About these ads

A Voice for Men has 99 problems, and the word “bitch” is one.

Here’s JohnTheOther on A Voice for Men, complaining that Australian journalist Tory Shepard has unfairly accused “men’s rights extremists” associated with AVFM of using the term “lying bitches.”

“[L]ying bitches” might have [been] pulled from from a reader’s comment on one of more than 1200 articles on AVfM. But that phrase forms no part of this human rights movement’s standard rhetoric, which if Shepherd were a journalist, she would know.

Huh. Yeah, it’s probably just some sort of incredible fluke. Just one reader’s comment on one of more than 1200 articles!

Oops, I guess it was used more than once.

But it’s not like this sort of language is encouraged by JtO or his boss Paul Elam.

No, not at all!

To be fair, they don’t always refer to women as bitches. Sometimes they refer to women by the much more genteel “cunt.”

Like the time Elam described the CEO of the Good Men Project as “a disingenuous cunt that makes her living off trying to turn men into lap dogs.” And the time he referred to comedic actress Katherine Heigl as a “misandric cunt.” Oh, and that time he referred to a commenter on his site as “Ms. Cuntforbrains, or if you are male, Mr. Cuntforbrains.” And the time he referred to the feminist blogosphere as the “cunt-o-sphere.” Very witty!

I know, it’s unfair to cherry-pick comments from the guy who actually started and runs A Voice for Men. Clearly he isn’t representative of the site at all.

(Note: Yes, I did say yesterday that I wasn’t going to read that JtO post on general principle. And yes, I did read a little bit more of it. But I have not read the whole thing, and I never will!)

About these ads

Posted on July 20, 2012, in a voice for men, antifeminism, evil women, hypocrisy, johntheother, lying liars, misogyny, MRA. Bookmark the permalink. 111 Comments.

  1. the twisted spinster

    But they didn’t say bitch bitch.

  2. They don’t seem to realize that denial doesn’t work when there is a perfect record of what was actually said. I try hard to refrain from labeling people stupid, but jeez, what other explanation is there for that?

  3. They don’t seem to realize that denial doesn’t work when there is a perfect record of what was actually said.

    If the Manboobz regular trolls are anything to go off of, MRAs in general seem to have this problem.

    This isn’t a conversation where you can just gaslight us with “I never said that!”, you guys. We have Google now.

  4. I always wonder about movements where the followers have to constantly lie about their doctrine, history, rhetoric and associations.

    Like, do any of these people ever stop and think that maybe the reason that they’re lying all the time is because their ideology isn’t valid to begin with?

  5. Ugh – I think there’s a huge cognitive dissonance over the fact that they know “misogynist” is a bad thing to be called and they should defend against that, but they don’t quite get why it’s a bad thing.

  6. thebionicmommy

    I find it ironic that in a post where JtO is saying that AVfM does not call women lying bitches, the title of that same post implies that Shepard supports mass murder. His long winded post then tries to portray her as lying bitch. It’s like “How dare she say we call women lying bitches! She’s just a lying bitch!”.

  7. 99 problems? What does their 100th follower get?

  8. Women are lamps. Lying lamps are out to steal my money and sperm. Lamps should get jobs. Lamps should stop stealing my job. Lamps told me not to write. Lamps ate my baby. Lamps are boars, even when they’re ten, and the lying lamps know they’re boars because MISANDRY. Lamps are attacking men by throwing their light bulbs at us. FALSE RAPE ACCUSING LAMP! MISANDRIST LAMP! SCENTED FUCKING CANDLES LAMP!

    HOW DARE YOU ACCUSE ME OF USING THE WORD LAMP, YOU LAMP!

  9. @Cliff

    Yeah, I think you nailed it. Probably the same goes for poeple who are like, “It’s so mean of you to call me racist, I just think non-white people are the cause of every problem in society.”

  10. but….but….RADFEMHUB!!!!1 they said some bad things too therefore that excuses us saying bad things. LOGIC!!!

  11. “But that phrase forms no part of this human rights movement’s standard rhetoric, which if Shepherd were a journalist, she would know.”

    People who don’t buy his version of reality aren’t journalists? He actually thinks that people are going to accept this argument? Because it took me about 30 seconds on Google to confirm that Shepherd is indeed a journalist. Check it out!

    http://www.thepunch.com.au/author-bios/tory-shepherd/

  12. Calling women names just makes them look even more ridiculous.

  13. Just like laughing at prison rape makes a person look ridiculous.

  14. @Ugh

    The more self-aware ones may occasionally rise to the level of “But it’s not bigotry if it’s TRUE!”

  15. also don’t forget you guys…they’re not insulting women, just feminists. That’s why so many of the photos that head their articles are of beautiful, stuck-up looking women. Usually followed by text ranting about said women. I still remember that one about women talking to much space on the sidewalk. Women…walking and existing…that’s misandry!

  16. Register-her also has a category for murderers, although in observance of lack of conviction, it is listed “killers”. In many cases the victims are children. That site, however, does not have a category for “lying bitches”, since mainstream media doesn’t publish reporting on that particular social faux pas.

    1. Ha ha, they think saying “killer” instead of “murderer” covers their asses. This is why real news sources use the word “alleged.”

    2. They can’t even refrain from implying people are “lying bitches” in the post where they deny doing so. It goes straight from “how dare you, we would never use that word” to “okay, yeah, that word fits a lot of lying bitches but it isn’t specifically a category on register-her.”

    And in the comments, predictably:

    Rper1959
    Bravo JTO , I was tempted to write a retort to Shepherd myself, but too little time. Whilst I would never generalise or even contemplate suggesting that all women are lying bitches, the vast majority I know are decent honest people trying to live resectable lives. It is clear that some are lying bitches and Shepherd could consider herself a role model in that regard!

    5 upvotes, no downvotes, no replies. And excellent “no, no, slurs are okay so long as you only use them for the bad ones” justification, we’ve never heard that one before.

  17. I still remember that one about women talking to much space on the sidewalk.

    I think the logic here is that if you impose any conditions whatsoever on your hatred of women, it’s not misogynist. So if you say “I hate women,” yeah, that’s misogyny, but if you say “I hate women who wear shoes,” that’s totally in the clear!

    So hating women who walk on the sidewalk is totally reasonable, because gosh, it’s not like he hates them just for being women or something! It’s an innocent sidewalk-based preference!

  18. Note: Yes, I did say yesterday that I wasn’t going to read that JtO post on general principle. And yes, I did read a little bit more of it. But I have not read the whole thing, and I never will!

    Next on AVfM: David Futrelle Has No Principles

    I’m kidding! They wouldn’t say that. They’d make a ‘witty’ misspelling of David’s name.

  19. @Cliff, rper1959 is Greg Canning, the subject of Shepherd’s article. So I guess that’s his official reaction to the article. The site he chose for his reaction, his use of a pseudonym, and the response itself, which is that Shepherd is a lying bitch, ends up looking like a guy lurking around the corner and taking a swift swipe, then running.

  20. @Cliff

    yep that’s pretty much is. Nevermind that the whole post was about only women and how they take up so much space with their giggly friends. That’s totally not misogyny, just like ranting about how black people take up so much space in public isn’t racism….OH WAIT.

  21. *pretty much it

  22. Quackers – I think the question with anything like that is why they didn’t just say “I hate people who block the sidewalk.” (And why they put this on a “men’s rights” website in the first place.)

    Backpedaling to “no really this is all about sidewalks that’s all” doesn’t explain why they said specifically women.

  23. Just slapping the word “alleged” onto something doesn’t really help legally with libel, something most tort and first amendment lawyers will tell you. Federal courts (and most state jurisdictions) have rather complex tests to determine whether a statement is in the form of/would be taken as/is intended as a “statement of fact”. I think the “alleged” thing is more of a journalism based notion about what is and is not acceptable than it is an actual reflection of legality.

  24. @Cliff

    Exactly. He made it sound like this was a specific thing only women do, and that his opinion (which is heavily biased anyway) was fact. I’ve been blocked by men and women alike, mostly people who walk to slow or just stop and stand in the middle of a busy walking space. Even then I don’t think they’re doing it on purpose just to spite me, they’re just being inconsiderate or not realizing they’re doing it. Whereas practically everything women do or don’t do is just to spite men.

    How dumb do they think that not only us, but anyone who wanders on to their site and reads stuff like that, are not going to see how blatantly “women suck argle bargle” it is?

  25. “Whereas practically everything women do or don’t do is just to spite men according to MRAs” I should say

    ugh…can’t type right now, need coffee :P

  26. thebionicmommy

    Register-her also has a category for murderers, although in observance of lack of conviction, it is listed “killers”

    They have women on register her who were acquitted of their crimes, which in the case of their “killer” category were battered women who were acquitted of killing their abusers in self defense. The MRM has a huge double standard in that they think that anything a man does is self defense, even if it’s something like “defense against a woman being mouthy”, while a woman never has a right to self defense. So far all their concern about false allegations, the MRA’s don’t mind falsely accusing women of murder.

  27. The prevailing opinion amongst manboobz a few weeks ago was women fought long and hard to insult men, and weren’t about to give up that right. Something about power this or oppression that within the patriarchy nonsense. Standard victimology stuff. Not really sure who it was that ran the original comment, darksidecat comes to mind.

    Always the excuses abound. Little miss, crys-and-gets-160K gets a few insults directed soley at her and it’s proof of women universally suffering systemic misogyny. Yet the gang constantly does the same but that’s different, and definitely not proof of universal systemic anything. The days of womens carte blanche insults are long gone, ya get what ya give. This ain’t a site that promotes love, it’s pure hatred. As the saying goes, what goes around comes around.

  28. not to mention falsely accusing all feminists of advocating murder of men just because of a few idiots on radfemhub

  29. CassandraSays

    That Register Her banner has a bloody knife on it. Nope, no violent imagery here, no ma’am.

  30. Is it bad that I think “Princess Miserable” would be kind of a cool stage name or character or something?

  31. CassandraSays – And JtO’s post has another, different bloody knife image!

    Other images on AVfM’s front page (just the front page, no digging through archives here):
    -A boxer standing over a knocked-out opponent
    -A person (I think male but I’m not sure) lying on the ground bleeding very messily from the mouth and smeared with blood
    -A severed hand with blood and bones sticking out the end

    There’s also images of riot cops and of male wrists wrapped in chains.

  32. Actually, the dominant visual theme on AVfM is men as victims of female and/or state violence, and I find that almost scarier. Not that those things don’t happen but… it doesn’t feel like images of protest, it feels like they’re trying very hard to get themselves worked up.

    Feels like they’re trying very hard to find things to “self-defend” against.

  33. CassandraSays

    “A severed hand with blood and bones sticking out the end”

    Is this a blog post about war or war crimes? Or possibly horror movies? Because otherwise I really see no need for that.

  34. @CassandraSays
    That Register Her banner has a bloody knife on it. Nope, no violent imagery here, no ma’am.

    You can find out about any man any woman, in her unbiased opinion has decided to write about. You can trust every woman’s word to be gospel pure. Women don’t lie, are never vindictive, vengeful or spiteful. Check all the adds that are run as well. Men sure are devils and women are always angelic victims.

    http://www.womansavers.com/

  35. Cliff: 1. Ha ha, they think saying “killer” instead of “murderer” covers their asses. This is why real news sources use the word “alleged.”

    Alleged/accused/suspected are buffers, but not an absolute protection. As a former journalist I have some experience with libel; as it applies to the press.

    If someone has been arrested/charged, the use of alleged is protection againt a charge of libel… if the description is factual.

    “John Doe was arrested yesterday in connection with the robbery of three banks in midtown last week. Six robbers were captured on videotape. The district attorney’s office said he will be charged with three counts of armed robbery at his arraignment tomorrow.

    The alleged bank robber….”

    If you left the word, “alleged out” you have said he is a bank robber.

    But that’s only good if the circumstances make it plain that he is, from the point of view of “the system” actually suspected of being guilty.

    If, however one wrote, >i>”John Doe is being sought in connection with the robbery of three banks in midtown last week. Six robbers were captured on videotape. The district attorney’s office said Doe was a “person of interest based on the videotapes.

    The alleged bank robber….”

    Not gonna save your ass, because no one in the justice system has so much as implied they were being considered the perpetrator. It may be they were the only person on the tape who was in a position to get a clear look at any of the robbers’ faces. You, as a reporter, don’t know.

    Step outside the realms of those who are involved in a criminal case: where the official acts of immunised persons can be used as a buffer, and things get a lot stickier. Unless they are persons of some note, in the subject area being discussed, you, even if you are a member of the press (and the net is still not completely sorted out as to what counts as “journalism” and what is just somebody muttering in public), you don’t have much cover.

    So “register her” is sailing pretty close to the wind, and is probably vulnerable to someone who has the money to mount a case. They are in a world of hurt if they can be haled into a British Court, where the laws on libel are much different, and the punishments a lot more severe.

    That can, of course, backfire (as David Irving found out), because the peril is bi-directional, and the plaintiff is at risk for the cost of the defense; should they lose.

    thebionicmommy: They have women on register her who were acquitted of their crimes, which in the case of their “killer” category were battered women who were acquitted of killing their abusers in self defense. The MRM has a huge double standard in that they think that anything a man does is self defense, even if it’s something like “defense against a woman being mouthy”, while a woman never has a right to self defense. So far all their concern about false allegations, the MRA’s don’t mind falsely accusing women of murder.

    From a legal standpoint (re libel), if the women mounted an affirmative defense (i.e. they said, “yes, I did it, but I had a legally justifiable reason”) then it’s perfectly legal to say they are killers. To say they are murderers is a libel. I’m pretty sure it’s libel per se in that the women are being defamed).

  36. When I was a young girl, I was utterly distressed that misogynist assholes like this wouldn’t like me because I felt that because they were so loud, they must therefore be RIGHT and all men, to some extent, must be like the loudest ones, just like the loudest politicians always seem “right” when you’re a kid and the loudest adult authority figures seem like they MUST know what they’re talking about. Of course, as I grew up, I finally realized that this was patently false (as an adult, I now realize that these types of people groom young girls to believe this misogynist shit to make them easier to prey on- if you believe that “all men are assholes” you are far more likely to accept abusive asshole behavior).

    Case in point:

    As an adult woman, I would much prefer these men to completely ignore me (and, thankfully, there are many, many decent and good-hearted men out in the world, they just aren’t as loud and obnoxious as these scumbags). I would far prefer being unable to ever have PIV sex ever again if indeed my only option was that sort of horrible misogynist man who thinks women are “bitches”. Unfortunately, these guys seem to think that they are entitled to vaginas on demand, so regardless of how much we “repulse” them, they still want to USE us like the OBJECTS we are to them.

    I think that the thing that pisses them off the most is that no one CARES about them. People just want them to go fuck off somewhere and leave them alone. So they stamp their feet and act like spoiled children because they hate us so much but GODDAMNIT THEY WANT US TO LISTEN TO THEM AND DO WHAT THEY SAY ALL THE TIME BECAUSE PENIS.

  37. CassandraSays

    If my feminism makes me repulsive to angry misogynists then I’d count that as a feature, not a bug.

  38. Argenti Aertheri

    Today in NWO rants — another round of “man bad, woman good” — like that view of his is news to anyone here.

    Hey NWO? Care to try connecting that view to what Cassandra had said? That is, wtf does what you said have to do with registerher’s banner (and its violent imagery)?

    You may’ve missed that the page you link to is lacking a bloody knife as the banner, perhaps? Or, for that matter, any violent imagery?

    Try harder, sites rating people are just tacky, not violent (no argument from me that that’s eye-bleedingly bad web design, but it isn’t violent).

    Epically shorter version — would you like to make a point that’s actually on topic?

  39. @Argenti Aertheri
    “Try harder, sites rating people are just tacky, not violent (no argument from me that that’s eye-bleedingly bad web design, but it isn’t violent).”

    Or is it slander?

  40. CassandraSays

    I can’t even read that site Slavey linked to because the site design is such a mess. However, I note that the front page at least lacks any images of weaponry.

  41. CassandraSays

    (The web design does give me a headache, though, so I suppose one could consider it an assault upon people’s defenseless eyeballs.)

  42. @Argenti Aertheri
    “You may’ve missed that the page you link to is lacking a bloody knife as the banner, perhaps? Or, for that matter, any violent imagery?”

    Isn’t feministe a little girl with a big gun?

  43. Isn’t feministing a silhouette of a naked woman giving men the finger? Hate watch is a picture of a hatefully watching eye. Most feminist sites are the communist fist, or the sigul of woman with the communist fist inside. Feminism is violence and hate. The state does the dirty work for women

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tender_years_doctrine

    Here’s the actual rate of men in the western world who are allowed equal child custody. The state enforces this on womens behalf.

    http://www.nij.gov/journals/261/who-perpetrates.htm

    Here’s whose actually more violent. Even girls themselves admit they’re more violent. Yet once again DV laws punish men as being the primary agressor. If girls are that violent when they’re young, they’ll be even more prone to violence after they learn to use the state to enforce their will.

  44. thebionicmommy

    From a legal standpoint (re libel), if the women mounted an affirmative defense (i.e. they said, “yes, I did it, but I had a legally justifiable reason”) then it’s perfectly legal to say they are killers. To say they are murderers is a libel. I’m pretty sure it’s libel per se in that the women are being defamed).

    Okay, that makes sense. Yes, the women said they did it, but they were acquitted because it was self defense. So while they are killers, they are not murderers. The register her site does call them killers instead of murderers, but by listing them alongside women guilty of first degree murder it makes it look like they’re all the same. I’m thinking that you’re right it’s probably libel what they are doing at register her.

  45. Dude, womansavers is a dating site, or at least peripherally related to dating sites.

    Register Her is a site where you whiny-ass titty babies in the MRM can pillory women that you claim got away with something, or who didn’t and you want to crow over it.

    Does womansavers post cheaters and beaters and assorted other assholes on a public list? (I can’t navigate that site, it’s a wonder it’s been in business since 2002.) It might do.

    Register Her definitely posts women’s names, faces, and contact information on a public list. That’s the whole point. It probably has a function where a man can put in a woman’s name and see if she’s on the list, but the whole point is that the list is public.

  46. Gotta go get supper. An evil spirit waits for us to lay it to rest, one attack roll at a time!

  47. Argenti Aertheri

    Oh I’d missed this NWO

    The prevailing opinion amongst manboobz a few weeks ago was women fought long and hard to insult men, and weren’t about to give up that right. Something about power this or oppression that within the patriarchy nonsense. Standard victimology stuff. Not really sure who it was that ran the original comment, darksidecat comes to mind.

    Always the excuses abound. Little miss, crys-and-gets-160K gets a few insults directed soley at her and it’s proof of women universally suffering systemic misogyny. Yet the gang constantly does the same but that’s different, and definitely not proof of universal systemic anything. The days of womens carte blanche insults are long gone, ya get what ya give. This ain’t a site that promotes love, it’s pure hatred. As the saying goes, what goes around comes around.

    Apparently saying fuck is insulting men? No argument that saying fuck you to a man is insulting that man, but how is saying fuck you to a woman insulting all men? How is saying “I am fucking loving this weather” insulting men? (It’s been raining here, on and off, for 3 days, I am actually fucking loving it, I hate that 90+ shit)

    As for the Tropes v Woman bit, we are not derailing another thread with that, or at least I’m not.

    Not at NWO — that site he links to seems to have a list of rated men, but it doesn’t appear to have a general list, one has to search to review the list. Running the search on a town/city does work, and a random clicking that way is getting me a bunch of “dude’s married!” type listings. So I guess yes, it has a public list, but “he cheats!” doesn’t seem nearly as bad as “she’s a killer!” (and I see nothing that suggests one should do anything more to the cheaters than stay away, which, considering if someone’s cheated before, they might again…seems more like advice than threats). Wow is that design terrible though.

  48. @Argenti Aertheri
    “So I guess yes, it has a public list, but “he cheats!”

    A bit tyrannical isn’t it? Would you judge anything while only hearing one side exclusively? Like the site says, it has millions of viewers and contributors worldwide. The prevailing theme is a womans word is not only gospel, it is the only word. The format is that women are angels and they tell who and why men are devils. Tell me it’s not a hate site. I dare ya.

  49. NWO, you really shouldn’t criticize other people’s icon symbolism when yours is of white hands in slave chains.

    I mean for Chrissakes.

  50. Argenti Aertheri

    Nice try NWO, but you’re now playing Spot That Fallacy!! — you made the claim it’s a hate site, prove it, I don’t have to disprove it. And in the case of “(s)he cheated on me” no, there’s not much point to getting the other side, who wouldn’t deny that claim? Point was that “you shouldn’t date this person” really isn’t a terrible hardship to put upon the person, particularly not compared to “this person is a killer”

    As for Spot That Fallacy!!

    (shifting the) Burden of proof (see – onus probandi) – I need not prove my claim, you must prove it is false
    Onus probandi – from Latin “onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat” the burden of proof is on the person who makes the claim, not on the person who denies (or questions the claim). It is a particular case of the “argumentum ad ignorantiam” fallacy, here the burden is shifted on the person defending against the assertion

    That very nearly literally translates to — the burden of proof rests on him who says (it), not him who denies (it) — I can’t recall right off if ei is gendered or not (Latin doesn’t often use pronouns, and defaults to male ones).

  51. I have discovered the solution to the problem of viewing those violent images on AVfM. If you run it through meowbify.com first, all of the images are replaced by cat .gifs. Give it a try by going clicky clicky here.

    I love this!

  52. Argenti Aertheri

    Oh he’s got 3+ comments directed at me…can’t you manage to put your thoughts into one comment NWO? Give me a moment to get to the rest of them.

  53. NWO, the upraised fist is a general sign of protest. It is not specifically associated with communism. Also, where you have “sigul” I think you meant “sigil,” although that could easily be a typo.

    Got any other questions about symbols and symbolism? I’m here to help!

  54. Oh my god, thanks SO MUCH for that discovery, cloudiah.

    The internet is going to be a LOT more fun now.

  55. Cloudiah, that’s the greatest thing ever!

  56. On my version, the pic next to “Fuck Their Shit Up” is an adorable tiny kitten rolling over.

  57. ShadetheDruid

    Catgifsplosion! I feel sorry for people with slow computers. :P

  58. Argenti Aertheri

    “Try harder, sites rating people are just tacky, not violent (no argument from me that that’s eye-bleedingly bad web design, but it isn’t violent).”

    Or is it slander?

    Scroll up, pecunium already explained libel laws, slander laws are the same thing (in this case, I can 100% say it is not slander, as slander is spoken, while libel is written, and this is in print, thus cannot be slander). As for libel, nope, that requires, in the US anyways, that it be knowingly and patently false — believing the claim to be true is usually a valid defense — the US has incredibly weak slander/libel laws, and idk common law ones to comment.

    Nor do I know (or particularly care) the feministing icon, but I cannot see how flipping someone off is nearly as violent as a bloody knife — you’d need a gun or noose or something to compare with that. A watching eye is now a violent image? Maybe you should go debate with the makers of neighborhood watch signs?

    And that fight? It’s a symbol of solidarity, not violence, not that I really expect you to see anything communist as anything besides violent. (FYI, who’s = who is; whose = possessive)

  59. Isn’t it? I am never again reading AVfM without meowbify.

  60. CassandraSays

    It’s interesting that Slavey has now decided to focus his ire on Argenti, who’s really not what I’d call a radfem. Why the obsession, Slavey?

    (Also me, a bit, apparently he’s still sulking about that comment about the word “creep” a few weeks ago.)

  61. I have basically given up on nwo. Not only is he a flailing idiot who abuses the English language, but he also seems to think he is an expert at gaslighting, regardless of the fact that *anyone* can control + F can go back and check what he actually has said. I am not sure at this point if he truly believes his own drivel of if he actually thinks that by being unintelligible and offensive, that he is actually “winning”.

  62. Argenti Aertheri

    “It’s interesting that Slavey has now decided to focus his ire on Argenti, who’s really not what I’d call a radfem. Why the obsession, Slavey?”

    Yeah I’m not a cis woman, they wouldn’t have me even if I wanted to join them…

  63. @Argenti Aertheri
    The site’s very motto is guilty, innocense can’t be proven. There is no rebuttal. So instead I’ll ask. Do you consider it a hate site?

  64. Here is a conversation between JtO and TheFemtheistDivine (still meowbified).

    http://cat.www.avoiceformen.com.meowbify.com/a-voice-for-men/from-jtos-in-box//#more-22746

    Um, isn’t TheFemtheistDivine a troll/poe who continually pwns the MRM?

  65. CassandraSays

    Actually that may be why he’s decided to pick on you specifically. His last target was ozy, I’m sensing a pattern here.

  66. @Argenti Aertheri
    “Nor do I know (or particularly care) the feministing icon, but I cannot see how flipping someone off is nearly as violent as a bloody knife — you’d need a gun or noose or something to compare with that.”

    Feministe is a little girl with a gun. ???

    “It’s interesting that Slavey has now decided to focus his ire on Argenti, who’s really not what I’d call a radfem. Why the obsession, Slavey?”

    Ire? Have I shown you any ire?

    “Yeah I’m not a cis woman, they wouldn’t have me even if I wanted to join them…”

    Fancy term, cis woman. Have you uncissed recently?

  67. Argenti Aertheri

    Cassandra — maybe if I ignore him he’ll go away? Or at least pick someone else? I mean, he’s taken to repeating himself now, like I didn’t already play Spot That Fallacy!! on his most recent question… But yeah, my taking his attempts to gender me as “whatever dude, I really don’t care” probably does irk him.

  68. @Fembot
    “Um, isn’t TheFemtheistDivine a troll/poe who continually pwns the MRM?”

    Who dictates who gets pwned? Someone who goes by the handle fembot?

  69. Argenti Aertheri

    Indirect response to his question — how is listing people who cheat (or are accused of cheating) a hate site? Does he just not understand the concept of hate speech? That’s probably it huh?

    They certainly hate good web design though, that one I have absolutely no argument against.

  70. CassandraSays

    I’m not sure at all the Slavey understand what hate speech is, he seems to think that it’s saying anything negative about anyone. Like if I was to say “my last boss was an asshole”, that would be hate speech.

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 9,469 other followers

%d bloggers like this: