MISANDRY – Dismissing women’s rape of boys

Crap:
Here’s the link:
http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/suicide-in-the-us-statistics-and-prevention/index.shtml

Adding insult to injury, when feminists compare girls to boys, you hear this boilerplate response:

“Girls are nicer!
Girls are neater!
Girls are more sociable!
Girls are more focused!
Girls are brainier!
Girls are more mature, at earlier ages, than boys!
Why, I’d let my ten year old daughter keep an eye on the baby before I’d ask my fifteen year old son to do so…”

But when you add sex to the equation…

“She didn’t know what she was doing!
She’s not ready to be a mother!
She still watches cartoons!
She can’t even cook!
She doesn’t know how to pay bills or negotiate a lease!
She was taken advantage of by some strange man who must have forced her to sleep with him!!!
Yeah, did you year about Tammy and the McIntoshs’ son! No, not the eighteen year old, the *thirteen* year old! I’d say something about it, but he’s had a beard for almost a year now. And you know about that entire family, those kids always look like adults as soon as they hit twelve…”

It reeks of hypocrisy. When sex isn’t involved, female teenagers (and even younger) are obviously years ahead of their male peers. But when there’s an erection in the room, the rules suddenly shift. A seventeen year old, married to the youngest {under 21, for argument’s sake} son of a good family and raised by another good family (good=rich, in this case) is a “victim”. A twelve year old boy from the wrong side of the tracks, purposely intoxicated or “convinced” to let his 30+ year old teacher or neighbour try his penis out for a ride, well, “He could get it up. So, obviously, nothing bad happened here. Erection equals manhood!”

As far as the “stepmother” cases are concerned, here’s what happened.

Case #1-13 year old boy is caught fondling 7 year old girl. The family (Nuyorican) beats 9 shades of shit out of him, his life being “saved” by his father’s second wife. Son gets admitted to the hospital, daughter gets sent to the police station to give her statements. Five minutes into the interview, the girl admits that “*Mami Maritza*” plays like that with them all of the time, and that she (the stepmother) told “Julio” to make her (the seven year old girl) “more like Mami, so that Mami and I could play with him the same way.” Father hears his daughter’s statement, realised that his wife is at the hospital with his son (because he and his brothers were too busy hitting him to listen, and she was the only one in the family with a “big enough heart” to “forgive him”), and calls his sons room. A nurse goes to the room and sees his stepmother crying at his side, but discovers semen on his sheets the next day. Mother was charged and later given probation, daughter received therapy (and is now the mother of two children who receive lots of attention), son received therapy, but slit his throat before he turned sixteen.

Case #2- a former play partner of mine gave me the details, so this will be graphic. Her sister-in-law died of ovarian cancer at the age of forty. When she died, she mourned for her brother’s loss, but noted that his wife was a literal godsend (bluntly speaking, her already unattractive brother hadn’t aged well. But, her SIL was a beauty. This will be relevant later.) About three years later, her brother introduces the family to his new girlfriend (who is also a stunner. My friend’s joke:”Damn, my *hermano* must be packing like a bull to get these women!”. This will also be relevant later.)
Two years after meeting, the brother gets engaged to his girlfriend. His son turns 13. Suddenly, the boy becomes less friendly, less interactive with his cousins (he was an only child) and starts spending all of his time at the computer. The family waves it off, because “everyone knows” that boys get in their moods, plus he’s probably figured out how his pollo works”. Two weeks before his father’s wedding, the boy hangs himself in his bedroom closet. “Mario” finds his son’s body, then reads the suicide note. Long story short, it was an apology to his father for sleeping with his wife-to-be. As far as the family could tell, his stepmother-to-be had started “grooming” him when he was ten years old (letting him watch her in the shower, telling him that he’d have to “take care” of her while his father was travelling for work, showing him how to find clean porn sites…) Culminating with their first intercourse on the day before her acceptance of engagement (because she wanted to make sure that she would have her needs met before cutting out other options.) After the first encounter, she told the son that she would be willing to take care of him and his father as long as the boy took care of “her needs” when “Papi” was away. So, for the next two years, he slept with his mother 1-2 times a week when his father had to work late, and would often be prevented from spending any time with his cousins on weekends (his father would usually travel out of state on weekends to inspect lower-level facilities, returning to NYC on Sunday afternoons.) During that time, he began to produce sperm. When he relayed that information to his molester, she told him that she was enjoying his father’s bichote as often as she was enjoying *his* bichote, and that any child she would make would be at least half his father’s, anyway. So, seeing that his father was happy again (three years widowed, now he has a woman on his arm that makes him *smile*, who wants to break their widowed parent’s heart?), he put up with her until he realised that the wedding was actually going to happen. Then, his father made the ironic mistake of telling him (the son), “Because you’re getting along so well with your stepmother, I decided to take a business trip. I wanted to be here for you, but you’re smiling and I’m smiling and this will make sure that we fan all go to Puerto Rico when I come back.” The trip? A six month fact-finding mission that would take him from New Jersey to New Mexico to *New Zealand*. The boy killed himself the next day.
When the woman was confronted, she said this…
“I saw the boy first, and he was so *pretty*. So I asked around and I find out that his mother was dead. Then I thought, ‘I wonder what his father looks like.’ So I met his father and his father is…his father. But ‘Mario’, he’s funnier than anything on TV and the man is good in bed. Nice chorizo. But ye works too much, and I have ‘needs’, so I play a little with the son. I figured, ‘A little teasing couldn’t hurt.’, then things got more serious. But, then I see that he’s becoming like his father every day and I tell myself that it wouldn’t be *too* bad if I try him out. And if I get pregnant, the baby will either look like my husband or be pretty and my husband will be grateful. But, if I had known that he was going to kill himself, I never would have done it.” As in the first case, she received probation for the molestation (because, in our country, “Did it fit? We must acquit!”, is the prevalent result in male rape cases. As long as he can get it up and push it in and he hasn’t been intoxicated, his assailant won’t be found guilty of anything more serious than low-level sexual assault.)

I mean, HECK, I was reading this just today:
http://human-stupidity.com/stupid-dogma/teenage-sexuality/any-innocent-can-go2-jail4-childporn-carlos-alfredo-simon-timmermann/comment-page-1#comment-419274

And just what was the prosecution up to? Why, they were not only relying on the testimony of a border guard as to how the tape was “obviously ” child porn, but also an actual MD misused the so-called “Tanner scale” to give expert testimony for the prosecution:
http://blog.simplejustice.us/2010/04/24/for-a-good-time-call-little-lupe.aspx?ref=rss
And yet twelve years earlier the man who invented that scale was complaining of its misuse:
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/102/6/1494.1

Had this guy been convicted it would have been another statistic counted for sex crimes involving children. Luckily for him, this pornstar decided to save his ass even though he didn’t pay her a red cent.

@Clarence

Just to be clear, three of the seven cases occurred in New York City. Two of them took place in Louisiana, one of them in Minnesota and one in Michigan. The first case, the boy was one of the “big kids” in my neighbourhood (and yeah, it sticks in your memory when one of your childhood friends cuts his throat open), the last one took place in June of this year. It’s the reason why those cases are closest to my heart, I was well acquainted with both of the kids. The other cases were essentially “shop talk”, EMTs comparing their worst cases with cops (or in our situation, combat medics and security forces.)

Gingko:
As was proven by the genetic tests, she is lying filth.
As for the rest, I look forward to throwing even more 18 years in jail for having sex with their 14 to 17 year old girlfriends/boyfriends.

Yeah, that’s a pretty disgusting attitude you have there. Luckily most states also have some kind of “Romeo and Juliet” law that would protect teens within a few years of age of each other from going through this crap. And if you need to find “victims” of “child sexual abuse” who are within 2 or 3 years of their “abusers” in order to try to push for more help for male victims of sexual abuse, I feel sorry for you and for any teen that comes near you.

MaMu:
Even assuming that all the EMT talk wasn’t as exaggerated as “locker room talk” often is, the fact is EMT’s are far more likely than people in the general population (just as are cops Doctors, social workers and sexual assault counselors) to run into people who commit suicide for various reasons, though I find it hard to believe that no one mentioned any other reasons for the suicides. The one suicide I am personally aware of was a male crossdresser who suffered because of societal disapproval which led to a drug habit, and its hard to disambiguate cause and effect as to which one was more responsible: his unpopularity since he had openly “come out” or his drug habit.

@Mamu, holy crap, it’s just fucking amazing that a rapist would say something like that after her victim committed suicide and not get put away for a very, very long time. Can you imagine if the genders were flipped? “The little girl was so pretty, so I agreed to marry her mother in order to fuck the child. I had my needs, you know?”

@Clarence,

Rape: It doesn’t really matter what you think about the age of consent; that’s certainly up for debate, as the various laws you can point to would attest. What matters is that those laws aren’t applied with the same righteous fervor when the victim is male.

Suicide: I’m 32 and I think I’ve been around a dozen male suicides in my life, discovered the bodies myself in some cases, carried their caskets in others, and watched them do it at times. By the time I was 6 I had seen a man jump into a bonfire, jump off a bridge, and drive his car into a brick wall. Yes, I was under 10 and I remember them through a child’s eyes, but trust me I still remember. I know now what was going on then – martial law under Communism, but my memories of it are mixed up with images of flying kites and preschool. Then there was this kid who wore a NASA space camp jumpsuit to school and told my 5th grade teacher that he hated me because I got better grades and girls liked me – he killed himself after high school. The first Marine who reported to me in combat, as well as the last Marine who I reported to in combat, both killed themselves. I’m really not surprised when someone says they’ve known 7 suicides of a certain kind. If you are really involved in a community of people who are at risk, then you won’t just see one or two, you’ll see a steady stream of it.

@Clarence, actually the suicides I saw as a child also were all of a certain kind. Had I grown up in that environment past age 6, I would have kept seeing more of that very exact kind. The only reason I saw suicides of different types over time was because I changed the environment in which I existed. Oppression by a foreign government when I was a child, geeky/nerdy bullying when I was in the “star” classes in grade school, and of course military suicide. If Mamu had stayed in a consistent environment long enough, he would likely see repeats of the same circumstances. That is my experience.

Mamu never actually said that he ONLY ever saw male victims of female abusers commit suicide, for the record. His point was that it’s just as damaging when it happens to boys as it is to girls, except that there is less help available to male victims of female sexual abuse.

I agree with you that, for the most part, the laws aren’t evenly applied between the sexes though I think its somewhat better than 10 years ago, or 15 when I first started exploring this stuff. So yes, female sex offenders usually get lesser sentences than an equivalent male counterpart, and that is wrong even if sometimes I don’t believe there should be punishment at all. Equal protection should make such disparate treatment impossible in the US, but sadly , it often doesn’t.

My part of the world – Australia – is a bit different. They don’t do “sentences” for rapist women here. They are, with the rule proving one exception, always suspended. There is also a woman in US federal prison right now for a staturory rape committed in my town. My state would rather leave the protection of her own sons to a foreign jurisdiction.

Another US woman traveled to Aus a little earlier to consumate her grooming of a Perth boy. She was smarter. She raced him off to a motel room on his sixteeenth birthday having groomed him from age fourteen. Our media treated it as a cutesy internet romance. One of our womens’ magazines – New Idea – funded her fifteen month stay in Aus and published a series of cloying articles. Even our respected Age paper ran the headline “Schoolboy Lover”.

THAT woman – who hails from California – breached US federal laws when she engaged in sex with an individual below the age of consent in HER home jurisdiction. I believe this to be eighteen. She also breached internet grooming laws. She did so with the full glare of publicity in my country. She should, like the woman who came to my town, be in jail.

Clarence, let’s say you are correct, and the 5-10% rate for underage sex abuse is exaggerated in that study. Your proof? None.

Even if you are correct about some exaggeration, my number crunch did not use that number, and still stands.

Now, you later claim that Mamu memories before age 10 are suspect. I remember 2 rape-murders of preteen girls that occurred in my home county of under 40,000 souls from when I was 7 years old. Heck, I remember where I was when I heard of the assassination of JFK when I was 4 years old. Early memories of traumatic events persist.

Carence, let’s take this in pieces.

“I gotta say I do find it disgusting to call someone a rapist when:
A. The sex was not forced and was wanted by both parties
and”

Minors can’t give consent. Period. That’s part of the definition of a minor.

“B. The “legal age of consent” varies by country and state, so that a “rapist” in one state is not a criminal at all in another.”

Ignorance of the law is no defense.

“So no, I don’t consider statuatory rapists to be “real rapists” when consent is not in question and their ages are within 5 years of each other”

Your personal opinion is not dispositive in this matter.

“OR the younger partner is 15 or 16 and above regardless of the age of the older partner.”

All that said, I agree with you on Romeo and Juliet laws. I don’t see any sense or decency in ruining some young person’s life over a high school fling.

So I was wondering what it ws about the Bieber thing that i found so repugnant. well for one thing it was no high school fling. That woman went after Bieber because of his fame. She was a starfucker. That disgusts me. The whole cult of celebtrity is despicable and this is probably the most despicable aspect of it.

That woman went after Bieber because of his fame. She was a starfucker. That disgusts me. The whole cult of celebtrity is despicable and this is probably the most despicable aspect of it.

For me, the rent-seeking harassment dispels any notion of this having been a romantic relationship that should be covered by a Romeo and Juliet clause. Statutory rape it was.

Re: the debate.

Unfortunately, 51% of the population believes the wage gap myth as if it were gospel and both of these candidates need the votes to win. It’s no different to me than hearing both of the candidates praising the free enterprise system and agreeing with one another that the government doesn’t create jobs, even though both of them are promising to do just that. It’s no different than politicians who refuse to get rid of references to god from our money and pledge of allegiance, even though it’s unconstitutional.

The real challenge isn’t to go after the politicians, but to go after the voting blocs. In the meantime, vote based on the overall policies you support and ignore the empty rhetoric aimed at non-thinking idiots.

Well, I guess the rage moment really occurred because here is a pudwag, looking for the one thing that has been holding her back in her life, and she comes to a wage gap. Despite the fact that unmarried, childless women under 30 get paid more than unmarried, childless men under 30. And this is exactly how stereotypes, bad data, misconceptions become policies, laws and discriminatory practices, i.e. child custody, rape enforcement (or even data collection), etc. etc. We need to get someone to stand up and say, “what are you going to do about workplace inequality, specifically, the overtime gap, the death gap, and the time off gap?”

But of course, since feminism controls the discourse on gender issues, our voices don’t matter. Maybe when I’m a grandpa, they will.

Information is very easy to look up:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/entertainment/2011/11/justin-bieber-takes-dna-paternity-test-according-to-report/

“Mariah Yeater had initially filed a paternity suit against Bieber but abruptly withdrew it last week. She has since hired new legal representation and reportedly wants to settle out of court.

Bieber has steadfastly denied Yeater’s allegations, saying the story was “completely made up” and that he has never met her.”

He claimed he had never had sex with her. It’s impossible to be a rapist or statuatory rapist if you never have sex with someone.

Girlfriend is all kind of messed up, and not only claimed that a former boyfriend was also the father, but she had a court case scheduled for allegedly slapping that boyfriend. In short, this was a bad example for Gingko to use and just shows how sloppy even normally decent people can be with facts when something made the news at one time or another.

I’m going to describe why I have had the reaction that I do to this post.
But it will be a rather long post.
So for now, lets just say its good to be skeptical of any claims of widespread rape being undetected, as it was to be skeptical of the Daycare Rape panic of the 1980’s and early 1990’s.

And by the way:
We all agree that men and women should be treated the same when it comes to the applications and penalties of these laws.

Depending on where she allegedly had sex with him and where she lived and he lived and a whole bunch of other legal bullshit I’m not willing to go into or look into.

Nope. She did it where it counted. Were she a male, she would be on a sex offenders’ registry by now.

“1. Minors can’t give consent. Period. That’s part of the definition of a minor.”
Which varies from place to place. Congrats on making people “rapists” depending simply on where they live in the civilized world ( because its not just third world shitholes that have lower ages of consent than the magic 18). Kind of debases the meaning of the word.”

That doesn’t work when you are talking about the crime of rape. Jurisdictions set their own definition so crimes all the time. Rape in the UK is not the same as in California, as one example.

Clarence, I think I remember the situation that motivates your caution about rape charges. I approve of that cuation, for what that’s worth.

Now if you are speaking of rape as some Platonic ideal object, then of course having it differ depending on place is unaccpetable.

If instead you are speaking of rape as a cultural object, a lexical item as defined by observable language behavior, then no, there is no Anglsophere -wide agreeminet on what is and isn’t rape, anyomer than there is on a huge percentage of words in the language. That’s just how language works.

@Clarence

1. At no point in any of my posts did I say that the only source/cause of male suicide was the actions of women. During a decade in the military, I knew (and knew of) a few dozen AD members who committed suicide for a variety of reasons (most of which involves multiple deployments or money issues, not women.)

2. Statuotory is statuotory, period. When you live in a country in which men can become “paedophiles” for a years’ difference in age (even with Romeo and Juliet laws) and women receive a slap on the wrist as long as they don’t get the kid drunk or have a legally enforced power differential over the child (and in those cases, they get slapped on both wrists), that’s hypocrisy. The fact that the women in both of my cases received probation (on the charge of “contributing to the delinquency of a minor, as the more severe charges were dropped) was deplorable.

Now, to continue: as other people were able to infer, my issue with the disparity in concern levels re: minor male/adult female relationships is based on the fact that any type of damage (physical, emotional, etc.), that has been documented as occurring in these scenarios is either minimised or flat out ignored. Clarence, an erstwhile ally with plenty of statistics, has evinced plenty of shock in this thread that I was able to encounter 7 cases of suicide in 23 years that directly involved a predatory female and an underage male (and double shock at the idea of an EMT, a person whose job entailed being a first responder, seeing 5 cases in 10 years.) If that isn’t an example of erasure, I don’t know what is.

And, on top of that, statistics show that a majority of violent male rape offenders were molested as children (with the gender divide landing firmly on the side of female aggressors.) Statistics show that the most accurate indicator for flagrant promiscuity in adults is a lower age of loss of virginity (regardless of the gender of the promiscuous person, regardless of the gender of the initiator.) I grew up in Brooklyn, New York, and my personal experiences match those statistics. All of the guys I’ve known who swore by the idea of “holding her down, until she gives up” or “not giving her a choice, because you know that women can’t make up their minds”, were guys who had “got lucky” as kids (in most of those cases, it was your standard for the area 15-21 year old girl who ran into an 11-14 year old boy on the block. Which he bragged and boasted about until they broke up…) For most of these cases, the girls would have been protected by Romeo and Juliet laws, but that means nothing to the *future* women that those men encountered. That means nothing to the “last call” barflies and beer-goggles women who find themselves as a guy’s newest fling because the guy was touched by his babysitter over a 2-year span and now his pride won’t let him leave the club without a partner. And it definitely won’t make a woman who’s been involved in an 8-year relationship feel any better about the fact that his main reason for not committing is because he loves her, but is “in love” with (the idea of) his mother’s best friend, who showed him the ropes when he was 14 and she was 38.

I know that the majority of molesters are men (at least, the majority of “reported” molesters.) That information does nothing to reduce the damage that women can cause when they decide to cross the age barrier, it just doesn’t. And using the, “Yeah, it happens, but it happens so rarely that it doesn’t make sense to pay attention to it”, excuse on this site (which has plenty of regular male posters who can attest to the damage caused by those interactions) is callous.

@Gingko

And that is in and of itself a big problem: the nebulousness of “rape”. Use a “paedo-tracker” in almost any rural area of the country and you’ll see that the lion’s share of the “paedos” are young (19-24) men with “almost legal” (14-17) women. When I lived in the Midwest, the majority of the “rapists” in Montana, North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin and Kansas were college students who hooked up with high school girls at college parties. It’s become such a trend that people (in more rural areas) don’t even take it seriously anymore. Guys who would have looked twice at a younger-looking woman (in the past), just go ahead and get the notch because they know *plenty* of high school aged guys (18-19) who were added to the pervert list for dating “girls” (15-17). And, hypocrisy being what it is, there have been more than a few news articles about Midwestern “wivesandmothers” who get impregnated by 13-16 year old boys (yet never get added to the roster. Who’s more of a threat of recidivism, the 19 year old high school senior who bought a ring for his 16 year POF high school girlfriend, or the 35 year old single mother who’s caught riding a 14 year old boy in her car, then is busted with pictures of *other* teenaged boys on her smartphone?)

@Clarence

Apology received and returned.

Now, here’s another problem that I’ve had with the definition of rape; rape by “coercion”, to be specific.

Rape by coercion, in its initial incarnation, was supposed to apply to weapons cases (as in cases in which the aggressor used the threat of lethal force to gain consent) or blackmail (as in, victim gets caught committing a crime, witness uses the threat of disclosure to gain consent). However, if you visit almost any feminism-themed website and *read* the most common accounts of “rape by coercion”, they usually read like this:
“So, he was poking me in the back with his thing, then he told me that he’d stop if I let him do it, so I did it. Was I raped?”
“I totally got drunk at this bar and I got into this blowjob contest in the bathroom, then the guy that we were blowing started talking about us going back to his place and he had weed. So we kinda did, but I’d been drinking then I got high and I don’t remember actually saying yes. Was I raped?”
“So, I got caught stealing the “exchange for new bills from the bank” money from the safe at my first job. Bobby, the guy who caught me, promised not to tell anyone if I gave him some ‘hand-action’. So, we used to meet up on Sunday and I’d jack him off for an hour. It’s been fifteen years since we had our little arrangement. Was my hand raped?”

And the feminist posters will make it abundantly clear that yes, her hand was raped. Yes, the young woman who willingly went home with a stranger (who she’d been blowing in a public place) because of the offer of weed was raped. Yes, if your boyfriend poked you in the back with his penis a couple of times and you just rolled over and let him get on top, you were raped. Because any sexual interaction that wasn’t initiated by the woman with “enthusiastic consent” is (in more and more feminist circles), considere
pd rape.

But, flip the genders around and the letter of the law becomes the limit.
“So, like, my girlfriend was wondering why we hadn’t done it yet? And when I told her that I wanted it to be special, she said, ‘We’re here, in a quiet room, what else do we need?’ Then, when I said that I’d rather do it on a bed instead of an air mattress, she said that I must be some kind of faggot. And after about half an hour of her calling me gay and changing her status on Facebook, we did it in her parents garage. Right underneath her father’s weight lifting set, beside his collection of guns… Was that rape?”
“Last week, I got drunk at the office party. I was flirting with Camille when I was just tipsy, but I woke up beside Natasha. I don’t even remember *talking* to Natasha, but I must have…”
“I made E-4 in a year. But I got a new supervisor and she was hitting on me hardcore and I shut it down. Then I couldn’t even get scheduled for promotion for four years. So I finally slept with her and I got sent up for promotion. Is that fair?

Tell a story like this on a Feministe, I mean feminist website and none of the posters will see anything *illegal* about *those* stories, desire the fact that they’re genderflips of male aggressor/female compliant sexual encounters. The guy who has sex so that he won’t be faux-“outed” as gay=the girl who gets whined and cajoled into sex because “that’s what boyfriends and girlfriends do”. The guy who remembers flirting with one girl and wakes up beside another girl, and the guy who has sex to get promoted, they don’t even need analogues. This site introduced me to the Crunk Feminist Collective story about the woman who pitched a fit about being turned down by a guy. If the genders were swapped, none of the feminists on the thread would have co-signed on a guy feeling cheated by a girl who was willing to have phone sex (but not willing to go “all the way”.) Cries of “Privilege!” and “Entitlement!”, would have drowned out any of his defenders. But, as has been said by feminism detractors as varied as Camille Paglia, Bill Maher and Tom Leykis, “With feminists, it’s only bad if a *man*does it. When a woman does it, no matter how negative the action or response, it *must be good*.” That way does madness lie.

anyways, if this article has it right….

http://theantifeminist.com/gawker-double-standards-hulk-hogan/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

I guess Jizzabel is an appropriate slur for Jezzebel and it makes sense that a predatory and hypocritical guy like Schwyzer writes for them….

Gaddangit, I couldn’t make this sh*t up….

MaMu:
I cosign everything you’ve said in your last two posts. I’ve long been aware of this kind of thing which is one of the reasons why I am so skeptical of any hyperbolic statements concerning sexual assault incidence – because I know how often the books are cooked. And every freaking year I have to deal with the same old lies (such as the 15/16 rapes are never prosecuted, that every large sporting event brings in tons of trafficked women *sometimes the claim is CHILDREN to make it even more scandalous*, hell some people even believe the myth about superbowl violence) sometimes even by well-meaning people and organizations (RANN does the 15/16 thing, though they also work with male survivors and most of their stats are more carefully collected then in most other similar organizations) who have been exposed to them.

Maybe I’m not as clear as I should have been, so I’ll say this – in order to demonize male sexuality and men in general, feminists have long played fast and loose with statistics (some of which they even create themselves via surveys which are USUALLY crappily constructed) usually by redefinitions of commonly understood terms or via selective reading of the legal definitions of things. That 18 to 20 year old male shy virgin with the 14 or 15 year old “hot to trot” (meaning more sexually experienced than normal for a girl her age) girlfriend? A horrid sexual predator rapist according to them, just another statistic as to how womyn are oppressed. Treated rhetorically as exactly the same as a violent stranger rapist who rapes the “bitches” because he hates his mother. It’s something I can’t let them get away with, and I’d rather we don’t start down the same path.

Ginkgo said…
Gwallan, I do remember that there is a state of Victoria; I was just making a little pun on the Victorianism of the legal regime that facilitated your rapes.

Just trying to clarify actually. There is some state to state variation across the country. Wasn’t referring back to the prior comment or having a go at you.

Actually Bendigo where I live was the wealthiest city in the world in the mid nineteenth century. We have some very grand Victorian architecture to remind us. Meanwhile any bloke wanting Labor pre-selection for Victorian parliament should brush up on his bible studies. Victorian enough for you? Doesn’t matter for female candidates. Women have been exempted from the Victorian era strictures. A Labor government probably issued that exemption – permission slips to break the state’s own equality laws – alongside the ones they gave all the womens’ gyms.

Clarence said…
Thanks for the information on how laws are applied in Australia. Of course they currently have a feminist PM so why am I not surprised?

Notwithstanding Gillard’s mysoginy rant last week she’s probably the least feminist of the Labor caucus women. She’s actually the sort of woman who would rather have a beer with the blokes than a wine with the girls. Others, such as Kate Ellis, are far more virulent. Gillard has been refusing to go down this road for a long time and, until that speech, had impressed me in that stubbornness. I believe it to be an act of desperation actually. It may also be the highest level overt damselling to have ever occurred. I doubt this will benefit women in politics, or with political aspirations, in the long run.

Depending on where she allegedly had sex with him and where she lived and he lived and a whole bunch of other legal bullshit I’m not willing to go into or look into.
All I know is that in Maryland 19 or 18 and 16 is perfectly fine, and I’m perfectly fine with that as I just view it as two teens having sex. Scuse me while I yawn.

Unfortunate consequence of necessary limits. There must be a boundary somewhere. Through most of Australia it’s sixteen which I consider rational and reasonable.

re Beiber the thing I found notable had less to do with the possible rape itself but, rather, the cavalier attitude of the young woman concerned. I referenced womens’ magazines above. In Aus all of them have run “schoolboy lover” type articles which invariably do not censure the woman involved in any way. Oprah Winfrey has done the same. These are media sources with huge distribution which are successful because they give their audiences what they want. Hundreds of thousands of New Idea readers funded that Californian woman’s stay in their – and my – country. Dare I suggest those readers and viewers are virtually all women.

The broader atmosphere in our communities is actually very permissive of these circumstances. The woman pursuing Beiber had every reason to expect that outing herself in that way, regardless of veracity, was not going to cause her any real difficulty.

Valerie Keefe said…
poisoned by testosterone, or whatever.

As true as that latter part is ^_^

Oh, dear.

MaMu1977 said…
I know that the majority of molesters are men (at least, the majority of “reported” molesters.)

I have developed a firm belief over a long time and a lot of reading that women commit about a quarter of the acts of child sexual abuse. Studies in my state(Lee Fitzroy in the late nineties and Rebecca Deering in 2004) from the past decade or so reflect this. Male perps are more inclined to have multiple victims which hints at women being a larger proportion of the perpetrators than that quarter might suggest.

Environments can be a factor too. It seems there are very nearly as many boys abused as girls. Girls are mostly abused by men. Boys are as likely to be abused by either sex. In the home environment girls are at more risk than boys. Outside the home it’s actually boys. Consider that most of the institutional abuse coming to light involves male victims.

There are environmental factors with perpetrators as well. A far higher proportion of female perps than male are in teaching roles in the commision of their abuse. The most likely scenario in a school involves a woman and a boy and by a significant margin. The much high proportion of teachers among female perps comes as a consequence of broader scrutiny which isn’t quite looking in the right direction. It, thus, becomes an enabler.

Now, here’s another problem that I’ve had with the definition of rape; rape by “coercion”, to be specific.

I define rape by that means actually. Coercion need not be physical but will always be present. I do not trust “consent” particularly given the politicisation of it’s meaning. Coercion/control is also the basis for many of the long term issues victims can struggle with.

Is that what she meant? I hope not.

Valerie is trans. Her problems with testosterone are personal, not political.

It’s the equivalent of an ex-jew who has converted saying that he has a final solution for the jewish problem. Tasteless, but not as hateful as it seems on first glance.

To me, the political becomes very personal when somebody says things like that. My brain goes straight back to being fed lines about how testosterone is poison, men being diseased and damaged women, how men do not possess the capacities for empathy or compassion or love or ethics, or how men do not possess the intellect of women.

I usually end up either self-harming, fantasizing about gendercide, or just wishing for some way to destroy the taint of having been born a cis male, even though I know that even if I was able to do so, it would change nothing, my brain was ruined by testosterone even before I was born. Then I usually just wish I was dead.

Which is the state I find myself in now. I should probably stop reading gender websites.

@RocketFrog, I don’t think she woke up yet, so let’s let her clarify what she meant first. I agree with you, though. I don’t think that anybody would be referring to a hormone imbalance of any sort as “poison” if not for the very anti-male bigotry that resulted in the original coinage of the term and the associated memes. Calling testosterone a poison is no different than calling water a poison – try drinking a couple of gallons of distilled water and see what happens. It’s unfortunate for trans people who then internalize this bigotry as if they were really being poisoned, when it’s just an imbalance. Nobody talks about “poison” when menopausal women get hormone replacement therapy and no one talks about them in terms of being genetically damaged women on their way to an evolutionary dead end, yet that’s what often gets said about men.

Clarence,

“and the ages of the partners involved have been more and more legally constricted.”

It’s the ongoing infantilization of women, concurrent with increased prerogatives for women. It has to do with the complete loss of senamntic distinction between “girl” and “woman” as actaully used in the language. It has to do with allowing females all the prerogatives of adults but granting them all the protections of children.

My great-great-grandfather married my great-great-grandmother when he was 44 and she was 16. No one considered him a pervert in 1860 or whenever that was. By law she could consent to marriage, although not to sex. Nothing has changed since then than the laws.

There was a class angle to this. Working class boys and girls as a rule left school after the 8th grade up until WWII or not long after. That’s when adulthood began for them – the boys went into the mill or kept working on the farm or left home. In a year or three they were about as economically ready to marry as they ever would be. for the girls marriage was their primary career option, so after a couple of years of it was time for them to settle down too.

For boys in wealthier families the timeline was different. They stayed in school longer and had to become established in some profession or some knd of business, and that could take years. But the girls did not have that option, or only gradually over a period of decades and as college became more available generally, so they had the same timeline as any other girls. The university culture with *sororities* and fraternities and football only started evolving in the late 19th century.

@Marja Erwin, and people do talk about water poisoning as well, also known as water intoxication. I’ve even seen it happen. Your cells start to dissolve. It’s besides the point. I understand just what a hormone imbalance is, and I still seriously don’t appreciate it being thrown around completely out of context in the discussion of men’s issues, where it is well known to have a very different connotation. That’s just wrong.

I know it’s just a comic but….

The “reaction” is WAY outta proportion to the “crime.”

It’s strange how those feminists say that bus driver used excessive force when he hit the girl who had spat on him AND attacked him (as the bus was still moving), why don’t they call this comic out?

That being said, I consume a fair dose of “violent media” and can’t really say I’m “butt-hurt” by the comic….

Interesting… Without the caption, I read the comic as saying, “Sick people shouldn’t go out in public. Bringing germs into the public arena is a crime that rates death.” Only the caption informs me that the man in the comic is intending to interact with the woman at all.

It seems rude to me to assume that someone is wrong about the details of their own life. If the author says that a man was harassing her by coughing, I’m going to give her the benefit of the doubt. But that context has not been brought into the art in any way that a neutral observer can tell. (And, of course, all the discussion is about commenters assuming the artist is wrong.)

If the goal of the comic was to depict someone hitting on someone else, it has failed to achieve that goal.

as far as the “Bus Driver incident”-I was refering to this….

https://omegavirginrevolt.wordpress.com/2012/10/16/sign-the-petition-to-reinstate-artis-hughes/

The Manboobz crowd doesn’t even see the fact that he was attacked as relevant….

What I got out of that comic was just that sick people should not be in public lest they be creepy and gross out women.

“What I got out of that comic was just that sick people should not be in public lest they be creepy and gross out women.”

oh, RF, it was gendered alright….

also, it wasn’t the part about-okay if you have a cough, you should stay home…

also, “offending” someone, an appropriate response would be, please don’t disturb me, I’m trying to concentrate, not blowing someone’s head off…

I should probably have been more specific. It is not all right for sick men to go out in public, lest they creep out and gross out women.

I am not sure I understand why it is supposed to be funny that she murders the coughing man.

Further to my eaarlier comment…

Outside the home it’s actually boys. Consider that most of the institutional abuse coming to light involves male victims.

In Victoria, Aus at the moment…

Inquiry into Catholic Church abuse begins

News on the radio a few minutes ago that boys are apparently niney five percent of the victims.

Yeah its good we’re actually discussing whether its rational to believe this man’s story or not. This is a very healthy thing for us to be doing, checking each others work and correcting one another, reminding each other when we let emotion or just common error drive us from the path. The way we should look at it is we already have enough truth to be comfortable, its understandable that we want more data and more proof and we will get that, but its so easy to let emotion step in and find us what we are craving, as opposed to finding us the truth. Fact is, we have enough truth, giving us a very powerful position.

” There is no evidence that the bus driver was attacked.”

Except for the video of the bus driver being attacked.

Even if you two are right about the bus driver being attacked (and the facts aren’t in yet), the “omega virgin revolt” dude is still using it as a method to promote violence against all women while hiding it in the language of “self-defense”.

I want to support the MRM. I really do, but too many of them like “omega virgin revolt” are only there because they hate women with a fiery white hot passion. If you don’t realize that it is because dudes like “omega virgin revolt” are smarter than Eivind Berge and know how to play the long game in their war on women.

I just want to hear both sides of the story. What is wrong with that? Do you seriously think you can get both sides of the story from a blog with “omega virgin revolt” in its name?

also a feminist excusing a womyn’s ™ bad behavior isn’t just supporting misandry but misogyny too. How is this possible? Well, when she assaulted the bus driver, it is possible that the bus could’ve crashed, harming a pedestrian, perhaps a child, perhaps even an infant girl. Also there were male and female passengers on the bus….

Stoner, you attempt at an analogy falls flat on its face because Amanda Marcotte, Jessica Valenti, and other heterosexual feminist women don’t have trouble dating (and getting married to) the opposite sex. How much can these feminists hate men if they have have relationships with men (and even marry men)?

OTOH, Mr. “omega virgin revolt” is a mid 30s virgin male who goes beyond anti-feminism. He is paranoid of women to the point where he tries to completely avoid them. At the same time he is angry that they won’t have sex with him. His feminist counterparts do not have this kind of trouble with men. Mr. “omega virgin revolt” isn’t even about mens rights or anti-feminism. He is about hating women and finding ways to harm women.

I really don’t have an opinion yet on what happened to the bus driver, but I would like to read about this from a source other than someone who seriously called his blog, “omega virgin revolt”.

Anon, you poor fool. You write like you think we don’t know about anti-male shaming tactics, when in fact Typhonblue is running a series of Vlogs on that very subject on this very site. We’re just tickin’ ’em off like a bingo card reading your comments.

“In a case like this, no, but I would say it is slightly more trustworthy since the man behind manboobz doesn’t have personal trouble with the opposite sex like Mr. “omega virgin revolt” does.”

man who is sexually successful with womyn ™=good man…

Case in point Hugo Schwyzer attempting to kill an ex GF in a drug filled rage. I guess he is a good man because he whines and cries about how bad men of lower status then himself are….

“Stoner, you attempt at an analogy falls flat on its face because Amanda Marcotte, Jessica Valenti, and other heterosexual feminist women don’t have trouble dating (and getting married to) the opposite sex. How much can these feminists hate men if they have have relationships with men (and even marry men)?”

Rape Apologist perhaps?

http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2012/09/19/is-it-rape-if-you-dont-mean-for-it-to-be-rape/#comment-526375

That’s the thing said about PUA’s- by dehumanizing their “targets” they are much better able to handle rejection and get more “notches.” Since they get more “notches” and have more success with the opposite sex, they are therefor better people by your logic….

How much can these feminists hate men if they have have relationships with men (and even marry men)?

Oh dear. We’re going to have to introduce you to Rush Limbaugh.

Anon,

“Stoner, you attempt at an analogy falls flat on its face because Amanda Marcotte, Jessica Valenti, and other heterosexual feminist women don’t have trouble dating (and getting married to) the opposite sex. How much can these feminists hate men if they have have relationships with men (and even marry men)?”

Valerie Solanas didn’t have much trouble getting the opposite sex to date her either. (And if she was forcing herself to like men, it might explain why she ended up hating them.)

Anon:

I sincerely hope that you have somehow managed to avoid ever studying formal logic in the course of your education, because I would shudder to think that any institution would pass someone whose reasoning is so full of basic fallacies. In the future, could you try to provide some “only other possible conclusions” that actually follow from your evidence and premises?

You consistently equate an inability (or unwillingness, but you focus exclusively on celibacy as a failure state) to maintain sexual relations with people of the opposite gender with a hatred for that gender, but you have done nothing to prove your contention. All your responses to counter-examples others have provided are entirely reliant on the belief that your initial contention is true. Do you really expect anyone to accept that sort of circular reasoning?

You seem to be implying that video evidence is invalid because it was linked (not produced) by a person whose name you dislike (maybe try demonstrating why that name is offensive? Or perhaps instead relying on actual quotations to demonstrate why this person should not be listened to?). You go on to make the absurd statement that no one can have good reason to write about a matter which will ultimately be decided by the judicial system. Surely, if that is really the case, your time would be better spent in combating the horrific excesses of the New York Times than those of one insignificant blogger. Unfortunately for you, the blogger is irrelevant to the incident in question. If you want to prove that no self-defense was involved, I suggest that you instead attempt to argue against the multiple videos recording the event.

“Even your extreme example of Hugo Schwyzer is still peanuts compared to a man who names his blog “omega virgin revolt”.”

Heeheehee; apparently Stupid blog name> attempted murder…

Stick around Anon, you’re good fun.

This makes him a thousand times more dangerous than feminists like Solanas are to men.

Oh, definitely. Insignificant, unknown men who have hardly a bit of influence on anything and have done little or nothing are much, much more dangerous than relatively well known, studied women who have attempted murder on a famous figure. Thousands of times.

/s

Anon:

I would not contest that he is both, but you argue for a correlation and have not even attempted to prove one. If you do not, his sexual history is utterly irrelevant and you are merely engaging in virgin-shaming.

Now, you see those links? That’s an actual argument. You should have done that from the start instead of just harping on his name.

None of this changes the fact that the words and beliefs of this blogger are, and will remain, utterly irrelevant to the question of the video. This entire tangent is a smoke screen you threw up because you refused to engage the actual arguments others have presented in response to your initial claims.

The next portion of my comment you quote was in response to the comment in which you imply that there is something inherently wrong with writing about the incident in question or criticizing the woman who can be seen initiating an assault on the bus driver in multiple pieces of video evidence (which you continue to ignore) for doing just that and further suggest that the only reason for writing a piece critical of such behavior is a hatred of women. Once again, you completely ignore both the context and content of criticism addressed to your arguments and repeat the same tired line you have parroted in every paragraph of every comment since you introduced this topic. Whether or not someone has “declared war on an entire gender” would be relevant if you had written a criticism of the substance of that article. You did not do so: You merely criticized the fact that an article on that subject was written. This being the case, my point still stands.

“This person isn’t insignificant. He’s rich so he has the financial resources to make his dream happen. He is also a leader among other men with a similar hatred of women.”

Pfff… Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha hee hee hee hee hee…. HA HA HA HA HA HA ha ha ha…
Oh, man, that was a good one. Seriously? He runs a tiny blog no one has ever heard of. Almost none of his posts even have comment threads in the triple digits. In comparison, there are independent game reviewers who get hundreds every week and more than a few webcomics that get thousands multiple times a week. There are columnists on Anime News Network who have more cultural influence than this man.If he’s so much of a threat, what’s he doing to “make his dream happen” other than posting angry rants to his blog? The most active role he seems to be taking on any issue is posting links to someone else’s petition. What “financial resources” does he have that could possibly translate into the kinds of policies he talks about? They clearly aren’t enough to afford a decent website design, his own domain name or any sort of marketing. Dave and Joel’s Fast Karate for the Gentlemen is a bigger operation than this nutjob. You’re seriously trying to tell me his ideas have a wider reach than those of people who’ve had multiple books in print in multiple languages for decades and that he’s more dangerous than people who have personally attempted to put their deluded ravings into practice?

Man, I thought you were being serious for a while there, but that last one just went too far out there. I’ll give you a 5/10, since it took multiple posts to figure out you were just trolling (don’t worry, I come from a part of the internet where that’s an art form, not a dismissal of people you don’t like), but you didn’t manage to pull off anything that provoked a real emotional response.

Anon:

Okay, I stand corrected. Honestly, I would have had more respect for this if it were just an attempt to get a rise out of people

Seriously, dude? ‘He’s small-time now, but it is theoretically possible that he might do something big in the future’? You’re seriously suggesting that owning his won business and being relatively well-off put him even close to the resources he would need to do anything he’s talking about? Only governments and major multinational conglomerates deal in the kind of material and monetary resources you’re talking about. Do you see any evidence of him getting a following? Anything that might point to a growing powerbase or any sort of planned action? In short, can you point out anything that separates this person from the millions of other idiots on the internet who are furious over something or other? Do you honestly believe his message or presentation are in any way novel or unique? Call me back when he at least has a book deal, because even if you believe he’s going to really take off, none of the great monsters who started off small went from irate unkown blogger to marching through the streets with death squads or even influencing policy anywhere close to overnight.

Oh, and of course we have the unspecified and growing group of like-minded men who are the “real threat” and are going to organize, take over and institute horrible policies to the detriment of women. No evidence or arguments in support of all this, obviously. This scare-mongering is just getting pathetic.

One of the videos is still up last I checked, you still haven’t addressed it, and it doesn’t take much searching to find other sources talking about the same incident. Do you seriously believe you;re talking about the guy who broke this story? Do you imagine he would ever be in a position to do that?

Also, the virgin-shaming is seriously getting old. I look at the rest of what you write with bemused indifference, but the way you approach that subject is quite simply disgusting.

and, yeah, you keep on bringing up his supposed virginity….

are you planning to deflower him with your “mangina”?

I don’t know who you are and I don’t use the word creep often but that seems to suit you Anon…

back on topic….

http://www.cleveland.com/morris/index.ssf/2012/10/rta_bus_driver_violently_punch.html

“Lane, according to a police report and witnesses, attacked Hughes and spit on his face. If such an assault occurred — and the video appears to show the woman hovering over the driver — Lane not only threatened Hughes’ safety but the safety of everyone on the bus, not to mention the well-being of any pedestrians or motorists in the proximity. ”

you can certainly make the argument the bus driver didn’t handle things well as the author did in the article, however, she is no angle and started the whole thing. Anon, you aren’t arguing in good faith, go back to manboobz and leave the rest of us alone…

Stoner With a Boner on October 21, 2012 at 10:52 pm said:

http://www.cleveland.com/morris/index.ssf/2012/10/rta_bus_driver_violently_punch.html

Actually that wasn’t the topic.

“Actually that wasn’t the topic.”

yeah, Anon derailed my derail….

but atleast I was talking about a bigger thing relating to gender and (s)he just wanted to make fun of another blogger…

Yes, Omega Virgin (aka the Black Pill) is a misogynist asshole who thinks he is the Manosphere’s Torquemada. He writes posts attacking game, paleo diets, female MRA’s, etc, and constantly complains the people who do or believe the things he attacks aren’t ‘real ‘ MRA’s, and that there is not enough activism going on though he hardly does any activism himself. I’ve gotten in a few throw-downs with him in his comment section, usually over his attempts to divide MRA’s, and his obvious disgust with the moral character of women.

That being said he’s not an eliminationist. You’ll never see him advocate for violence (save self defense) or death for women, and you’ll never see him advocate for enslaving them. There are plenty of radfems and other haterz on the web and in the world worse than he is.
Importantly, Anon never told you what made this blogger the way he is : multiple false accusations, mostly at various jobs. It’s why he now works for himself.

And that’s all I’m going to say on the matter.

Clarence, thanks for that last insight into this whole fascinating and I think very informative derailment into a rather marginal character.(Gingko)

Seeing as we’ve gone off the rails. In the grand scheme of things, are we not all marginal characters? 🙂

When it comes to activism, I have done more than all of the so called manosphere combined. That’s not difficult since the so called manosphere is incapable of doing anything it the real world. The problem is that from the so called manosphere’s perspective I don’t “do anything” because I’m not lying on the internet about getting laid like they are. My activism also includes supporting men like Artis Hughes and Brian Banks. Both of them are African-American and by default hated in the so called manosphere for their skin color so activism for them doesn’t count in the so called manosphere.

Hello Black Pill,

I wouldn’t say that I ever used “PUA language”. Gamers have no original ideas. They stole them from other places so there is no “PUA language”.

When someone uses the words “alpha”, “beta”, or “hypergamy”, I assume that they are working from the same mindset as the PUAs. Your older articles used those words, while your newer ones didn’t. (Note that I haven’t read all of your archives.)

Similarly, if someone says “patriarchy” or “privilege”, I assume they are coming from a feminist perspective.

Generally, when women find my blog, they mostly go nuts. I have deal with women like anon before, although I never seen someone try so hard to attack me on another blog where I have no history of comments.

Anon’s only posts are on this thread, and they only showed up after SWAB linked to you. It looks like you have a stalker. Probably using google alerts or similar.

Basically, your whole schtick is purity. When all MRA’s and MRA allies are as pure and focused as you – when none of them believe anything you find silly or offensive ,in other words – then, and only then will the MRA be able to move forward.

Clarence, you say that like it’s a bad thing. 😉 Seriously though, many MRA spaces have a number of (to me) distracting threads. So many places are full of “oh no, I’m getting divorced”/”All women are like that”/”I am in a reciprocally violent relationship”/”get yourself an Asian woman”/”if you had game this wouldn’t be a problem”/”why do nice guys finish last”/”look what the feminists are saying now”/etc that you can’t see the Men’s Rights discussion, if there is any. Black Pill’s purity keeps most of that stuff off his plate, and it seems like the MRM could stand to have a bit less of it too.

Actually, looking at that list, all of those are people mistaking their own personal crisis for a greater social problem. “The personal is political” indeed. (The same applies to the dating advice distraction.) (But, repeated personal problems may be an indicator of an overarching social problem.) (Gah. This is very hard to think through without getting tangled in knots.) (“Holy Shit, Guys. People Are Complicated.” http://xkcd.com/592/)

“Both of them are African-American and by default hated in the so called manosphere for their skin color so activism for them doesn’t count in the so called manosphere.”

This animus against black people will come as a huge surprise to people like Nurdy Dancing.

“When it comes to activism, I have done more than all of the so called manosphere combined. ”

That will come as a surprise to Fathers and Family, A Voice for Men and the National Coalition of Men. A nobody liek me has heard of them and their efforts, and heard nothing at all about yours.

“Basically, your whole schtick is purity.”

Purism is generally an adolescent indulgence, Clarence, although as EGR points out it can have some tactical usefulness.

@Clarence

It is correct that you attack racist, conspiracists, and anti-science parts of the “manosphere” as well and I actually applaud you for doing so.

Attacking Hawaiian Libertarian, for instance, simply because he believes in some conspiracy theories is stupid.

I put these two sentences together to show just how contradictory you’re being. Either I’m correct for attacking conspiracy theorists or I’m stupid for doing that. There’s no middle ground on this of, “It’s correct to attack conspiracy theorists except for Hawaiian Libertarian”. That makes no sense. This is a case of its either one or the other so trying to assert both statements means you’re being dishonest about something.

Yes, you were being dishonest by saying I attack, “game, paleo diets, female MRA’s,”. I have never attacked an actual female MRA. I only attack Roissyite gamers. I have worked very hard at showing that there is a difference between Roissyite and non-Roissyite gamers. While I disagree with non-Roissyite gamers about game, we can get along. (Some non-Roissyite gamers have even come to my blog to support me because they want nothing to do with the racist conspiracy theorist variant of game, and they consider Roissy to be a fraud.) Saying I attack gamers or game is highly inaccurate. Since Roissyite gamers are racists and/or conspiracy theorists, it would be more accurate to say I attack racists or conspiracy theorists. When it comes to the paleo diet, you know that most people here aren’t familiar with the paleo diet. They don’t know that the paleo diet is a conspiracy theory that requires its adherents to believe that doctors, nutritionists, and other medical authorities are conspiring to hide medical knowledge from the general populace. Several of the major personalities behind the paleo diet are listed on Quackwatch because the paleo diet is anti-science too. It would have been more accurate to say I attack racists, conspiracy theorists, and anti-science ideologues.

My “divisiveness” is not unique. NCFM, SAVE and F&F practice the same divisiveness that I do by default. AVFM practices 80% of the same divisiveness that I do. The only reason it isn’t 100% for AVFM is that they haven’t rejected conspiracy theorists. Otherwise, Paul Elam has been plenty divisive when it comes to game, manhood101.com, white supremacists, racists, anti-semitism, traditional conservatism, the “alt right”, etc., and he is right to do so.

If you want to talk about real divisiveness, then look at the so called manosphere. Criticism of major manosphere personalities or its (un)holy writs gets you the online equivalent of an inquisition. It’s hasn’t just happened to me. The manosphere’s attacks on Alek Novy (who has arguably been attacked more by the manosphere than I have) are absolutely deplorable. The so called manosphere has attacked PMAFT, YBM, Alek Novy, and myself by saying we’re all secretly the same person. Paul Elam gets regularly attacked by manosphere conspiracy theorists as a “government agent”, “Illuminati agent”, etc. These are their own words. Accusing me of “divisiveness” is pure projection on your part.

I don’t care if my blog “cedes moral ground to feminists”. I stand up against racism, conspiracy theory, anti-science quacks because it is the right thing to do. Not only is it the right thing to do, none of these groups have accomplished any of their own goals. Also, being associated with them, just gives feminists ammo to use against the MRM. By definition, they can’t help the MRM. This is on top of the fact that according to THEIR OWN WORDS they are hostile to the idea of mens rights. I’m correct both morally and practically.

The manosphere and the MRM are two completely different things. I would not say that I have done more activism than someone like Glenn Sacks. NCFM, SAVE and F&F have probably never even heard of the so called manosphere. The reason why they get things done is because they have no association with the so called manosphere. AVFM has even said goodbye to the manosphere and that the manosphere has no common purpose with the MRM.

If my fellow MRAs can get things done by not associating with me, then I support their decision. However, the real MRAs aren’t associating with the manosphere either. By your own metrics, I am better than the entire manosphere.

@Evil Green Ranger

I understand your confusion about my use of “PUA language”. You are correct in most cases. I guess its my own stubbornness that I refuse to cede linguistic territory to them. I agree with concepts like hypergamy and the 80/20 rule even though PUAs use them a lot. Those concepts weren’t invented by PUAs even though they were associated with them.

I don’t think I have a stalker as such. Occasionally, a woman shows up at my blog to attack me, but they go away eventually. From their IP addresses they aren’t the same woman, and they aren’t using TOR or a proxy to hide themselves. I suspect that “anon” is this woman who showed up on my blog right after “anon” stopped posting here.

I’m not about “purity” as much as I am about not being drowned out in off topic rubbish. Conspiracy theorists in particular are very guilty of this since they have a long history of invading unrelated forums and blogs. The MRM isn’t unique in dealing with the problem, but this is the only place where we’re told that we “need” these kooks.

@Ginkgo

The manosphere and the MRM are two separate things. Like I told Clarence, AVFM, has (mostly) completely rejected the so called manosphere. F&F, NCFM, etc. have no connection with the so called manosphere and probably have no idea what the so called manosphere is. There is no way I can seriously say that I have done more activism than MRAs who have been agitating against feminism for decades. However, I can easily say that I have done more activism than the so called manosphere. All the so called manosphere does is lie about getting laid. Any activism I do is more than everyone in the so called manosphere combined, by definition, because the manosphere does nothing whatsoever.