About these ads

A Voice for Men’s Attempts to Find and Publicize the Personal Information of a Toronto Activist Could Threaten That Young Woman’s Safety

cropped-man-yelling-at-computer

[TRIGGER WARNING: RAPE THREATS]

The Men’s Rights movement has been described by some as “the abusers’ lobby.” I don’t think that’s fair, but there are certainly those within the movement that fit the bill – not necessarily because they themselves are abusers, but because, among other things, they lionize abusers and advocate on their behalf.

In the case of hate site A Voice for Men, there is another way in which the term applies: the “activism” of the site and its followers, insofar as it consists of anything more than self-promotion, often mirrors the actions of abusers – AVFM is known for harassing individuals, usually women, and exposing (or threatening to expose) personal information that could be used to stalk and harm them, in an attempt to intimidate them and other feminists and shut them up. Indeed, the site on several occasions has offered $1000 “bounties” on the personal information of its foes.

Now AVFM has another individual in its sights: a young woman, presumably a student, who participated in a recent demonstration against Men’s Rights author Warren Farrell at the University of Toronto. Men’s Rights activists have been promoting a video depicting the protest, in which a group of feminist activists blockaded the building at which Farrell was speaking, until they were forcibly removed by police. The carefully-edited video pays particular attention to one of the activists, the woman in question, as she confronts supporters of Farrell, calling one of them “fucking scum.” (See here for an even-more-manipulatively propagandistic video that focuses even more intently on the woman; and here for one that more clearly depicts the police pulling, shoving, and knocking non-violent protestors to the ground.)

I don’t personally support blocking speeches by opponents; I think it’s bad both in principle and as a political tactic. But Warren Farrell certainly deserves criticism; demonstrators certainly have the right to demonstrate; and as anyone who has ever been to a demonstration knows, sometimes people on opposite sides shout at another.

Apparently the politically inexperienced “activists” at AVFM are unaware of this. And so the site has responded to the demonstration with a campaign to uncover and publicize this woman’s personal information – for the “crime” of using angry language at a protest. In one of the several posts on the subject now up on AVFM, the MRA known as JohnTheOther describes her as, among other things

her own generation’s brown shirt, and she knows it. …

She is clearly sadistic, unable and unwilling to recognize the humanity of anyone who does not slavishly and blindly agree with her own religion of hate.

There is more, much more; if you have the stomach for it, I suggest you read the full post to see JtO’s extended attack on the woman. As is often the case with MRA writings, the full quotes in context are worse than the excerpts I quote here.

A later post from site founder and head Paul Elam includes a picture of the woman, with the caption “Seeking this undesirable’s identity.”

Elam warns that

We have her image and know her general location. We will identify her and profile her activity and name for public view.

We will not stop there, or just with her. And while we will not publish our complete intent, we are dogged in our efforts.

Again, this quote is if anything worse in context; see the entire post here, filled with vituperative, thuggish, threatening language and illustrated with a picture of a violent storm, evidently intended to represent what AVFM is threatening to rain down upon its opponents.

In still another post, with the inflammatory title “Yanking Off the Hood,” Elam defends his site’s “doxxing” policy, writing

AVfM is conducting outreach and investigation into the identities of the persons involved in the violent protest against the rights of men and boys orchestrated and conducted by the University of Toronto Student Union and other antisocial elements within that institution.

To that end, one individual has already been identified, and you will be seeing a story on her here in the near future. Our search for the woman highlighted in the video of the protest continues, with some leads. …

Gender ideologues absolutely hate the light of day. They hate it shining on their ideas and on their lies. Many of them also don’t want it shining on their identities. They seek anonymity for the same reason Klansmen wear hoods.

Even beyond the vicious nature of AVFM’s language and tactics, the hypocrisy here is off the charts: most of AVFM’s writers – gender ideologues all – hide their identities behind pseudonyms, including of course JohnTheOther, who launched AVFM’s campaign against the still-unknown protester.

JtO, who now wishes to conceal his identity, used to write under his own name, and has linked his name with his pseudonym on YouTube and on Men’s Rights sites he has written for. Though his real name is fairly widely known, and can be uncovered with the simplest of web searches, JtO has now decided to try to get that cat back in the bag, and at one point demanded that I remove all mentions of his real name on this site so that he would not – irony alert — face harassment. As much as I don’t respect John, I respected this wish of his, and did so; he may want to take this issue up with his friend Elam, as a post by the AVFM head still up on the site identifies JohnTheOther by both name and pseudonym.

There is no question that the student activist targeted by JtO and AVFM will face harassment when and if her personal information is exposed. Indeed, she is already being singled out for abuse now. On YouTube, videos featuring her have inspired numerous threatening comments. Here are a sampling of comments I’ve found there:

ytwf2ytwf5ytwf6ytwf7ytwf8

Here you can find even more, sent to me by someone who was at the protest.

If AVFM releases the personal information of the student now being attacked online they are giving a green light for this sort of harassment online and off. They are aiding and abetting those who wish this woman to come to real physical harm.

That’s why I think it is fair to call AVFM a hate site, and a member of the abusers’ lobby.

(Meanwhile, JohnTheOther seems to be undergoing some sort of meltdown on Reddit; more on this in my next post.)

About these ads

Posted on December 8, 2012, in a voice for men, advocacy of violence, antifeminism, bullying, drama kings, evil women, harassment, hate, hypocrisy, irony alert, johntheother, men who should not ever be with women ever, misogyny, MRA, paul elam, threats, trigger warning, video, warren farrell and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 207 Comments.

  1. “Fucking scum”? Go suggest on reddit – not in men’s rights just generally on reddit – that there’s sexism in gaming or on reddit. You’ll be called cunt, scum, whore, skank, feminazi over and over and over. And if you point out the misogyny, you’ll be told you’re too sensitive.

    Not sure if you’re aware, but men’s rights will not allow any Gawker magazine links because they oppose doxxing. So, if this site is doxxing, the site should not be linked (at the very least).

  2. Not to mention that beyond the whining about being held accountable for the ‘doxxing’ – because most people are not disingenuous morons and know exactly what is the point of pairing a woman’s personal information with a bunch of hyperbolic rhetoric and rape threats- is that the whole reason they chose to dox is to protect themselves from being held accountable for the end results of their desires. They’re playing the lottery: probably if they find and post her address she won’t be physically assaulted, but maaayyyyybbeeee, who knows? Wouldn’t that be a damn shame? Anyway, the consequences for making sure she got her consequences will be someone else’s problem. If they wanted it done right, they’d do it themselves. But they’re less interested in if it gets done right-or at all- if it comes at their own expense.

  3. @aworldanonymous: If it makes you feel any better, most of society does hold youtube commenters threatening rape in profound contempt. More subtle rape apologism may not be scorned by much of society like it should be, but the vast majority of society would indeed despise these youtube commenters. They only feel safe to say this because of internet anonymity. It’s not much, but it’s something.

  4. Suzie: Can’t be holding a girl accountable now, can we?

    And it’s horrid to be saying the people who are threatening her are awful people.

    Can’t be holding them accountable now, can we?

  5. I wonder if Steele is following this little kabuki of AVfM and JtO?

    All that peacable, anti-violence, and all.

  6. Loving the poster idea. Maybe with a few SCENTED FUCKING CANDLES.

    @kysokisaen: Which makes their delusions of heroism even funnier. You’d think if they were really all that devoted to their cause, they’d be tripping over one another to take responsibility if, gods forbid, anything did happen.

  7. It’s like watching a circus, only less organized. See ya. Or not; this shit gets old fast.

  8. driversuz,

    “Can’t be holding a girl accountable now, can we? Perhaps if she wanted privacy, she could have avoided the camera. Or perhaps she’s too stupid to have noticed it a foot from her face.”

    So, you believe that threatening to rape someone for voicing a contrary opinion and insulting another person is okay, right? No? Then fuck off.

  9. It’s like watching a circus, only less organized. See ya. Or not; this shit gets old fast.

    Meaning, in other words, that driversuz has no way to respond to the counterarguments to her shit. Kind of sad, really.

  10. Cloudiah: Yeah, and that shit gets old… fast.

  11. The Kittehs' Unpaid Help

    Driversuz’s shit is so old it’s practically a coprolite.

  12. Failsuz’s argument are so old and dead they’re turning up in riverbeds as diamonds.

  13. The Kittehs' Unpaid Help

    Nah, that’d mean they’re worth something if they’re compressed enough.

  14. It would explain why DeBeers is artificially limiting the supply of Failsuz’s comments, however.

  15. “Existing.” That’s what you call it.

    Is this going to be our next semantic debate?

  16. It’s like watching a circus, only less organized. See ya. Or not; this shit gets old fast.

    “I have no refutation of your arguments, and therefore shall declare my victory by fiat.

    I win because I’m better than you! The end!”

  17. ““I have no refutation of your arguments,”
    If anybody here were making arguments instead of squawking out spastic leaps of ‘logic,’ I’d be all in. Instead all you can offer is some weird variations on:
    “Give some examples of misandry.”
    So I make a short list and get responses like:
    “That’s not an argument, it’s a list” {duhhhh}
    “Some of that stuff is real, but the most important thing is the fact that Suz is creepy, hates women, has issues with her son, is a man…..”
    “Divorce theft is not a ‘thing.'”
    “You don’t agree with me, therefore you must be “fill-in-the-blank.”

    Like I said, sixth grade girls. Drunk sixth grade girls playing house with stuffed animals. Boobzie is a joke and Booblets are the punchline. No wonder his readership is falling off; what “serious” feminist who wants to be taken seriously, can afford to be allied with this crowd? You grrrlz aren’t the only ones who come here for laughs.

  18. Driversuz: You don’t sound like you are laughing.

    Also, hate to break it to you, but name calling =/= “logic”. Also, using the words “leaps of logic” in a poorly constructed sentence doesn’t make you logical either.

  19. I understand your position now Suz. If you redefine misandry to mean “not being able to rape with impunity” and “not being able to leave your children to starve” then I can see how you would see that everywhere, since that is what the rest of us call “common decency” and it is, in fact, everywhere.

    One thing you did touch on was circumcision, which I do agree needs to be stopped.However, it’s been declining as feminism has increased, so it’s not something that can be blamed on feminism.

    Do you care about the ways men are *actually* being discriminated against? Like being told there is only one correct way to be a man?

  20. Suzy D, you were refuted, point-by-point, repeatedly. You ignored it all. You’ve never explained how anything we’ve said is a leap of logic. Your selective perception is amazing.

    You bring nothing but empty dishes to the table and declare it a feast. I’m glad you’re having fun, because you certainly aren’t doing anything more meaningful.

  21. Suz: The problem you are having is you aren’t making arguments. You are making assertions.

    Let me help you with some of the rules of argument

    What is an argument? In academic writing, an argument is usually a main idea, often called a “claim” or “thesis statement,” backed up with evidence that supports the idea.

    The required elements are:

    1: Proof that you understand the material, AND

    2: A demonstration of your ability to use or apply the material in ways that go beyond what you have read or heard.

    What arguments aren’t:

    Arguments in academic writing are usually complex and take time to develop. Your argument will need to be more than a simple or obvious statement such as “Frank Lloyd Wright was a great architect.” Such a statement might capture your initial impressions of Wright as you have studied him in class; however, you need to look deeper and express specifically what caused that “greatness.”

    Your real failing is here:

    Do not stop with having a point. You have to back up your point with evidence. The strength of your evidence, and your use of it, can make or break your argument. You already have the natural inclination for this type of thinking, if not in an academic setting. Think about how you talked your parents into letting you borrow the family car. Did you present them with lots of instances of your past trustworthiness? Did you make them feel guilty because your friends’ parents all let them drive? Did you whine until they just wanted you to shut up? Did you look up statistics on teen driving and use them to show how you didn’t fit the dangerous-driver profile? These are all types of argumentation, and they exist in academia in similar forms.

    You stopped right about here.

    For example you claimed, “look at any commercial with men and women

    That was refuted. Your claim was countered with evidence.

    Most of your assertions were so thin as to need no more than a simple dismissal (as I did when I said you didn’t provide evidence, you merely retorted with a list)> Other people (more charitable than I), were kind enough to detail the gross, and terminal, failings in your work.

    Some other things you might (as a general rule) want to consider.

    Do some research. It may seem to you that no one could possibly disagree with the position you are arguing, but someone probably has. For example, some people argue that the American Civil War never ended. If you are making an argument concerning, for example, the outcomes of the Civil War, you might wish to see what some of these people have to say….

    When you are summarizing opposing arguments, be charitable. Present each argument fairly and objectively, rather than trying to make it look foolish. You want to show that you have seriously considered the many sides of the issue and that you are not simply attacking or caricaturing your opponents….

    Critical reading is a big part of understanding argument. Although some of the material you read will be very persuasive, do not fall under the spell of the printed word as authority. Very few of your instructors think of the texts they assign as the last word on the subject. Remember that the author of every text has an agenda, something that he or she wants you to believe. This is OK—everything is written from someone’s perspective—but it’s a good thing to be aware of. (For more information on objectivity and bias, please read our handout on evaluating print sources)….

  22. Suz: No wonder his readership is falling off;

    Citation?

    I don’t see the superficial evidence of it. There are regulars (some of whom have been active for years), occasional commenters (some of whom have been active for years) and new commenters.

    Dave gets shout outs from sources in various places (including the MRM, which seems to pay fairly close attention to him, all in all). The SPLC noted some of his work.

    Heck, you say you’ve been quietly reading for months.

    You grrrlz aren’t the only ones who come here for laughs.

    You may be coming for laughs, but they seem to be less spontaneous chuckles, and more the forced response of the studio audience looking at the “Laugh” lights.

  23. Suz: You called it divorce RAPE. Not divorce THEFT. Own your bigotry!

  24. Look at Suz try to weasel away from her use of “divorce rape.” Backpedal much?

    titianblue: she’s be easier to take if she owned any of her positions. All of our trolls seem to think the scroll function on our computers is disabled.

    Suz, this is one of many reasons you’re a joke.

  25. Instead all you can offer is some weird variations on:
    “Give some examples of misandry.”
    So I make a short list and get responses like:
    “That’s not an argument, it’s a list” {duhhhh}
    “Some of that stuff is real, but the most important thing is the fact that Suz is creepy, hates women, has issues with her son, is a man…..”
    “Divorce theft is not a ‘thing.’”
    “You don’t agree with me, therefore you must be “fill-in-the-blank.”

    This is how I know you didn’t read either full-length posts responding to your list. I point-blank offered to work with you on an issue. (However, since I do actually give a shit, the offer still stands if you ever come up with any ideas to address that particular issue.)

    You called it divorce RAPE. Not divorce THEFT. Own your bigotry!

    Also, this.

  26. Still fairly new to all of this – so are Elam et al saying that since these protesters were demonstrating at a speech by this one particular person (Warren Farrell), they are therefore against men in general? And because one of them was all, like, yelling and shit, she deserves to be punished via doxxing (and oops, whatever else may happen when ppl get her home address, tee hee)?

    So… to them then, does Warren Farrell represent their ‘movement’, therefore if you don’t agree with him, you’re against the whole shabang? Is he their Jesus? Or should I forget about trying to figure out their logic, because it doesn’t actually exist?

    Suz is pretty classic – drop a faulty argument/claim and then completely ignore any and all responses. I don’t understand why she (or any of them) wouldn’t WANT to get better at debate and proper argument as to be more of an asset to her beloved movement. Suz seriously, step it up sistah!

  27. Forget trying to figure out their logic. You’ll just give yourself a headache.

  28. “Or should I forget about trying to figure out their logic, because it doesn’t actually exist?”

    As far as I can tell, this seems to be the way to go.

    “I don’t understand why she (or any of them) wouldn’t WANT to get better at debate and proper argument as to be more of an asset to her beloved movement.”

    They all suffer a massive case of Dunning-Kruger effect, where they think their MAN BRAINS make them automatically rational and therefore more intelligent. What they don’t understand is that if they actually spent time learning how to have open, honest, rational discussions about things, they would realize that all of their arguments against feminism would be shown to be completely invalid.

  29. We’ll they’ve started their doxxing, and it’s not even their main target. Any woman who participates in a protest against misogynists is fair game to have her personal information smeared up on the Internet by the “brave heroes” (i.e. cowardly assholes) at AVfM:

    http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/who-is-emma-claire-and-why-is-she-so-hateful/

  30. In the comments, the “reasonable MRA” Dean Esmay also loses his shit:

    In short: not worried about [violence against this woman]. No reason to be. She’s more likely to be struck by lightning than to be attacked by one of us. I’m more worried she’ll arrange to have one of us hurt or killed, or fake an injury on herself to get more attention. But if we don’t start naming and shaming the Stalinists, they get to keep doing what they’re doing under the cover of “I’m a girl, I’m helpless and harmless!” Fuck that and fuck her.

    In which they show that they also have no idea what Stalinism was. Is there a Stalinist equivalent to Godwinning? Is it Esmaying?

  31. OK, I take back what I said about Dean Esmay being reasonable. Damn, sometimes I wonder if something really bad is going to happen because of these guys sometime in the near future.

  32. Is it safe to say this dude has a victim complex? (For the record, I hate the term. however…)

    AVfM is doxxing a fucking college student for saying things they don’t like in public, accompanied with a plethora of documented death/rape/hurt/suffering threats, and this dude is worried that SHE will somehow try to hurt HIM?

    WHAT. THE. FUCK.

    She’ll “arrange to have one of us hurt or killed” with what, exactly, the Feminist Assassin Society?

  33. She’s already gotten at least one tweet from these dudes.

  34. Driversuz = MRA
    MRA = coward
    *transitive property of equality*
    Driversuz = coward

    Why would anyone expect a coward to stand firm and own their own shit? Especially while being held accountable for their words and actions? The whole MRM is a bunch of whiny ‘fraidy titty babies, Suz is unremarkable and predictable, she will not respond but to call names and throw tantrums. Just like all the rest of them.

  35. I’m more worried she’ll arrange to have one of us hurt or killed, or fake an injury on herself to get more attention.

    So, if she actually does get hurt because they doxxed her, it still won’t be their fault, because she’s a liar. right?

  36. That was sarcastic, by the way

  37. She and her friends are taking it well. Good to know that most people default to mockery as an almost instinctual response to these assholes.

  38. This makes Elam and company look like the unhinged assholes they are. In regards to them, I’ll borrow from a friend of a friend’s resignation speech: “You people make me fuckin’ sick.”

  39. And from Phil in Utah:

    Also, I know it’s a bit OT, but I’m getting a tad impatient: when will we see the article exposing David Futrelle as the creator of r/beatingwomen?

  40. Well, Phil, that would be never, for obvious reasons.

  41. I almost feel bad for Bowspearer in that thread. He’s trying to interject some common sense, and failing.

  42. @hellkell, I know, Bowspearer is kind of sad.

  43. These protestors physcially and verbally harassed innocent people, blocked them from enterting the building, vandalized posters, and I wouldn’t doubt threatened to batter (which is assault) the men attending the speech.

    Which is why some of the officers may have arrested some of the protesters. That is how you appropriately deal with someone who has crossed from protesting to threatening. Not release their information to the general public and trying to innocently claim “you know nothing will happen to them…wink wink”

  44. Tracy: Suz is pretty classic – drop a faulty argument/claim and then completely ignore any and all responses. I don’t understand why she (or any of them) wouldn’t WANT to get better at debate and proper argument as to be more of an asset to her beloved movement.

    This does presuppose that logical argument matters.

    One of rules of the MRM is the acceptance of several axioms, a priori

    1: Women are wrong.
    2: Feminists have managed to subvert society.
    3: Men are oppressed as a result of these two facts.

  45. Dear Failsuz, try whining about the thread you’re in, at the very least. You know, the one where you accused us of trying to keep a girl/female of being “held accountable” for her actions, and we pointed out how the AVfM crew is whining about being held accountable? Cuz men just take accountability by default cuz menz and femininsts [insert interminable whining here].

    Making shit up/pulling it out of your ass is also generally not considered anything but a “spastic leap of logic”.

  46. “Give some examples of misandry.”
    So I make a short list and get responses like:
    “That’s not an argument, it’s a list” {duhhhh}

    Actually, it was not “give some examples of misandry,” it was literally this:

    “Shit, if you can point to this overwhelming cultural hate of men, I’d love to see it.”

    If you’ll recall, the very first item on your list was disproved with a simple youtube search. And that’s why I suggested you try making arguments rather than lists.

    She says she comes here to learn dishonest debate tactics. Evidently to practice them, too.

  47. If there was a man verbally abusing and screaming at women and blocking their entry into a women’s conference and all of this was captured on camera, would you think it unreasonable to want to know who that man was?

  48. The Kittehs' Unpaid Help

    If you mean “post his address and contact details for vigilantes rather than the police to deal with,” then yes, it would be unreasonable.

  49. If there was a man verbally abusing and screaming at women and blocking their entry into a women’s conference and all of this was captured on camera, would you think it unreasonable to want to know who that man was?

    Yes. I would also think it would be particularly unreasonable to orchestrate a harassment campaign of that man by publishing his name and address, as it would be particularly unreasonable to call for that man to be raped and/or murdered. Do you disagree?

  50. Oh, gateman. The chumps at AVfM (and you) don’t just “want to know who she is,” they want to see her harassed. If she gets hurt, that’s just gravy to Elam, all of his mealy-mouthed talk of non-violence aside.

  51. After all, fucking their shit up provides PaulE with sexual release.

  52. Sir Bodsworth Rugglesby III

    Why is false equivalence always the go to argument of the MRM?

  53. Sir Bodsworth: because they are sloppy, lazy thinkers.

  54. Hey Gateman, if the feminist organization trying to publicly expose his identity had the SCUM Manifesto listed on its front page under the “Activism” label, and the founder of said organization had publicly stated that “Men in certain situations are freaking begging to be raped,” had published an article called “Bash a violent man month” in which she applauded a lurid scene of bashing an abusive man’s head against a wall and forcing him to clean up his own blood, had written that “fucking up MRA’s shit makes me wet,” would you be concerned for that man’s safety? Would you see the attempt to air out his identity as an act of deliberate intimidation?

  55. It’s funny that Gateman thinks a “ha! you’re hypercrites too, admit it!” argument does any more than admit that he knows he’s a hypercrite.

  56. I love it when trolls attempt the Socratic method. It’s proof positive that they have absolutely no idea how people think, because people never answer the way they’re expecting.

  57. So doxxing is now linking to someone’s twitter with their real name attached?

    Would that mean that if I linked to this site, called Manboobz, on another site with people contrary to the opinion voiced here and said it’s run by someone called David Futrelle, I’d be doxxing, even though it says as much in the “about” section on the sidebar? Seriously, I’m genuinely confused. Linking to a public account with her real full name is violating her personal information? *blink* Her home address hasn’t been revealed, only her name has, which she on twitter reveals with no pseudonym. She hasn’t been contacted, she hasn’t received any threats directly to her home. Doxxing?

    By the way, if you want to have any moral high ground, it’s usually a good idea to keep the “gets sexual release” memes out of the way, unless you wish to be deemed a hypocrite. Also, I’m not sure if you realise, but whenever anyone of you says “what about the menz?” sarcastically, while I’m sure you think it’s clever, it’s actually a reverse “Dear Muslima” and, again, a tad hypocritical. Besides, this woman clearly had some gears to grind and I don’t think it’s fair to say she’s being harassed when in the video she’s the aggressor. The irony is that if this was in the reverse, you absolutely would want to know the identity of the man deriding a woman for merely wanting to attend a speech. And there is no indication what so ever that they’re looking to reveal the home address or other such crucial information in the blog posts you link to, that’s sensationalist nonsense – and that linking to her twitter page would threaten her safety is ridiculous. Grow up.

  58. AVFM have posted her name and twitter account name. They have not posted her address.

  59. gateman: that means it’s okey-dokey?

    This from a movement that makes requests to have their names removed from posts because, “I will be harrasssed”?

    This is the moral high ground of the MRM?

  60. Sir Bodsworth Rugglesby III

    And that’s the appropriate place to draw the line because?

  61. Tulgery that is all bullshit quote-mining and you know it.

  62. Pecunium, there’s a world of difference between someone posting comments online and those conducting criminal activity which is what the blockade was.

  63. In that light, I have ideas about women who spend evenings in bars hustling men for drinks, playing on their sexual desires so they can get shit faced on the beta dole; paying their bar tab with the pussy pass. And the women who drink and make out, doing everything short of sex with men all evening, and then go to his apartment at 2:00 a.m.. Sometimes both of these women end up being the “victims” of rape.

    But are these women asking to get raped?

    In the most severe and emphatic terms possible the answer is NO, THEY ARE NOT ASKING TO GET RAPED.

    They are freaking begging for it.

    Damn near demanding it.

    http://www.avoiceformen.com/mens-rights/false-rape-culture/challenging-the-etiology-of-rape/

    gateman, you can bullshit yourself all you want, but you can’t bullshit me.

  64. And all the outraged PC demands to get huffy and point out how nothing justifies or excuses rape won’t change the fact that there are a lot of women who get pummeled and pumped because they are stupid (and often arrogant) enough to walk though life with the equivalent of a I’M A STUPID, CONNIVING BITCH – PLEASE RAPE ME neon sign glowing above their empty little narcissistic heads.

    In my opinion their “plight” from being raped should draw about as much sympathy as a man who loses a wallet full of cash after leaving it laying around a bus station unattended.

    Perhaps if we start curbing out automatic outrage over what happens to women who are begging for and insisting on trouble, then maybe a few of them will be more prone to decisions that turn out a little better for them.

    How dare anyone call him a misogynist!

  65. Pecunium, there’s a world of difference between someone posting comments online and those conducting criminal activity which is what the blockade was.

    Nope, actually, a blockade is not “criminal activity”.

  66. Yeah it’s true, words are never illegal and actions are always illegal. Sharp points, whatsisface.

  67. Sir Bodsworth Rugglesby III

    Wasn’t the blockade already dealt with by, y’know, the police?

  68. Wasn’t the blockade already dealt with by, y’know, the police?

    You can’t leave something as important as harassment and intimidation to the police, Bodsy. That calls for an angry vigilante mob.

    /sarcasm

  69. Luckily no one has ever figured out someone’s address given their name, and no resources exist to make that possible, so it’s all OK.

  70. The Kittehs' Unpaid Help

    And I don’t see anyone in the MRM having the know-how to be a hacker. Being hacks is more their line.

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 9,021 other followers

%d bloggers like this: