Tom Martin’s “anti-male discrimination” case against the London School of Economics dismissed; he responds by calling his critics “whores.”

Hard wooden chairs: Enemy of men?

Tom Martin, a former gender studies student at the London School of Economics, recently became a minor celebrity amongst Men’s Rights activists and other angry men when he sued his alma mater for alleged sexism against men.

He’s now had his case thrown out of court. Let’s go to the Camden New Journal for details:

Tom Martin, 39, who lives in Covent Garden, claimed he suffered “anti-male discrimination” while studying for a master’s degree in gender, media and culture at the world-famous university in Holborn.

Representing himself at his application for a trial at the Central London County Court on Tuesday, Mr Martin complained of a lack of men-only sessions in the university’s gym and the preponderance of posters in the corridors advertis­ing services for women without the presence of similar materials geared towards men.

Mr Martin, who describes himself as a feminist, said “hard” chairs in the library were uncomfortable for men and that a “male blaming culture” was evident in course materials, which “ignored men’s issues” and focused on wrongs done by them.

Damn those misandrist chairs and their man-hating hardness!

The judge didn’t buy it, saying Martin’s case had essentially no chance of success. He threw out the case and ordered Martin to pay LSE’s legal costs.

Martin, welcome to reality.

On Twitter, Martin responded to the news by calling his critics “whores.” One of many examples:

But I was really discriminated against, you whores!

More examples here, and here.

And, yes, his Twitter handle is indeed Sexismbusters.org.

EDITED TO ADD: Actual headline today on What Men are Saying About Women:

Tom Martin Faces Slut-Feminist Judge, Motion Denied..

EDITED AGAIN TO ADD: Tom Martin has replied to this post in the comments. Some highlights:

My legal complaint did NOT involve a complaint about the seating. You have been misled by the press – The Times and the West End Extra/Camden New Journal both mysteriously got it wrong.

One year prior to joining the university, when visiting its library, I did complain, that the seating being hard created a greater disadvantage for men than for women, as men have considerably smaller weight-bearing buttock pads than women, and men are heavier too – so for men, on average heavier than women, have more weight bearing down onto a pad which is approximately four times smaller than women’s on average – according to a BBC documentary on the subject.

He then details his attempts to fight this grave injustice. Also, there’s this:

[S]everal comments here are confusing ‘whore’ with ‘slut’. A slut has sex freely, which I am all for. Freedom of association is the ultimate in humanity. A whore charges for sex. Even if a woman is a virgin, but is waiting for Mr Right to buy her something, she’s a whore.

It’s counter-intuitive, but a lot of professional feminists are whores. They expect the government and men to do them special favours. They make up stories to convince men and government to believe that we all owe women something.

But really, if someone were keeping a tab, then…

Women owe men five years pension.
Women owe men some National Service.
Women owe men some inventions.
Women owe men positive discrimination in university curricula.
Women owe men some child access.
It’s women’s round at the bar too.

For the whole thing, see here.

For more charming quotes from Tom, see this post on the blog Butterflies and Wheels.

About these ads

Posted on March 16, 2012, in actual activism, antifeminism, I'm totally being sarcastic, irony alert, misandry, misogyny, MRA, oppressed men, Tom Martin, twitter, Uncategorized, whores. Bookmark the permalink. 1,737 Comments.

  1. So Tommy… how am I a whore? How is it that you said women never, and we showed you that women do, but you don’t care?

    How about you explain what it is that differentiates “nice women” from “prostitutes”?

    Answers, or shut the fuck up.

  2. Pillowinhell thinks I said

    Hey gals! Feminists never talk about slut shaming!

    Feminists never talk about the whoriarchs, in maternal gatekeeping guardian roles, advising girls and young women to protect their usufruct fiefdoms, to go for men with money, prepared to donate it her way just for showing up at the party. Sounds like a shit party in a brothel! At some point, some charismatic feminist somewhere will get round to breaching the subject in public with the female audience, head on.

    Person with Manboobz tattoo
    Good point. As a real feminist, I hereby renounce prostitution
    in all its forms. Do you accept cash, bartender?

    V.O
    Carlsberg don’t do feminists.

    HellKell says:

    Tom, you’re an idiot. X came way before the Pixies. Per Ubu did start around the same time as X, but in a different part of the country.

    Hellkell, it was total idiocy, chalk that one up in your corner, for your side. Choose any colour of star for yourself. Everyone’s a winner. You’re on a roll, just like X probably.

  3. Pecunium, I think you know the difference between nice people and whores. Do unto others etc. The golden rule, don’t piss on him (even if he asks).

  4. That was an impressive lack of sense.

  5. moist owlet

    That was goooooooooooooooooood.

    Renewing my call for some kind of (limited or total) banning of Tommy Boy. He’s just … useless.

  6. I might vote to keep him if he’d come up with some new material, but that doesn’t seem to be happening.

  7. Ok, I’m just guessing here Tommy Boy, because you’re fairly incomprehensible, but are you saying that the 97% who are whores are whores because they a) have sex and b) sometimes receive things from men that they didn’t buy from those men? Or perhaps the sex is irrelevant, and it’s just about women getting things without paying for them with money they earnt?

    What about when women do things for men? Are the men whores too? Are the only people who aren’t whores the ones who have no friends and only ever get anything by working for the money and then buying it themselves?

    Do you never allow anyone to do any favours for you Tommy? Do you refuse all presents even on your birthday? Do you never go to anyone else’s house in case they offer you a cup of tea? Or do you just insist on paying for the cup of tea?

  8. Tom, we can’t talk until we agree on terms.

    I think a prostitute is someone who takes money, in a direct exchange for sex, as a purely business transaction.

    Dinner and drinks before fucking don’t count. Being a stay at home partner doesn’t count. Taking advantage of all the things “men” have created int he past doesn’t count.

    Quid Pro Quo is the only thing that counts. “Give me £X and I’ll fuck you” = prostitute, nothing else.

  9. Pecunium, I think you know the difference between nice people and whores. Do unto others etc. The golden rule, don’t piss on him (even if he asks).

    WTF? 97% of all women are whores, and 3% of women have renounced prostitution in all its forms.

    But the difference between a whore and a nice person is that a whore will piss on somebody and, what, 3% of women won’t? So giving up prostitution in all its forms means following the golden rule?

    This from a man who does every fucking thing in bad faith?

    Tom, you make less and less sense every comment you post.

  10. You’re spot on pecunium. Tommy here has basically mangled the word until it’s no longer recognisable.

    He doesn’t seem to understand how interpersonal relationships work.

  11. reginaldgriswold

    He’s like a shotgun full of alphabet soup.

  12. So, if I’m interpreting this correctly, Tom thinks that 97% of women are into watersports?

  13. So giving up prostitution in all its forms means following the golden rule?

    “Golden rule” *snrk*

  14. Cassandra said’

    I might vote to keep him if he’d come up with some new material, but that doesn’t seem to be happening.

    Cassandra, the material girl?

    Let’s hear it, treacle.

    We all love a laugh.

    Yes we can. Wooooo!

  15. Kim said,

    He doesn’t seem to understand how interpersonal relationships work.

    Kim,

    Interpersonal relationships which are no work work. I don’t know nothing.

  16. I think I see someone who’s had a few too many ABUs.

  17. He is definitely drunk. And also boring.

  18. What’s an ABU? I mean, I Googled it but I got lots of clearly irrelevant results.

  19. The Kittehs' Unpaid Help

    Feminists never talk about the whoriarchs,

    Well, he was right on that one, if only because there’s no such thing.

    Yup, pissed as a fish is Tom. D’you think he’s over visiting Joe? Spilling their beer on a shared keyboard? Aini’t it sweet …

  20. An Abu is a feisty little monkey.

  21. …Treacle?

  22. Sir Bodsworth Rugglesby III

    Is it happy hour in Britain or something?

  23. Tom: Go to sleep, molasses.

  24. The Kittehs' Unpaid Help

    I think it was about sixish (am) when Tommyboy did his last post. An all-night binge, maybe?

  25. For reference, his line about the treacle was posted at half six local time. Drunk posting at half six in the morning is actually slightly worrying.

  26. The Kittehs' Unpaid Help

    He probably has to drink to endure the pain of hard chairs.

  27. Weeeeelll, it’s not like he has a job to go to. Still wondering how his managing to pay for things without working, collecting donations for ‘projects’ he has no intention of doing or fobbing off a legally-enforceable £35k debt doesn’t fit into his unique definition of whore.

  28. The Kittehs' Unpaid Help

    ‘Cos he’s a man, of course. Only women are whores. If we’re really good at it we get promoted to whoriarchs.

  29. The whoriarch is captain, of a sinking ship.

    .

  30. Interpersonal relationships which are no work work. I don’t know nothing.

    No, still demonstrating you know nothing. All relationships require some effort to maintain them. Just because something is enjoyable to do doesn’t make it not work. I’m really starting to wonder if you manage to have any friends with the way you view people. It’s like you view every human interaction as 1 person conning or taking advantage of another. Unless there is money exchanged for work, then it’s all clean and above board. If you do have “friends”, do you pay them to be your friends?

  31. Tom can’t afford friends with that 37K judgement against him.

    Let’s just ban the moron. He really serves no purpose.

  32. “Tom can’t afford friends with that 37K judgement against him.”

    At time of writing the above sentence Hellkell, you clearly didn’t believe in free association.

    How about now?

    On the subject of money, what 37K calculated gambles for a good cause have you lost – or won – lately?

    On the assumption that you don’t have any dependents, so can afford to gamble with your career, what high gamble high reward projects have you taken on?

    I will take you as I find you.

    What are you going to do, and why is it going to be so awesome?

  33. Kim said:
    No, still demonstrating you know nothing. All relationships require some effort to maintain them. Just because something is enjoyable to do doesn’t make it not work. I’m really starting to wonder if you manage to have any friends with the way you view people. It’s like you view every human interaction as 1 person conning or taking advantage of another. Unless there is money exchanged for work, then it’s all clean and above board. If you do have “friends”, do you pay them to be your friends?

    I think Kim needs to PHONE a friend. Two heads are better than one. Have a guess Kim.

  34. I don’t make £37000 bets to prove my worth. I don’t need to. I’m better than that.
    You want me to gamble and lose to show how awesome I am? Tough. I’m too busy actually being awesome. You know, making things and loving people and telling stories and running grassroots educational projects. Things that make the world a better place.

  35. What are you going to do, and why is it going to be so awesome?

    I’m going to ask our Dark Lord to ban your ass, and it will be awesome when that happens because you are a boil on the ass of humanity and this blog, and the sooner you are spewing your pus elsewhere, the better.

    I am already awesome because I am not you.

  36. He is so sure of his superiority that he really thinks he can use the “what x have you done lately” for any act he’s ever done and it’ll work as a damning condemnation.

  37. Good lord, is Tommyboy still drunk?

  38. Okay then, tell us a joke. ANYTHING!

  39. I’m all for letting the pedophilia apologist post here. It just lets the world know more about The Greatest Human Rights Movement Of The Twentieth Century and its courageous, upstanding warriors.

  40. Viola,

    What is the grass roots organization, and how have you made it as awesome as it is?

  41. I’m all for letting the pedophilia apologist post here. It just lets the world know more about The Greatest Human Rights Movement Of The Twentieth Century and its courageous, upstanding warriors.

    I think we have more than enough evidence from this particular subject, and now he’s just tiresome and incoherent.

  42. Yeah, anyone searching him can find out how he’s acquitted his “movement” here.

  43. Hmm. I’m sort of inclined to let him stay (he’s on moderation but I let most of his comments through). But i could be convinced to ban him if enough people are sick of his crap.

    Or maybe we need some sort of challenge for him. Only let through comments if he does x or doesn’t do y, or something.

  44. Why is he asking us to tell jokes? Where was anyone talking about jokes at all?

  45. Tom’s too incoherent to perform any challenges. I’m done with him.

  46. I’d second (third? Fourth? Umpteenth?) hellkell’s suggestion to ban him, if only because he’s incredibly boring as well as contemptible.

  47. You know, given that Tom seems to have reached the stage of life collapse where he’s drunk trolling in the early morning rather than figuring out a way to pay off his court debt, cutting him off from as many of his sources of trolly satisfaction as possible might actually be seen as an act of compassion in the long run.

  48. Early morning is right – yesterday he was at it at 6.30 am, today it’s 12.30 am. Sleeping it off during the day and starting again at night, perhaps?

  49. Nothing wrong with having an odd schedule, but I don’t remember him being drunk all the time when we first encountered him. I think he’s coming unglued.

  50. That’s what I meant – should have clarified – the hours plus the incoherence, not the hours alone.

  51. All right then. I’m cutting him off. He can find somewhere else to troll.

  52. Thanks, David.

  53. I do have a joke. He won’t think it’s funny.

    Tom Martin, Mens’ Rights Activist.

  54. And he’s gone.

    Thank You.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 6,370 other followers

%d bloggers like this: