I was invited to do a three minute live interview for CTV Saskatoon. It was very generous of them. We discussed the men’s rights movement and the posters going up in Saskatoon that are trying to bring attention to it.
Unfortunately I can’t embed, so I just have to give the link.
Artist/Writer at Xenospora
Alison has been researching men's issues since her mother gave her "Princess at the Window" by Donna Laframboise in 1994 when she was 16. She's taken part in men's rights communities since she started posting on soc.men in 2003. Since 2011 she's run the gender apostate blog Genderratic with her pal Gingko the wonder leaf and she founded Honey Badger Brigade in 2013 with Hannah Wallen and Karen Straughan. According to Vice the pony she most resembles is Fluttershy.
Latest posts by Alison Tieman (see all)
- What will Dior’s decision regarding Johnny Depp mean for male survivors? - August 10, 2022
- Chauvin Released, Teen bullied for supporting trump, False accuser forced to apologize| HBR News 277.5 - October 13, 2020
- What Jordan Peterson checking into Rehab can teach us all - October 26, 2019
by 
I thought you presented your case very well. I imagine we’ll see you on TV in the future.
Nice job. Good PR for men’s rights too. You come across as an intelligent, caring person.
This is freaking great! Love seeing you and Karen on tv. Shit’s starting to pick up, that’s for sure. Exciting times.
Awesome interview.
Hey, Typhonblue,
I’ve seen your interview and you presented yourself as Alison Tieman, yet your real name in AVfM is Asha James.
Why?
@TB, I think you came off incredibly strong in this format. For some reason I think it fits you better than YouTube. This was really Live television?
Ok, so there was one thing that I’m not sure how it came across. AVfM is clearly not interested in being another uncritical feminist sounding board, which is what people typically think of as the de facto “women’s experience.” So I was still wondering how it is that AVfM actually bring’s women’s experiences into men’s rights. I tend to view gender as completely irrelevant when it comes to understanding the issues. If hearing what you had to say for the past couple of years had reminded me of anything, it’s that the things lauded by feminists such as the “lived experience” or “ways of knowing” of one gender or the other doesn’t count for shit.
@ dungone
Feminism isn’t “women’s experience”. It’s an ideology that takes certain women’s experience and projects it as the only true experience onto all society, while also ignoring huge portions of it.
I don’t care that people think “feminism” when they hear “women’s experiences”. They’re wrong and, to be blunt, women’s experiences need to be liberated from the feminist lens just as much as men’s do.
@TB, I was referring to the way feminism is perceived as such by default. I’m worried that when a naive person hears that AVfM covers both the men’s and women’s perspective, they’ll picture it to be more like TGMP.
That’s an excellent point. It’s already well established that feminism’s blinders prevent it from seeing men’s issues in a useful way (or at all), but it also prevents it from seeing a large range of women’s issues that don’t fit the “woman-as-victim” narrative.
dungone,
” I’m worried that when a naive person hears that AVfM covers both the men’s and women’s perspective, they’ll picture it to be more like TGMP.”
How long do you think it will take them to get sorted on that particular confusion?
@ Jose
“Asha James” is a pen name.
Oh, OK. It’s that I read a while ago Manboobz saying you’ve finally revealed your “true” name – Asha James. Anyway, he’s a distortionist, so…
@ dungone
I said AVfM was open to a woman’s perspective, not that they covered it.
I’m pretty sure you guys are missing the point, but it’s not really that important.
How long do you think it will take them to get sorted on that particular confusion?
They’ll just call the MRM liars and push the same narrative they always have. They already “know” AVfM is misogynist. The question I have is, what’s the public going to believe? I merely feel that a more pedantic explanation of the difference between feminism and a “woman’s perspective” is in order. There are only two views you ever hear about in mass media – the run of the mill traditionalist Quiverfull variety of “where have all the real men gone?” insanity and the feminist variety. I am just saying that people will try to pigeonhole women in the MRM no matter what and so therefore I see a real need for developing a third, distinct identity so that even the biggest idiots could start to understand it.
dungone,
“I’m pretty sure you guys are missing the point, but it’s not really that important. ”
I think Typhon and MREdmonton are going after a dfferent point but the one oyu are tlaking about is important too.I thin you mena the way women in the MRM are going to be charactrized. Am I right?
Oh, and TB did an excellent job of presenting the entire MRM movement. She showed that you don’t have to be an extremist – in fact you can’t be an extremist – in order to appreciate men’s issues as seen by the MRM. I just wanted to hear TB say, flat out, “Women should care about these issues because x y z.” Yes, it’s great that Paul Elam values women’s contributions to his website. Yes, it’s kick ass that TB evolved past her radical feminist childhood and became one of the key figures in the present-day MRM (imo, anyway). But I still think it doesn’t really answer the “what’s in it for me?” question that a typical non-feminist woman might be asking herself after watching the interview.
Sadly, I doubt that any attempt to establish and legitimize a “third perspective” would fare any better with feminists than the men’s rights movement has. ANY attempt to give men a fair hearing, or to discuss responsibilities along with rights, or to stray from the woman-as-victim narrative, will always and automatically be dismissed as obvious misogyny, period.
I’m the last person in the world who thinks the MRM should be anything but stridently anti-feminist. That’s the fundamental disagreement I had with blogs such as Feminist Critics. I don’t believe in allowing feminists to play beggar thy neighbor strategies against the MRM. I was not talking about appealing to feminists. I said create a new option – period. The MRM has effectively done so for men, with men waking up to the fact that there really is no room for them with either right wing or left wing philosophies. No offense to anyone who still thinks otherwise, but the MRM isn’t politically “neutral,” it altogether rejects mainstream political views. So that’s been the project we’ve been working on for men. Why wouldn’t it also work for women? I don’t see why not.
“The MRM has effectively done so for men, with men waking up to the fact that there really is no room for them with either right wing or left wing philosophies”
TB has pointed out elsewhere and earlier that the MRM is in effect a WRM because it attcks the gender system that degrades women wiht hypoagency. She may get around ot articulating that, but I get the sense that a lot of women hearing her will hear that on their own without her having to get explicit.
“No offense to anyone who still thinks otherwise, but the MRM isn’t politically “neutral,” it altogether rejects mainstream political views”
It pisses certain MRAs off that AVfM has explicitly rejected the left-right dichotomy as relevant to the MHRM. They accuse Paul Elam of letting Marxists ryn the ploace and so on. It pisses then off that he eschews identification as a libertarian.
And of course it pisses off people on the feminist side who desperately want to cast the MHRM as the traditionalists. It flummoxes them to call them on their strawmanning on that point.