no amount of insults will change that.

I have however refuted the few arguments that you did make and since you haven’t challenged those rebuttals, I take it that you concede those points.

Since you present no more arguments (unless you consider calling me a “whiner” or a “b*tch” constitutes an argument), there’s nothing else for me to say to you. I realize you’ll probably call me more names for requiring rational conversation but I really don’t care.

@ Reynardine
“Really, AC, your specious attempts to erect, inter alia, straw men, has ceased to amuse, and you are in an extremely poor position to accuse anyone of lying. “

It’s really not that difficult to understand: if you’re not lying then you can easily prove it by quoting the passage where I said what you claimed I said. You have not done that – hence you’re a liar.
And simply suggesting that I might be lying is a cheap retaliatory attack, not a defense. At best it’s a tu quoque but even then you’d have to show me where I was lying. But evidence? How dare I ask for that, right?

It’s also pretty simple to correct my suggestion that you were dismissing male victims with that previous statement. All you have to do is answer my question as to why you said that. But you won’t – therefore my suggestion stands as probably accurate.

@thebionicmommy ,
“AC, no matter how you try to spin the numbers, the truth is that the vast majority of male rape victims were victimized by other men. “

Another case of selective illiteracy? I’m not even discussing those numbers so I can hardly be spinning them.

The standard of reasoning here is abysmal. Not one single point I’ve made on this entire thread has been refuted by anyone. You won’t even have the courage to try but simply resort to name calling instead – probably to distract from your inadequate capacity for reason. It’s like playing chess where your opponent responds to your carefully placed moves by throwing the pieces at you and declaring victory.

@Anon

You said

“And Sig,

Why do you keep citing a CDC report? Either bring me back Justice Department report or kindly pipe down. Thank you”

Why do I keep citing CDC 2010? Its the only large GOV report that collects information on rape by envelopment. I keep citing Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality too.

There aren’t any Justice Department reports that collect information on rape by envelopment so exclude most female perpetrated rapes. That’s why CDC is relevant, it does what other studies don’t do. I assume that that’s why you are trying to demand their figures to the exclusion of those that actually collect information on female perpetrated rape.

And grow up, yourself and a others here are contributing little but school year behaviour.

Strong testament here to why feminism is unpopular.

Merely citing legitimate information about female perpetrated abuse and rape, and male victims provokes them to behave like school yead bullies and attack the messenger. They want it buried and prefer data that doesn’t record it.

The old guard need to come to terms with the fact, patriarchal dominance theory is debunked, and that it should bear no influence on policy and intervention. Abuse victims and perpetrators should be treated accordingly in a professional science and evidence based system, and not one that is run on feminist superstition, discrimination an misinformation.

For reference, here is a paper on the methods feminism has been using to suppress abuse data, including intimidating and threatening honest activist and researchers.

^[30]

Oh Mr. Zarat and Sig, the fact that you try to claim you have statistics from actual legitimate sources yet are not linking to them speaks volumes. If your statistics were real and not just something that insecure little men made up you’d be able to link to the original sources of said statistics rather than men’s rights websites.

Of course, even if you provided real data statistics can be highly misleading. Statistically there is no difference between a man who has been slapped once by his wife during a fight with no injury and a wife who has been beaten and raped by her husband with injury more than 100 times over an extended period before the neighbors finally call the cops and the man gets sent to prison for raping and beating his wife. Despite the dramatic difference in severity of the assaults both statistically qualify as “victims of domestic violence.”

Of course, you insecure little men would say it is the wife who slapped her husband once who is the “real abuser” and the wife beater and rapist is a victim of an unjust system because his wife no doubt deserved because she is a woman. Apparently the only “right” that the insecure little men in the men’s rights movement really cares about is the right to hit and rape women (and often children) without consequence.

Oh I guess I qualify as a mean girl for calling you insecure little men. Whatever, sweetie :P

SPLC, you should do research before quoting people. Cathy Brennan also owns pretendbian.wordpress.com, which is a hate site directed at trans women.

“With women presenting as at least as likely to commit DV..”

Nope, doesn’t matter how many times you repeat this, doesn’t make it so. Go read the paper. I don’t BLAME you, as such, for not being able to access, or not being able to critically read a scientific research paper (most people can’t, including my graduate students).

——————————————————————————–

“Why do feminists, when confronted with facts, resord to personal attacks? Did you learn anything at all about reason and critical thinking in your women’s studies curriculum?”
Pointing out someones failings when it comes to comprehension isn’t a personal attack.

But hey, NICE sexist retort by implying that we’re all wishy-washy wimmens studies majors who wouldn’t know the meaning of a standard error if it fell on our heads. Shame that I was trained as a PROPER scientist, and in a proper male hard science subject like physics to boot……………….Plus I can even read and do simple arithmetic…………..

“I say again: according to the Centers for Disease Control of the United States 2010 IPSV survey, MORE women rape men, than men rape women.”

O joy, MORE inability to interpret simple tables.

Much more fun though when you have loads of FACTS and actual figures to throw back at people…………

Let’s start with a PROPER link (rather than some blurry image):

^[15]

Tables on pages 18 and 19. The figures cherry-picked here are the 12 month as opposed to lifetime figures, and the rape figure for women (1.3 million), versus the forced to penetrate figure for men (1.3 million).

Does this mean ‘MORE women rape men, than men rape women.’?

Nope. If you compare the lifetime versus 12 month figures, you see a very different picture. You ALSO have to consider that the figures here AREN’T specific as to the SEX of the perpetrator. Hence the made to penetrate figure DOESN’T indicate the number of ‘women raping men’.

Nor does the rape figure for women indicate the number of women being raped by MEN, since it also includes women being raped by women.

So, what else can we see from these tables?

As paper itself says, for rape it gives lifetime figures of 1 in 5 women and 1 in 71 men. For sexual violence other than rape, lifetime, 1 in 2 women versus 1 in 5 men. Women seem to be predominating as the victims here……..

But I guess if you DO insist on comparing women being raped (1 in 5), versus men as victims of sexual violence other than rape (1 in 5), it kind-of looks SAMEY, but then you’ve IGNORED the 1 in 2 women (why does this sound familiar, but hey, us girlies are USED to being ignored by men……….).

As regards the sex of the perpetrator, I quote (page 24):

“For female rape victims, 98.1% reported only male perpetrators. Additionally, 92.5% of female victims of sexual violence other than rape reported only male perpetrators.”

and

“For male victims, the sex of the perpetrator varied by the type of sexual violence experienced. The majority of male rape victims (93.3%) reported only male perpetrators. For three of the other forms of sexual violence, a majority of male victims reported only female perpetrators: being made to penetrate (79.2%), sexual coercion (83.6%), and unwanted sexual contact (53.1%).”

Note that this is for the LIFETIME figures, where the rape/forced to penetrate figures were 21.8 versus 5.5 million (if you insist on rape versus forced to penetrate as the comparison you wish to make).

Hence that gives 21 million men raping women (assuming only one incidence per male), versus 4.4 million women forcing men to penetrate (same assumption). Hardly ‘MORE THAN’ and not anywhere near ‘EQUAL’. Plus I haven’t looked at any estimates of the TOTAL number of male perpetrators versus total number of female perpetrators.

Either way, the statement that:

“I say again: according to the Centers for Disease Control of the United States 2010 IPSV survey, MORE women rape men, than men rape women.”

is just plain WRONG.

QED.

Anthony Zarat, you should really admit that you’ve just got it totally WRONG. 0/10, must try harder………………

I now need to get a coffee and dial-down my sarcasm level from 11 back to its default setting…………………….

Sig, sweetie – self reported statistics about human sexuality are notoriously unreliable.

One obvious question that would come up about self reports aboout sexual aggression would be are their false positives from people who have engaged in consensual BDSM activities answering honestly. Those activities may well involve force and coersion – so a person may well answer yes but of course, they are consensual.

Another would be what do people define as coersion – that is a pretty vague term and could be interpreted broadly. Does saying “honey, if you want to have sex tonight you have to wash the dishes first” qualify as sexual coersion? Does trying to get that cute guy in the second row’s attention by wearing a miniskirt and halter top to class qualify? Sexting or sending notes? Saying “if you want to have sex with me you have to put a ring on my finger”? Requiring a certain type of foreplay before sex? And of course, the consensual BDSM issue again arises here. Coersion could mean almost anything. Self reported surveys based upon a vague term proves absolutely nothing.

All the sex, drug, and alcohol statistic proves is that women act stupidly when they use drugs and/or alcohol and may have regrets later. Hardly news there.

Basically your statistics prove absolutely nothing – but I’m sure you will post them several more times to share your fantasy about women raping men. Sweetie, fantasies work best when they are only shared with intimate partners ;)

Hey Sig,

I am a man, not an ANON. My name is Aron.

And just like the others, you’re not even WRONG.

Just for fun, on the Iowa Sex Offender Registry at ^[31] which as far as I know is the only state sex offender registry which allows for such searching (use the advanced search feature) you can find the following numbers:

Total number of female sex offenders – 117

Number of female sex offenders with male victims overall – 84

Number of female sex ofenders with adult male victims – 7

Number of female sex offenders who committed a forcible sex offense against an adult male victim – 1

Number of female sex offenders with a female victim – 33

Number of female sex offenders with an adult female victim – 4

Number of female sex offenders with a female victim who committed a forcible offense – 1 or 2 (depending upon if you count sex trafficking as a violent offense).

Total number of Male sex offenders – 5305

Number of male sex offenders with a female victim – 4,706

Number of male sex offenders with an adult female victim – 884

Number of male sex offenders with a male victim – 586

Number of male sex offenders with an adult male victim – 66

Those numbers speak for themselves (and you are perfectly free to check them by going to the Official Iowa Sex Offender Registry – note the use and provision of an original source – and checking them yourself).

I already explained the CDC stats above, AnthonyZarat. Of male rape victims, 93% were victimized by other men and 7% were raped by women. Here is a link to the full summary from where you linked the charts so people can read
^[15] . On page 3, the authors of the study state “Male rape victims and male victims of non-contact unwanted sexual experiences reported predominantly male perpetrators.”

You are only looking at the numbers for just one year, and everyone who participated in the survey had to be 18 or older. That means the numbers you are using exclude all victims who are minors, and it ignores all victims who were victimized more than one year ago. Another mistake you make is to assume that all of the male victims who were forced to penetrate were forced to penetrate women, when some of the were forced to penetrate other men. When you look at the lifetime numbers, it is clear that the vast majority of both male and female victims of rape were victimized by men.

It is also hard to believe that the MRA’s are advocating for any victims of rape when at A Voice for Men’s Activism page, it encourages anyone on a jury at a rape trial to vote not guilty, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that the defendant is guilty. Jury nullification for rape trials would harm victims, allow rapists to commit more rapes, and for all intents and purposes, legalize rape.

Damn, look at all the fun I missed by going back to bed after the pre-dawn dogwalk!

Aron, your telling me that the show in question was comparable to “‘Allo, ‘Allo!” has probably enlightened me sufficiently.

AC, your standards of proof for proving you’re lying v other people proving they’re not would be called remarkable if you could only be called significant.

And….waiter! Please wipe the crumbs off our Stammtisch! They’re drawing flies!

It took a little more coffee to clear my mind enough, but “rape by envelopment” is not a legal or forensic category. The act or acts alluded to are subsumed under “sexual battery”. “Envelopment” is a term used mostly in porn, enlightening only as to how our unbidden guests from Men Going To the Toilet spend most of their time.

Erika – those statistics speak for themselves? what do they say exactly? do they say how many raped men don’t report getting raped? does it say how many men did not report getting raped out of fear of being accused of domestic violence or rape themselves?

Erik, you tell us how many women have tried to rape you. The same for the rest of you guys. Honest, you don’t even have to say if the attempt succeeded, just describe it up to the point where you were certain it was a serious attempt.

@bionicmommy

“You are only looking at the numbers for just one year”

Yes I am well aware that they are the numbers for the previous year, that’s why I keep repeating that they are the 12 month figures.

What we are saying is that the research that gives a snap shot of todays figures, that actually asks men about being raped by women, like CDC 2010 previous 12 months and all the smaller studies that do also collect information from both genders including envelopment, show relative parity in victimization and perpetration (out side of prison).

And there are various things that contribute to disparities between men and women reporting, women are x6 times more likely to report CSA than men are for example.

“16% of men with documented cases of sexual abuse considered their early childhood experiences sexual abuse, compared with 64% of women with documented cases of sexual abuse. These gender differences may reflect inadequate measurement techniques or an unwillingness on the part of men to disclose this information (Widom and Morris 1997).”

We are free to talk about what the research says. Its not a thought crime, if you feel that people that talk about these things should be attacked or silenced, it says more about you and your problematic ideology, than anything else.

You are more than welcome to add your comments here

^[18]

Erik, it’s true that many male victims of rape and domestic violence do not report what happened to them. This is also true of female victims of rape and domestic violence. Both rape and domestic violence are under reported crimes for men, women, and minors.

The men’s rights advocates are not doing any favors for any victims by saying that most accusations of rape and domestic violence are false. The False Rape Society has an agenda of making all rape victims look like liars, and S.A.V.E. has an agenda to repeal any laws that help victims of intimate partner violence. SAVE even tagets gender neutral laws like the VAWA, no drop prosecution policies, and predominant aggressor laws. That is why SAVE and The False Rape Society contribute posts to A Voice for Men, a website that advocates jury nullification for all rape trials.

Sig, can you provide a link to the actual Widom and Morris study and not a link to a reddit thread? I tried to find the file myself but it is locked behind a paywall. If you cite the source, you should be able to provide the source so everyone can read it for themselves. Even if more girls than boys report their child sexual abuse, that does not change the lifetime figure that of male rape victims, 93% were victimized by other men.

It is important to note that not all rapes that are classified as “forced to penetrate” are cases of vaginal envelopment, because 21% of male victims who were forced to penetrate were forced to penetrate other men. The term envelopment excludes male victims forced to penetrate an anus or mouth. That is why the report used the language it did, to account for the other ways men can be raped when forced to penetrate someone else.

I never said that anyone should be attacked or silenced for disagreeing. It is the MRA’s running register-her that intimidate anyone who challenges any claims made by MRA’s. The bigot category of register her.com was created in order to encourage vigilantism against women who disagree with MRA’s. This is a silencing tactic meant to control what people say using fear, and that’s why so many groups in the manosphere are being criticized here at the Southern Poverty Law Center.

@ Pecunium
so your advice for people seeking to redress inequalities that affect men is:
“work to address the inequalities.”

But doing so would, by definition, make them MRAs and therefore, according to you, misogynists. You’re not exactly being selective or specific about misogynist MRAs – you’re just calling all of them misogynists. This effectively means that caring about men’s rights is equivalent to hating women. Feel free to specify your blanket assertions (In particular I’d like to see examples of MRAs that you think aren’t misogynists). As it stands now, I find your reasoning puts people who genuinely want equality between a rock and a hard place.

I suspect that the non-misogynists challenging any laws that create a presumption against men don’t identify as MRAs. The websites that do so identify are filled with…but, res ipsa loquitur.

Note that, while I had reason to suspect “Jason Smith” was a committee, the style of our unbidden guests is such that I am beginning to think the reverse.

@ Reynardine
“AC, your standards of proof for proving you’re lying v other people proving they’re not would be called remarkable if you could only be called significant.”

Why the hell would I try to prove that I’m lying? Check your sentences for coherence and clarity. No wonder your reasoning is such a mess.

And we can’t even start talking about “standards of proof” if you haven’t even attempted to supply any proof of any standard. Obviously you’re not criticizing my standard of proof (since I haven’t even stated it). You know all too well that you have none (otherwise you’d have come up with it long ago). This is just your pitiful and embarrassingly immature attempt to save face. Nothing more.

In your own interest it’s better you just give up because apparently your attempts to save your sinking ship of mindless squabble are just making it sink faster. It’s funny to watch though.

oh so you insecure little men of the men’s supremacy movement are now so concerned about non-reporting of rape – but only because you need to cling to your little fantasy about women raping men – in any other context it would be the normal men’s supremacist line about how the woman obviously must be lying about being raped. Because obviously its always men that are the victims and women that are the victimizers.

Even the fact that most men and boys who are raped are raped by other men or boys – that must be disputed because it goes against the overall narrative of the insecure little men’s supremacist movement – that is that men are always the victims no matter what and its always a woman’s fault.

Really, why don’t you just admit that you are scared of women? Its pretty obvious that is your real issue

Reynardine–Thank you for pointing out that the women who are really anti-male are those who consider themselves anti-feminist. I’ve identified as feminist since my college years, and while anecdotal, I can compare my conversations with feminist friends/reading feminist work to conversations with friends who don’t identify as feminist, and back up your findings 100%. And non-feminist women don’t like to hear it when feminists speak up and try to tone down the vitriol.

Nick–while I agree that the comments about the fabricated (thankfully) story about the dental patient are regrettable, I think part of the larger context is the reluctance of people, both male and female, to view men as victims. It is not a direct corollary, but yet I’m reminded of stories of children being sexually victimized by teachers and other authorities. If the victim is a female, people are rightfully outraged. But if the victim is male, the comments lean toward “I wish I had been abused like that in school!” This is probably not the best example (hell, I know it’s not), but I can’t help but feel that, although the commenter you referred to in the dentist story is female, and in my example is male, there is a connection to be found between them in joking about men as victims. This is wrong and it needs to stop. I can tell you, though, that it won’t end by following any MRM advice, but instead by listening to feminists, who have long advocated for men to be emotional, full human beings (have a “feminine side”, if you will), without fear of cultural recriminations (being called gay, pussy-whipped, etc.). If our culture as a whole wasn’t so vested in men being macho, invulnerable guys-guys, seeing a story where a girlfriend got even in a violent way would be much less easy to laugh at. I would also bet what little I have in my 401-K that the dentist commenter in question didn’t identify as a feminist.

Also–if this has already been posted, I apologize–I have been able to read many of these posts, but not all–even if the CDC statistics on female initiation of DV incidents are true, it doesn’t take into account motivation. Oftentimes, women in DV situations will initiate an incident–hit first, if you will–because they know a beating is coming. It’s part of the cycle of violence–a DV incident occurs, there’s the honeymoon/apology period, then the buildup to the next incident. This happens repeatedly over the course of an abusive relationship. For many women, this buildup is unbearable, because they don’t know from day to day if it will be the day they are beaten again. Because of this, they will instigate the next incident, either by intentionally pissing off their partner, or by actually being physically violent, to 1) just get it over with because it’s inevitable, and 2) feel like they can exert a tiny bit of control over the situation. Abused women feel powerless, and being able to “choose” when the incident will happen, and therefore be able to anticipate it, gives them a small feeling of control over a life in which they never know what is around the corner. So a simple statistic saying women initiate DV situations really means nothing without context, and certainly doesn’t mean that women are more violent than men.

@bionicmommy

“I never said that anyone should be attacked or silenced for disagreeing”

You are repeatedly making false accusations about people, websites and groups here.

Someone advocates to protect the civil rights of the falsely accused, you attack them with false accusations about trying to make all rape accusers look like liars.

A group are trying to get a non discriminatory evidence based DV services in place, you make another set of false accusations against them.

You feel a strong need to argue with people that point out that in 2009 40% of those that forced a man to have sex against his will were female and victimization was equal between the genders, according to the first large study that asked about forcing to penetrate another as well as penetration.

Here is what you asked for.

Widom C. S. and Morris S., Accuracy of Adult Recollections of Childhood Victimization: Part 2. Childhood Sexual Abuse, Psychological Assessment, Vol. 9, No. l, 34-46, 1997

More reasons that men under report here

“For instance, the link between sexual abuse and suicide attempts is stronger in boys (Rhodes et al. 2001) and sexually abused boys are twice as likely to commit suicide (Molnar et al. 2001) than sexually abused girls. In addition to that, there is a risk factor for sexually abused men to sexually abuse others is if their abuser was female (Salter et al. 2003.)”

Taken from this article ^[32]

My ship is quite fine, little AC, and I am not the one who is uttering mindless squabble. But since you appear to have failed eighth grade English, the sense of the phrase you object to ought clearly to have been understood to have been: Your standards for [our] proving you are lying are far more stringent than those you apply to yourself “proving” we are lying. It is, in that small and dessicated attic you call a mind, enough for you to make an assertion for it to be a cosmic truth; the burden you place on others to rebut it is impossibly high.

As noted by Eomer of Rohan, the accusation of lying comes all too readily to the lips of liars. You have thus accused yourself out of your own mouth many times over. I point out herein, though I am as capable of the odd antecaffeine howler as anyone, I spent a couple of my younger years as the English examiner of a very reputable language school. Consequently, when I say that your constructions of language exhibit a special (and specious) artfulness, my opinion would actually carry weight in a court of law.

Concerned, I also wonder ed when the Dr Pepper for Men ad would hit the fan. It’s no more for men that Virginia Slim cigarettes were for women, but it indicates some ad man thought it would work for some reason.
For a light look at all this, check out “Unknown Hinson”‘s music video of building a rocket to a planet inhabited by all women. He is the voice of Orly on Squidbillies, an unmatched guitar maniac, and should be President IMO.

Carmen, I imagine you, as well as most of the people here, have either seen or read “The Godfather”. You might recall that when Carlo needed to beat up his wife in order to provoke his brother-in-law into rushing carelessly out of the compound and into the reach of assassination, he first provoked her into some form of violence (I think it was throwing fried peppers) by flaunting his infidelity. This was his “justification” for beating his pregnant wife black and blue. This kind of thing – “I just sent your cat to the pound”, or “I gave away your family china to the Sally”, or, “I’ve been screwing your best friend for a year”, is a pretty common tactic of abusers to provoke a reaction that justifies upping the ante. In the case where the abuser is markedly stronger than the victim, “upping the ante” is likely to mean serious physical abuse.

By now, it’s as useless trying to document this stuff as it is to prove to Young-Earthers that the planet is at least four billion years old. They know they are lying out of malice, as do these manosphere trolls, and they will always apply a double standard to their own assertions and “evidence” v anything that refutes it. This, in itself, is a well-known tactic of psychological abuse, and by using it, they prove what they deny.

@Raydarnie

It’s you that looks like the 10th grader. While other people are making cogent arguments and posting links to back themselves up, you are contributing nothing but the sort of relational aggression and snark that’s more commonly associated teenagers. You are wasting whatever English skills you might here as window dressing for passive aggression and bile, all too typical of those associated with your ideology.

Hey Sig,

Cry some more! You can repeat the ‘rubber and glue’ silliness again and again, or you can simply attempt to compromise. But we know that’s never going to happen.

After all, IT’S ALWAYS PROJECTION, right?

@ Reynardine
“My ship is quite fine, little AC,”
lol. Even your insults are pathetic.

“I am not the one who is uttering mindless squabble.”

Denial doesn’t make it false.

“It is, in that small and dessicated attic you call a mind, enough for you to make an assertion for it to be a cosmic truth; the burden you place on others to rebut it is impossibly high.”

I never just made an assertion about you lying. I clearly said why and how. All you had to do is show me where I said what you claim I said. That’s not an impossibly high standard by any stretch of the imagination. Come on. If I claimed that you said black people are inferior, then you’d rightfully demand to be shown some evidence that you said it and if I didn’t come up with any but instead just throw insults at you, then you’d rightfully conclude that it was a lie. That situation is analogous to ours.

“As noted by Eomer of Rohan, the accusation of lying comes all too readily to the lips of liars. You have thus accused yourself out of your own mouth many times over. “

In other words, because somebody said that liars can also accuse people of lying, therefore EVERYBODY who accuses people of lying is automatically accusing themselves. There’s that “coherence” of yours again. Apparently you like humiliating yourself.

“I point out herein, though I am as capable of the odd antecaffeine howler as anyone, I spent a couple of my younger years as the English examiner of a very reputable language school.”

That makes it all the more embarrassing for you.

Sig, you are pathetic.

As for you, AC, it is impossible for anyone here to insult you. It is impossible even to describe you, as words fail the most eloquent among us. We can only marvel at your indescribableness.

AC,

Quit while you’re behind. Or don’t! The latter option is vastly more entertaining.

I’m impressed; the “Men’s rights movement” rivals the White Nationalist movement in terms of whining and butthurt. I wish I had started picking on these losers YEARS ago!

Lol Reynardine,
notice the pattern?
1) you say something false or illogical
2) I point it out to you
3) you try to cover it up with ad hominem fallacies
4) rinse and repeat.

And your contribution Aron can be summed up like this:
“you stupid hahaha you wrong duh, huh? duh! I’m like clever ‘n stuff”

Example:
AC: “the political power of a group is a function of the extent of its political representation and does not require political leaders themselves to be members of that group.”

Aron’s response:
“you b*tch”

Ruslan, one shouldn’t be surprised – the “men’s rights movement” should be more accurately called male supremacists – as such, they are no different than white supremacists.

The male supremacists complaining that only women can be sexist and how men are just victims of women are no different from the white supremacists claiming that only racial minorities in this country can be racist and that whites are just victims of other races.

Just as the white supremacists represent the most pathetic examples of white people the male supremacists represent the most pathetic examples of men.

The fact that even when confronted with actual arguments they simply cannot respond with anything other than their same cut and paste talking points and non-original sources speaks volumes.

But I’m just a mean girl so what do I know?

Sig, once again you linked to a blog and not the actual full study. You gave a small except which doesn’t include the thesis of the study. Even the quote you gave didn’t say that women rape men more than men rape women. It was about the link between rape and suicide. I would prefer to read the whole study myself to see what it says rather than just take you at your word that it proves it says what you say it says.

The False Rape Society is just another MRA website that is more about calling women liars than it is defending the rights of those who are falsely accused. That is why they post at A Voice for Men, a website that advocates for people on jury duty to vote not guilty in all rape trials, even when the evidence shows guilt beyond the shadow of a doubt. They also post at The Spearhead, a website devoted to bashing women. Why would the False Rape Society contribute to misogynistic websites if their only mission was to help people falsely accused of rape?

I did not say anything false about SAVE either. They say themselves that they want to replace the VAWA with their own bill that cuts services for victims of domestic violence. They also advocate for the elimination of predominant aggressor laws, mandatory arrest policies, and no drop prosecution policies. You can see some of their goals at ^[33]. I also wonder why they contribute to A Voice for Men if they are not a misogynistic organization.

Now you are saying you are discussing the data from 2009. I have been discussing the CDC report published in 2011 which gave abuse and rape data for the year 2010. Do you have a link to the study you are referencing for the year of 2009?

Ruslan, never mind picking on them. They’re doing as much to their noses as fast as they can. The results are all over their white quilted wallpaper, waiting to be eaten.

Erika, you’re right. It’s time-honored DARVO- Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender. Everyone who has ever dealt professionally with abusers/oppressors knows this acronym.

AC, I am flattered by your obsession with me, but I assure you, it is not reciprocated.

AC,

Funny, but I think you may have left out a couple things I wrote. Basically what I’m trying to convey is that you aren’t worth my — forgive my immodesty here, but my friends on the board can attest to the veracity of my — somewhat sizable intellect.

I came here to troll you and make you look like arses. Based upon the great swaths of verbiage — read: GARBAGE — you’ve produced, I think I’ve succeeded.

And along Ruslan’s lines, the only real difference between yourselves and the WNs and others of the Stormfront crowd is that you guys aren’t quite so innately detestable. But goodness knows you can whine just as loudly as the best of ‘em…

Also, because I enjoyed your rather feeble parody of my mockery of yourselves, I’ll indulge you with your own (or rather MY own) words:

you stupid hahaha you wrong duh, huh? duh! I’m like clever ‘n stuff

(I especially enjoyed the lack of proper capitalization and punctuation. And the syntax was brilliant. Good show!)

UUUUUUUHHHHHHH…

“AC, I am flattered by your obsession with me, but I assure you, it is not reciprocated.”

That’s pretty hypocritical given that you’re the one constantly diverting attention towards me and away from the arguments I make.
And my obsession, if one can call it that, is with clearing up lies and fallacious reasoning. It only seems like it’s about you because you do so much of those and so little else.

I was going to question some of our whiny guests as to how they would feel if their own girlfriend or wife were raped, then demonized as a liar and her rapist walked free due to the jury nullification some of them advocate. Then I remembered- these losers don’t have girlfriends or wives.

@bionicmommy

“Sig, once again you linked to a blog and not the actual full study.”

You have the name of the journal it appears in along with and a well sources article about the topic.

“The False Rape Society is just another MRA website that is more about calling women liars than it is defending the rights of those who are falsely accused”

If that unlikely scenario wasn’t F.A. they wouldn’t be saying things like this

“Princeton’s solution to thorny ‘Dear Colleague’ problem should be national model
COTWA applauds Princeton University, which will continue to run campus sexual assault proceedings disciplinary proceedings using a “clear and persuasive” standard, while conducting a parallel process in sexual assault cases using the preponderance of the evidence standard to determine if there has been a Title IX violation. This means an accused student might be cleared of sexual assault, but the school might have a duty to provide support for the accuser. A perfect balance to protecting the accuser while insuring the innocent aren’t punished. And the Dept. of Education’s Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Russlynn Ali indicated she wasn’t necessarily opposed. We hope all schools follow suit.”

The fact that you are flinging F.As relating to sex crimes around so liberally and using them as a weapon, is underscoring the need to restore and protect the civil rights of the accused.

“That is why they post at A Voice for Men, a website that advocates for people on jury duty to vote not guilty in all rape trials, even when the evidence shows guilt beyond the shadow of a doubt”

This is very faulty logic, and you left out some vital context.

Elam is saying nullify in protest of civil rights violations that make it impossible to get a fair trial.

Folks, there are some people around here who can’t do a damn thing but play the same old broken record. It’s a clear sign of organic oligophrenia. But now, as I am in the Eastern timezone, I actually have to think about food.

In fact, that is probably true of most of us. Most of us can’t live off what our honored visitors paste to their quilted wallpaper. Kellner! Bitte reinigen Sie die Krümmel!

@bionicmommy

“Now you are saying you are discussing the data from 2009. I have been discussing the CDC report published in 2011 which gave abuse and rape data for the year 2010. Do you have a link to the study you are referencing for the year of 2009?”

We are talking about the CDC 2010, the previous 12 months data would presumably be a snap shot of 2009. It was published in 2011.

Reynardine: I’m pretty sure that the use of the term “envelopment” in this context is actually a feminist idea, and a very old one at that. The idea is to break the linguistic assumption that the person doing the penetrating is the agent and the person being penetrated is the one being passively acted upon.

thebionicmommy: actually, envelopment includes men being forced to penetrate a mouth or anus. Similarly, the CDC’s definition of “penetration”, and many legal definitions, includes any kind of oral-vaginal contact so long as the person performing the oral is raping the person with the vagina, and any kind of oral-penile contact so long as the person with the penis is doing the raping. Basically, the penetration-based definition of rape stretches the meaning of “penetration” so that it covers every kind of forced sexual intercouse where a man is the aggressor and a woman the victim, and not an inch further.

Ruslan Amirkhanov: there is a link to the CDC study in someone else’s comment earlier in the discussion. You know who genuinely didn’t bother to link exact same CDC study so that people could check the fine print, and used it in a really interesting fashion? The SPLC, in their report on the Men’s Rights movement that so many people are complaining about. They also carefully avoided linking to any examples of the MRA argument they were “debunking”, probably because people would realise that it was based on the exact same CDC study and that the SPLC was defining rape in a way that excluded nearly all men who were forced to have sex with women using violence.

thebionicmommy: See above. The CDC’s headline statistics on rape that you’re using only include forced sexual intercourse where the victim was the one being penetrated. If you define rape to exclude the main kinds of forced sexual intercourse that female rapists use against men, then of course you won’t find many female rapists! Scroll down a bit further to section 2: 1.4% of men in the US reported having been forcibly penetrate, whereas 4.8% reported having been forced to penetrate and 79.2% of those reported only female perpetrators – meaning at least 3.8% of men were raped by women in ways that the CDC didn’t categorise as rape, far more than the number of men raped in any other way!

(Those are lifetime stats by the way. There’s no information about the gender of the perpetrator or about CDC-defined rape against men available at all in the 12-month statistics.)

I read all this, and since I’m really an outsider to American culture (Native American, descendent of a matriarchal society which still is in many ways), I am flummoxed by the depths of hostility. Do men sometimes have valid complaints – yes, both my other half and I have seen false charges of rape and pedophilia leveled at men to try to destroy them (and they have sometimes worked) and other really vicious and nasty attempts to harm – often for monetary gain or in custody battles. The article quickly mentions the fact that some men have reasonable and valid complaints.

I’ve also talked with women who were the victim of rape (by their preacher/pastor/priest no less) and know where much of the hostility comes from. I’ve had many friends over the years who have been abused in relationships… the worst I think was a woman who was in an abusive marriage for several years – her ex was deeply into the “submission theology” crap and she bears both physical and emotional scars and will probably for the rest of her life. (I also used to know a girl that I’m pretty sure was beaten to death by her “husband” for not being submissive enough – long story.) I’ve heard the rhetoric from men, and although I know some are just talking bravado, at the same time I also realize that most of what I’ve heard was meant. Also, people are quick to pick up when they’re considered second-class citizens, and believe me, that can trigger some pretty strong rage. I’ve seen and heard things where I half expected the woman in the situation to hand the guy his balls or his head, and rightfully so.

The problem stems from this stupid idea that someone has to be the head… that one is more important than the other. Patriarchy brings a lot of the problems on itself. The problem is, people like myself, who don’t buy the patriarchal bullshit, often end up the target of hate and rage (from both sides). Rage like that always hits the innocent. A few times, women who’ve been put through hell could not look beyond my “physical characteristics” and because I was a convenient target, started dumping. (I’ve received some vicious verbal abuse because I was a man and just sitting there – the dismissive “you’re just a man” and getting accusations of infidelity and misogynistic thinking are quite unpleasant.) Men get angry because I refuse to agree with their misogynistic thinking and speak my mind, which since I consider myself a militant feminist, often goes against what they believe should be. For instance, I’ve told men that if they cheated or played games on their wives (or significant others) while expecting their wives to be faithful – they deserved what they got and if they ended up loosing everything, got what they deserved. I also strongly believe in equal pay for equal work, and that women and men are equal. In other words… what’s good for the goose is always good for the gander. That really sets off the patriarchal types who expect it to all be their way.

American (and other) societies teach men and women that we’re somehow vastly different… almost polar opposites. The truth: except for the physical characteristics, we really aren’t that different. What “differences” there are were programmed into us from infancy… it’s called enculturation. For instance, women are supposed to be emotional and men logical, right? Well, from my observation, women use emotion language to express their logical thinking, and men use “logic” to deny that what really was motivating or guiding them was emotion. (I also admit that’s also oversimplified by an extreme amount, but I hope it gets my point across.)

The solution is to drop the double standards and be honest. Nearly every problem I’ve encountered happened because of these two things… a nice double standard and a big lack of honesty. (That also means learning to be honest with one’s self!)

We are ALL people, after all.

Having said that, the fact is that men in this culture have been programmed for centuries to be dominant and the patriarchal bullshit behind that thinking is the cause of the hostility I read here. Action-reaction-reaction – and it’s escalating. The violent rhetoric reported by SPLC is a symptom and a bad one.

“You have the name of the journal it appears in along with and a well sources article about the topic.”

Sig, the “well sourced” articles you gave were opinion pieces that do no link to the full study they cite. Just because you gave the name of the journal, does not mean I can access the article. It is behind a paywall. How can I trust you that it proves your point that there are more female rapists than male rapists? Even your excerpt didn’t state that, so it makes me wonder if you even read the study or if you are just repeating what you’ve read at blogs. Either way, I did include the link to the full CDC report, and it showed that the vast majority of both male and female victims of rape were victimized by other men. You have not given a link to any other studies that refute that data.

“The fact that you are flinging F.As relating to sex crimes around so liberally and using them as a weapon, is underscoring the need to restore and protect the civil rights of the accused. ”

Where did I ever fling a false accusation about anything? I can scroll up and read everything I’ve already said. All I said about the False Rape Society is that they contribute to misogynistic websites and that they make it harder for victims of rape to be taken seriously by over inflating the number of false accusations.

How exactly do you think jury nullification in all rape trials helps protect the civil rights of the accused? It just allows guilty rapists to go free and commit more rape. I read Elam’s blog post advocating jury nullification, and I disagree with his position. I think rape shield laws are necessary to keep irrelevant details out of rape trials, such as what a victim was wearing at the time or if he or she is promiscuous. Just because a person is promiscuous does not make it okay for other people to rape him or her. Rape shield laws help ensure that everyone can get justice at a rape trial regardless of their sexual history.

Welcome into the pissoir, Walkaway.

This is not the only place I’ve seen this kind of rhetoric, and what I’ve seen elsewhere has been both obscene and gynocidal. The fact that these people think they have to invade an opposing forum and demand that everyone thereon stop thinking Bad Thoughts (usually a mirror-projection of their own) is most eloquent. This stuff is being stoked, and the stochastic violence that erupts down the line could encompass somebody’s nine-year-old child, as it did in Tucson. Anyhow, thanks for coming and seeing for yourself, and speaking out of your experience.

Thebionicmommy: since they probably hate their own womenfolk (if any) the most of all, they probably don’t care if someone can rape them and walk free.

Makomk: the only place I have ever seen “envelopment” (and also “engulfment”) used in this sense is when I have, in the course of psych or legal work, found it in porn. Any acts so describable would, under the felony statutes of my state, be subsumed under “sexual battery”, if not consensual. The offender, regardless of sex, would be the one riding the pony.

Most state laws currently use this kind of gender-neutral language. Even before such language was adopted, any nonconsensual conduct not fitting the old common-law definition of rape was still (if penetration of anything was forced by either party) forcible sodomy, or if no penetration occurred, lewd and lascivious assault. Even under the former (prior to 1974) definition, Florida recognized any kind of penetrative conduct with a child of either sex under ten as rape.

@Murphy

You can make the argument against abortion on the basis of gender all you want, but in practice, how exactly would you enforce such a law? If a woman wanted to abort just because the fetus would be a sex they didn’t want, but doing so would technically be illegal, all the woman would have to do is use some other reason for asking for the abortion. In reality, the only reason you need is, “I do not want to bare a child.” It’s just an absurd thing to fight in a country where it’s not a cultural phenomenon like it is in other countries and would be near impossible to prosecute without the ability to read minds.

@bionicmommy

How can I trust you that it proves your point that there are more female rapists than male rapists?

Stop making false accusations relating to sex crimes please. I never made the claim that there are more false rapists than male in the first place.

The CDC data I’m citing seems to indicate that there are slightly more male rapists than female.

“How exactly do you think jury nullification in all rape trials helps protect the civil rights of the accused?”

I never said I believed that. I added Paul Elams context that you left out. Paul Elam, in his shock advocacy suggested this tactic to protest civil rights roll backs.

“Where did I ever fling a false accusation about anything? I can scroll up and read everything I’ve already said.

This is one of the false accusations relating to sex crimes that you made.

““The False Rape Society is just another MRA website that is more about calling women liars than it is defending the rights of those who are falsely accused”

This

“that they make it harder for victims of rape to be taken seriously by over inflating the number of false accusations.”

is another.

Here are the False Rape Society, talking about the importance of ” A perfect balance to protecting the accuser while insuring the innocent aren’t punished”.

““Princeton’s solution to thorny ‘Dear Colleague’ problem should be national model
COTWA applauds Princeton University, which will continue to run campus sexual assault proceedings disciplinary proceedings using a “clear and persuasive” standard, while conducting a parallel process in sexual assault cases using the preponderance of the evidence standard to determine if there has been a Title IX violation. This means an accused student might be cleared of sexual assault, but the school might have a duty to provide support for the accuser. A perfect balance to protecting the accuser while insuring the innocent aren’t punished. And the Dept. of Education’s Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Russlynn Ali indicated she wasn’t necessarily opposed. We hope all schools follow suit.”

Look, I don’t want to be untangling a web of deceitful arguments and false accusations relating to sex crimes, its totally unproductive for you, and it solidifies the mens movement points that false accusations and laws that facilitate them are a significant problem and that feminism tells lies about men and reality in order to castigate men and manipulate the system.

Please either address me in good faith or not at all.

EDIT TO ABOVE

“Stop making false accusations relating to sex crimes please. I never made the claim that there are more female rapists than male in the first place.

If arguments were coins and bills, AC, Sig, and a couple of other visitors would be in Leavenworth for uttering and passing counterfeit.

You are so right, Reynardine.

MRA’s are wrong, because they want to take away rights that I enjoy as a woman. I cherish having the right to vote, the right to work outside the home, the right to drive, the right to express opinions, the right to have police protection from violence, and the right to even run for political office if I ever chose to do so. I’ve seen MRA’s that say that women are subhuman and need to be controlled by men because we can’t be trusted to have the same freedoms men take for granted. That is not the kind of world I want, and I don’t want other women to be oppressed either.

Now the MRA’s are claiming victory for the US House of Representatives Republicans passing a weakened version of the Violence Against Women Act. SAVE is cheering that the Republicans removed provisions to help immigrants get visas to escape from abusive marriages and provisions to expand services for gay, lesbian, and transgender victims of intimate partner violence. Concerned Women for America (CWA) lobbied along with SAVE to have these changes made, because they believe that some victims don’t deserve protection from violence. CWA has already been listed as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center for its homophobia, and now they have created a partnership with MRA groups that will align with anyone that wants to weaken domestic violence laws.

The MRA’s themselves are too small of a fringe movement to have much sway over laws in the US. However, now that they are aligning with right wing extremists like Concerned Women for America, they can actually have some influence over the Republican party and end up making laws that harm women.

Bionicmommy, I don’t know if they’ll post anything that singles out a candidate or party, but a number of right-wing pundits- including some women- have proposed repealing the Nineteenth Amendment on the ground that female hormones make them “too mommyish”, and therefore too liberal and peace-loving to be trusted with power. Normally, this would be nothing but the noise of wind turning a pinwheel,, but the PNAC-derived cadre backing Rott Mimney is exactly proposing a program of pure and eternal war against “political Islamism” abroad, coupled with one of pure and eternal stratification at home, and in this, disenfranchising women would be a major step. Because the standard gerrymandering/election qualifications laws don’t disproportionately weed out women voters, I don’t doubt that people like our cherished unbidden guests are being deliberately incited to hatred against women, in hopes that there will be enough pre-election and election-day violence against them to suppress their votes.

@bionicmommy

“MRA’s are wrong, because they want to take away rights that I enjoy as a woman. I cherish having the right to vote, the right to work outside the home, the right to drive, the right to express opinions, the right to have police protection from violence, and the right to even run for political office …. etc”

Those are just more malicious false accusations Bionicmommy

You have moved on from making false accusations relating to sex crimes, to making false accusations about other forms of ill towards women.

Why is it that all feminists arguments against men’s rights, boil down to false accusation of one sort or another?

And I hear the same old counterfeit argument falling out of one of the same old counterfeiting mouths. Damn, it’s getting as tiresome as listening to a hundred fifty repetitions of “The Farmer On the Rock”.

Sig said, “Why is it that all feminists arguments against men’s rights, boil down to false accusation of one sort or another?”

You win the Grand Prize for Sweeping, Hasty and Unjustified Generalizations. Remarks like that will prevent anyone rational from taking you seriously.

In general, I find it incomprehensible that these men are surrounded by violent, domineering, dishonest women. My own experience is very different, and the random citation (and in several cases here, distortion) of a handful of debatable studies isn’t going to cause me to reject my six decades of personal observation. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

CM, forget “The Farmer On The Rock”. It’s getting like standing in a field latrine after a mass Thanksgiving dinner and listening to the plops.

I think it was Ghandi who said:

First they ignore you (check, for 45 years of men’s movement)
Then, they laugh at you (check, the last few years)
They, they fight you (check, read this page carefully)
Then, you win. (Coming right up.)

The unresisted 45 year attack on men, and shaming any man who protests, is over. I don’t blame you man-haters for being frightened. The MRM daring to speak out about valid grievances is much like a 3900 pound Holstein bull on a rampage around the farm. Hide the kids under the bed, and get the shotgun, quick.

Oh yeah, Anonymous, men have had it so hard in the last 45 years. Hell, why stop there? Men have been oppressed for CENTURIES!

Jesus H. Christ you MRA folks are such whiny losers. You shouldn’t even be allowed to call yourselves “men.”

I wonder if I can just slightly bread the fourth-wall here with a question for the feminists?

What IS it with you and rape?

Rape rape, rapety-rape, rapey – rape, rape, rape-a-doodle rape. It’s all about rape isn’t it?

Why ARE you so obsessed with rapey-stuff?

I mean I know it’s a serious violent crime, but so is second-degree murder, and people don’t go on about it all the time do they?

But feminists never talk about anything else, it’s just rape, rape, rape all the time.

It’s really boring.

Anonymous, being seventy is no excuse for being feebleminded. And I’d like to know where the Hell you ever found a Holstein bull of that size. Has Hermann Goering come back as a bovine?

Mr Anonymous,

The difference between the MRM and MK Gandhi is that the latter had genuine grievances whilst the former is a crock.

Good day.

Murphy said: “But feminists never talk about anything else, it’s just rape, rape, rape all the time.”

You’ve just revealed that you’ve never listened to an actual feminist, but have drawn your picture of them from anti-feminists. I have to conclude that you’ve chosen the right online name: Anything you can say that’s wrong, you will.

What a weird world these male supremacist losers must live in – where all accusations of sexual assault by women against men no matter all strong the evidence are considered false. but any accusation by a man against a woman no matter how filmsy is considered real.

A world where men control almost all of the wealth and power in this world – and women are systemically paid less and frequently victims of violent crime including murders, beatings, and rapes by inimate partners and strangers – yet men are somehow the victims.

A world where only women can be sexist and only women commit violent sexual assaults – and men are only victims.

Basically these male supremacist losers live in opposite land.

Incidentially, this weekend I saw what the male supremacist losers would no doubt consider proof of how bad men have it in society and in history.

Namely on the Eastern Shore of Virginia, I saw a town named Onancock. This town was established in 1632. No doubt my sweetie Sig and the other male supremacist losers would claim that even as far back as 1632 women had control and were mocking men. And don’t get them started on Blue Ball, Pennsylvania

Of course, being a mean girl (according to my sweetie Sig) I could point out that there are hundreds of place names which contain unflattering references to women – but as the male supremacist losers would point out these two place names obviously prove that even the landscape reflects female domination much more than the hundreds if not thousands of place names with unflattering references to women.

Mr. Murphy seems obsessed with rape, doesn’t he?

Erika,

Less than 20 miles from Onancock is a village called Assawoman. One has to wonder if the Indians on the Eastern Shore were playing jokes on the early English settlers, or the latter were having a laugh among themselves.

To my friends and colleagues on the SPLC blog,

Allow me to give you a short quote from one of my other favorite blogs. I feel it sums up the MRM quite handily:

‘IT’S ALWAYS PROJECTION!’

(via ^[34])

CM and Erika,

That really is quite laughable. Though a bit distasteful for this prudish blog ;-)

You have to understand that to these men, a feminist is any woman who turns them down and doesn’t seem thrilled to be their submissive sex-slave/domestic servant.

MRA’s: ploppity-plop plop, plop-adoodle-plop. It’s all about your plops. So sorry you feel cat-thrashed.

P. S.: Didn’t somebody here report living in Tomball?

I bet we hit two hundred on this thread.

Aron, it is rather a prudish blog, though there seems to have been some relaxation of standards for this topic. Admittedly, it is somewhat fortunate that our proximity is virtual, as some of the exchanges could have resulted in an overturned Stammtisch, fisticuffs, and even the odd duel challenge otherwise. I hate to think of all the (since it is still early) coffee and pastries on the floor (chocolate, pie crust, and whipped cream make an even worse mess than blood and teeth)

CM, I didn’t visit Assawoman but I believe that is where next year’s men’s rights convention is scheduled.

Erika, from everything I’ve seen, most of those MRA’s spend all their time at Onancock.

Rey,

I think that may be one of the funniest comments I’ve seen on HW, up there with (I believe) CM’s comment on the van’s exploded view.

Very droll, indeed ;-)

The men’s rights advocates wanted to schedule their conference for Intercourse, Pennsylvania but women rejected their permit.. Visiting Assawoman, Virginia was as close as they could get to contact with an actual woman.

Well, damn, Aron, it writes itself.

Erica, I heard they also tried to get into Peach Bottom.

Aron,

I have to pass the credit for the exploded view to Sam Molloy.

Incidentally, speaking of prudishness, the locals pronounce it “ohNANcuck.”

Were they hoping that the radiation from the Peach Bottom nuclear reactor would cause an increase in size?

Incidentially, my understanding is that the women in Intercourse told them to go to Blue Ball instead :)

The male supremacists are missing all of the fun :)

Erika

Only one, huh? They never made it to Tomball, either (or so my two tomcats tell me).

Its quite possible that one might be generous :)

Its a good thing that Tomball is located in Texas rather than Virginia or Georgia. ALthough the Male Supremacists would no doubt prefer it to be.

CM, does that mean that they do not sell “Love Yourself in Onancock” T-Shirts?

I had a friend who was given as a gag gift a t-shirt which said “Its More Fun in Intercourse, PA” – for some unknown reason my friend refused to wear it.

CM,

I thought it might have been Sam, but my thumbs were hovering over C and M, so there you go!

In any event, I’m loving the direction this post is taking. Trolling the trolls is fun, but stealing it back is even better!

And then, there’s, “Find Radiant Joy in Peach Bottom”.

Great, I see negative generalizations against feminists, and against the MRM. The people in the comments who assume just because they saw some feminists/mra’s talk about taking their rights away etc, IT DOES NOT MEAN ALL OF THAT GROUP THINKS THAT WAY.

There is so much childish behaviour in this thread, seriously. The snark towards the MRM, how is that at all helpful? The accusations of the men being whiney, really? Have you actually paid attention to MRA’s lately? I’ve seen plenty that detail how they’re worried about selective service, the problems boys and men are facing in education, circumcision, physical, sexual and emotional abuse, gender roles, healthcare, etc. You assume they’re just privileged men upset at losing power but if you actually started listening to some you might find quite a lot have serious concern over serious issues that affect men.

It’s not a p%ssing contest of who gets it worse, maybe if you did some research into the state of men you might realize men actually have legitimate concerns, and before anyone suggests women get it worse I’ll tell you this. If we used that kind of logic to focus our attention on the biggest killer in healthcare, breast cancer would get zero funding, all of it would be put into heart disease.

So what to do now? Sit around fighting, accusing people of whining because they’re worried how about to get help for domestic violence when their wife beats them and there are no shelters for men in their area? She’s threatened to stab him and the kids, he’s scared as hell for them but also scared he’ll lose them if he takes them out of the family home. You may think it’s a joke, but many men do not.

Yes there are misogynists in the MRM, yes there are misandrists in the feminist movement, both movements need to call them out for their bigotry but also work together to fix up the problems with both genders.

Just bathed one of said toms, balls and all. A yard long white Angoriform with blue eyes (not deaf), he forgets his normally mild demeanor at such times and reverts to some Turkish janissary of an ancestor. I have only three minor wounds on my left hand, but my bathroom wall is missing some paint and plaster.

I had actually hearing rumblings about a big MRM meeting in Fucking, Austria. There was a recent referendum to rename the town ‘Fugging,’ but it failed.

(en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Fucking,_Austria)

Archy, I don’t doubt your assertions that there are legitimate complaints and that they’re not all like that, but the ones who barge in on us and troll *are all like that*.

The Austrian town in question was named after a sixth-century count called Fucko (you can’t make this up). It might be a first-rate meeting place for these guys, except that Mel Brooks is no longer here to film it.

Is the “Its always radiant in Peach Bottom” slogan available in a bikini?

If so, I totally want one.

I’m thinking that Mike Judge would be perfect to film it based upon his work with two junior examples of men’s rights activists – Beavis & Butthead.

Erika, I think you’ll have to learn to crochet.

oh well. can you at least get matching shorts? even though it wouldn’t be nearly as (in)appropriate as the bikini it would still work for me to want to get it.

I’m beginning to think certain ones among us should find a way to rendez-vous and start up a T-shirt, bikini, and bumper sticker company. I also think this thread is going to make it to 200. Who crochets?

Have some janissary music on. I sincerely hope my aggrieved giant white tomcat isn’t out there getting inspired.

Erika, I think you can find a pair in peach velveteen and get them printed.

Nearly 200 comments. I guess the MRAs have more time on their hands (no pun) and better access to the intertubes than WNs. And yes, Archy, they are whiney, although I would use the term “whinging”.

Besides, that slogan is too big to fit on a bikini.

We went over two hundred.

I’m guessing, Archy, that most of us here don’t have any problem with genders. We have a problem with people who are always acting out their problems with genders.

Ive been reading radicalhub.com , its odd that a feminist site holds such a extreme transphobic view

^[35]
This is many of many articales there bashing transgender people
A good read on the transphobia and this is not some isolated thing
^[36]

Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival bans transgender women to enter,

^[37]

They have coined the term transmisogoyny

Or at least any bikini that matters.

if the writing was small enough, it could fit ;)

small writing also has the advantage of my being able to limit the ability to get close enough to read it on me to people who would actually understand the joke.

while the peach velveteen shorts would work nicely with my skin tone, isn’t it a bit redundant to print “Peach Bottom” on them?

I’m thinking that “Love Yourself in Onancock” t-shirts and bumper stickers would definitely sell.

More than 200 comments now – it could have never happened without the male supremacists cutting and pasting the same comment multiple times.

Well, Erika, if one is wearing shorts, any underlying radiance is not immediately apparent.

Men’s blue Speedos could be emblazoned with, “Escape from Blue Ball”. I don’t even want to think about Tomball slogans until I recover from bathing The Great Phoenix.

I would prefer to think that the radiance would come from my radiant personality and not due to the radiance of my bottom, but really, do men ever have to put up with that?

Erika, see the reference to blue Speedos, supra.

One hate group attacked another hate group. When is the SPLC going to designated second wave feminism as a hate group? Have you seen the anti-transphobic rhetoric, they spew? They publicly shame transgender women and are fighting against their rights.

Oh, for God’s sake, Very Concerned, get over it. They’re already sweeping the crumbs off this table.

Erika im not talking about men rights,manosphere, had no idea what mrw was before lr that it existed, what worrsy me is the extreme transphobia i see spewed by radical feminists going almost unchallenged by other feminists

books like “the transsexual empire” which is on par with the “the pink swastika” but instead of bashing gay´s it bases transsexuals

events in real life like Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival banning transgender women

I did not know there was transphobia existent in feminism before i read this article and i went to radfemhub and saw a transgender people and too my shock it was so hate filled it looked like something you would see from wbc (im a regular reader and a commenter on hatewatch blog

Erika im not talking about men rights,manosphere, had no idea what mrw was before lr that it existed, what worry me is the extreme transphobia i see spewed by radical feminists going almost unchallenged by other feminists

books like “the transsexual empire” which is on par with the “the pink swastika” but instead of bashing gay´s it bases transsexuals

events in real life like Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival banning transgender women

I did not know there was transphobia existent in feminism before i read this article .

Out of curiosity i went to radfemhub and saw a article about transgender people and too my shock it was so hate filled it looked like something you would see from wbc.

Like men have ever been told that in order to demonstrate their radiance they have to wear a Speedo.

Erika, you were the one you said you wanted a bikini bottom with a slogan.

Oh I definitely do want the bikini and would no doubt look very radiant in it.

I would just like to think that its not required to show how radiant I am :)

Of course, you are radiant, my dear. We all know that.

one day myn will have the same rights as women, when the subjugation and rape of our brothers, the vilification and sexualization of our gender wont stand. one day myn will be liberated from the sinister enemies oppression and hatred! MYN LIBERATION BY ANY MEANS

some of you feminazi on here are actually DENYING that myn are SEXUAL ASSAULTED an RAPED at a rate higher than chicks???? thats like denying the holocaust, i know so many victims of the ‘rapeocaust’ if you will its despicable. MALE LIBERATION NOW! STOP THE RAPE OF MYN!

Go home, Randy. The party’s over. You’re ranting in a darkened hall.

Randy’s post is just way too good to be true. This has to be a joke and a parody.

While entire post was hilarious, I especially like spelling men “myn” but continung to spell women “women.”

Well, dammit, Erika, time to take out the tablecloth and lock the door, before someone else like Randy wanders in and…

I don’t know, if Randy really is for real, he is the dumbest male supremacist loser yet.

Erika, don’t know if you saw my post on Coryphodon, the dumbest mammal that ever lived, but maybe they’re not extinct after all.

I think so. Were they noted for male domination?

Incidentially, with Memorial Day Weekend upon us, its almost time for me to change into my ultrasexy peach with white lettering “Find Radiant Joy in Peach Bottom” bikini so I can find some men. You know that our feminist leaders Valerie Solaris and Lorena Bobbit get upset if we feminists faill to meet our quotas for number of men forced to penetrate us in a year

Do I even need to say I am joking? Everyone knows there is no such thing as an ultrasexy peach with white lettering saying “Find Radiant Joy in Peach Bottom” bikini (yet) ;)

I don’t think anyone knows the social structure of Eocene Coryphodons at all. Don’t make that bikini a tanga, or you’ll just have to settle for a tattoo.

Have just arrived at a suburb of Tomball. My smallest tomcat is covered with medicated soap.

I wouldn’t consider a tanga to be “sexy” – just trashy.

In all events, if one takes into account the manufacturing cost of the fabric, tangas at least deserve to be called cheap.

I’m now rather regretting my search for this ‘tanga’ garment that had been mentioned. Oh dear.

Scandalous!

Aron: Yes, you(r) can!

Rey, may be cheap to manufacture, but its remarkable how much women have to pay to look so cheap ;)

Aron, is it scandalous because manufacturers charge the same price (or more) than what they charge for respectable bikini bottoms?

Of course, if you’ve ever shopped for women’s underwear you know they pull the same scam with panties.

Lace crotch floss.

By the way, though you’re not likely to see it in the United States, there are countries where men wear tanga trunks- basically crocheted jock straps. Not sure if they come in blue, though.

Yes, you(r) can!

There are times to be grateful that the United States is such a prudish country :)

really, if a man or woman wants to wear a tanga, I think they should be able to as a matrter of law – but people should have enough taste to see that as one right they should not exercise.

Erica,

One need only glance through the window at a La Perla boutique (not that I would have ever done such a prurient thing!) to see how badly women are being hosed for their ‘frilly things.’

Dey sure am sexy, though.

Oh, and Rey,

My can is probably the LAST thing anyone here wishes to think about. Unless you’re referring to my 21st Amendment Breweries’ ‘Hell or High Watermelon’ beer can. Which is a very nice can.

Actually, Aron, I am too old to think about anybody’s can, unless someone has one of those vintage Log Cabin Syrup cans you can use as a piggybank.

Ooh, I loved those! Sadly, I haven’t seen them for years :(

watermelon beer sounds potentially very yummy :)

the funniest part is that the shops charge the most for the frilly things which get worn the least

Well, yes, Erika, but they are worn on the most significant occasions.

Erica,

Not only is ‘Come Hell or High Watermelon’ potentially tasty, it’s kinetically tasty, too! And I believe Sixpoint Brewery hails from your homestate, so I definitely recommend giving them a try :D

I feel the Southern Poverty Law Center should be sued if it starts listing groups like the ANCPR as a hate group and a member of. I support mens rights because in my entire life no men I have known can live in their own ghetto unless they make a mistake or dying of Aids. And I am going to work tirelessly by writing United Nations members to help support Mens Rights the disrespect towards men is enough .We cant ignore our homeless vets and enermous male population in prison and our here branded as a felon .

I feel the Southern Poverty Law Center owes MRA a apology and if it is bent on declaring certain groups or association as hate groups it should be sued to the government recognizes what the Southern Poverty LAw Center is doing is illegal and must be held accountable by the courts for its actions.

you go ahead and do that Robert.

The rest of us – including the Judge who will explain what that entire First Amendment freedom of speech thing means – will just be laughing at you.

Come to think of it slander is a reason to sue the living breaks out of a organization. I am a Mens Rights Activist I suport Housing Rights for Vets and men that can build Hud homes. MRA have alot of work to to . We need to get 3 UN representatives to push bills for us so that we to can be treated as human beings. Go to any ghetto in America and ask the men their how many of them can actually rent in their own ghetto.

“Solanas was the undeniably disturbed woman who shot Andy Warhol in 1968. ”

So pardon me, you write Solanas off as “undeniably distrubed woman” yet when it comes to Breivik he is a symptom of the MRA movement?

Why do I get the feeling that you are measuring differently here?

As for Radfemhub and your explaination why radical feminism isn’t really the same as radical MRAs: Same. What happens here is that there is a form of asymetrical warfare going on. The main concerns MRAs are voicing are institutional. Or do “borrow” from the feminist vocabulary: The Matriarchy.

A bit of a better balanced approach to this would have helped the SPLC come off as a neutral force instead of one that seems to have swallowed a certain dogma (that of women as victims). What a shame for this missed opportunity.

Let me clarify a few things for you since this post was confusing as heck!

1. MRM stands for Mens Rights Movement, its clearly as indicated by the name a “movement” Feminist can be called Womens Rights Movement, since feminism doesnt care about men its obvious society need MRM.

2. MRA stands for Mens Rights Advocates, its clearly as indicated members of the aforementioned movement. The female opposite would be called WRA

3. A movement is not an organisation. Thus claiming MRA as a hate group is just ridicolous. We dont even need to debate whether the opinions is criticism or hate cause IT IS NOT A GROUP! Its lots of different groups with lots of different opinions.

4. Solanas may have been a disturbed woman however the people reading her workds does not have that excuse. The issue is not about whether Solanas was disturbed, its about the masses of feminists who read and treat her works as important thought. Are they also disturbed or whats their excuse?

5. Thomas Ball commited suicide the same way monks often protest against state oppression. Solanas however tried to murder three persons by shooting them with a gun. I am not sure in which universe SPLC would think suicide and murder are equal

6. Thomas Balls message was rebellion against the state. Valerie Solanas message was to murder half the population on earth (Kill all men). In which galaxy are these messages equal of anything?

7. Not only is it really stupid to throw the name “Breivik around” to make opponents seem bad in various issues (Swedish Psychiatrist D. Eberhard think its so ridicolous the Godwin law applies, with Breivik instead of a certain austrian….)

8. Its also concluded in the largest even Police Investigation in Norwegian history he acted completely alone. Also his manifesto (by large copy-pasted and interpreted through his crazy filter) make it absolutely clear the killings were 99,99% caused by his view of himself as a crusader knight against islam.

10. Conclusion:

a) Neither MRA nor MRM can be called a hate group cause they are not groups at all. Should anyone wanna call actual groups as AVFM a hate group they must first show the difference between criticism and hate.

Otherwise you are saying people can only criticize in one direction. Thats a pro-discrimination opinion.

b) Being sympathetic about Solanas who wanted to kill half of the worlds population cant be compared to being sympathetic to Ball, a man trying to avoid his family being destroyed. Thats not even close by a mile.

c) Breivik has nothing to do with the subject whatsoever. The subject of his killings were being a crusader against islam – also his manifesto was not written by him. It was a copy-paste project.

Let me repeat this yet again:

Men’s Rights is a stupid concept. Men are in charge. Men can lie about this all they want. It will not change the fact that women haven’t done this to you. You and your bros did this to you.

If you are for men’s rights, then why don’t you fight against male genital mutilation? Oh, sometimes you do, but only after insisting that MGM is worse than FGM. lol. Hardly. And hardly the point. Anyway, Christian men want to keep hacking away at their sons’ penises because god forbid their sons be left intact as father wishes he were. If dad doesn’t get his foreskin, no one do!

Solanas was a badass. So was Wuornos. Cry about it.

Here I should add: biology is transphobic. I’ve got this menstruation and ability-to-get-pregnant thing. TOTALLY TRANZPHOBIC. Having a Y chromosome makes you…human! Not male! Wait..

Anyway, glad this misogynist killed himself. Ironic that he used fire, too. Can’t wait to see more patriarch suicides. Suicide for a better world!

Goldwag do you like making excuses for left wing nut jobs I mean Occupy wallstreet has committed tons of crimes, my own sister nearly got raped by Occupy wallstreet terrorists. Not only did they try to destroy an interstate bridge but the rape women and you excuse them not to mention the only bile in the agent orange link is coming from feminists. How much did the feminist pay you to write the former statement? I know you won’t reply to me because it would mean a man with no liberal elite education and whose only valor was earn in war.

Is this a pathetic apology for baseless accusations of entire men’s rights movement? Yes expect outrage because of unfair treatment. Unlike feminists no part of men’s rights movement have ever advocated hate, violence, sexism or racism. You want a hate group? Radical feminists.

I think it’s pathetic that you opponents of the MRM seem to think you have the right to decide its membership, which you immediately expand to include people like Breivik. Then you say that the MRM needs to disown the psychos that you put there. Then when MRM people speak up and say “Actually, we reject murderous bigots like Anders Breivik” you turn around and say that’s not allowed.

It still amazes me that anyone can call the SCUM Manifesto satire, and that anyone else will believe them.

A woman writes a manifesto about murdering men, then attempts to murder four men.

If Solanis had merely written the manifesto, I could believe it was satire. Instead, she lived it out.

I don’t have an interesting opinion on the rest of the article, but I do want people to stop making excuses for Solanis. She was a criminal. The only reason she’s not a murderer was dumb luck and her own ineptness. Her manifesto is hate speech. That is ALL it is. Anyone who says different is provably wrong.

Three words describe the defense of feminists perfectly here, excuses excuses excuses

I’ve actually gone and read these MRA/MRM websites, and find them eminently more reasonable than feminist organizations.

I’m not some reactionary, I came from a matriarchal family, I’ve seen and known men who have been victimized by a legal, media, and social structure with a distinctly misandric tilt.

Figures such as Judith Grossman are now reaping what they sow as their own sons get mowed under by the legal structures they erected.

The SPLC’s hypocritical actions regarding MRM groups vs Radical Feminist organizations has convinced this life-long hyper-liberal to discount its credibility.

I have nothing but the utmost respect for the SPLC, its work, and its legacy.

But this post needs to be taken down or edited: Cathy Brennan, owner of RadFem Hub, is a well known hatemonger herself.

Brennan’s campaign against the transgender community is too lengthy (and vile) to detail in this post. However, given SPLC’s commitment to human rights, I would think that Brennan’s submission to the UN of a paper arguing *against* gender-identity as a legal protection, would kill her credibility with the SPLC.

What’s next? Jared Taylor’s ideas on crime prevention?

While I appreciate the attempt here to be even-handed, it seems to me that the article eventually devolves into rationalization of why mens’ groups really kinda sorta were asking for it.

I would just like the same standard applied to all. If A Voice For Men is a hate site, then so are the angry feminist sites. If it is not, I’d like the SPLC to unequivocally say as much.

Even normal feminists admit that some radical feminist cross the line into hating men. Will the SPLC list their sites too?

I came here from Transadvocate because I couldn’t believe the SPLC had asked for Brennan’s opinion on anything unless I’d seen it with my own eyes.
Why would you quote someone who organises hate groups and aids others in committing violence on trans women (and other trans folks)? Is this a Critical Research Failure or is this an endorsement of TERFs?
The SPLC was one of my favourites; but unless you declare TERFs a hate group, I have to wonder whether you’re really paying attention.

SPLC has lost credibility for me as both a minority and LGBT activist.

Apparently they condone transphobia and even lend a platform to it