Categories
a voice for men actual activism antifeminism drama kings evil women FemRAs grandiosity harassment hate I'm totally being sarcastic manginas men who should not ever be with women ever misandry misogyny MRA oppressed men paul elam playing the victim reddit self-congratulation shit that never happened splc straw feminists the fucking titanic the poster revolution has begun Tom Martin whores

2012: Year of Triumphs for the Men’s Rights Movement

Come early to get a good seat!
Come early to get a good seat!

What a year!

The Men’s Rights movement, the most important human rights movement of the 21st century, got 2012 off to a flying start in February with an event in Bozeman, Montana that was quite literally attended by no one. After that, the year was a whirlwind of activity. Let’s go to the timeline:

January: The Men’s Rights movement rests up to prepare itself for the year.

February:  The Montana State University chapter of the National Coalition for Men holds a lively and well-attended Men’s Rights event in Bozeman, Montana.  Sorry. When I said “well-attended” I meant to say “not attended at all.” As the local NBC affiliate reports, in what may be my favorite sentence ever written about the Men’s Rights movement: “No one showed up to the event but organizers say the lack of attendance is not due to a lack of interest.” You can read more here at Man Boobz, or watch the NBC affiliate’s report here.

March: The Southern Poverty Law Center, an important and influential watchdog of hate groups in the United States, profiles the Men’s Rights movement, describing it as “an underworld of misogynists, woman-haters whose fury goes well beyond criticism of the family court system, domestic violence laws, and false rape accusations. …  Women are routinely maligned as sluts, gold-diggers, temptresses and worse; overly sympathetic men are dubbed “manginas”; and police and other officials are called their armed enablers.”

March: British Men’s Rights activist Tom Martin has his “anti-male discrimination” lawsuit against the London School of Economics thrown out of court as a “hopeless claim.” Martin responds on Twitter by calling his critics “whores.” He then comes to Man Boobz and calls people here whores. Eventually he announces that female penguins are also whores. No, really. Read more about Tom’s visits to Man Boobz here: 1, 2, 3, 4. (TRIGGER WARNING for links 2 and 3, which deal with Martin’s reprehensible views on child prostitution.)

April: Thousands of Men’s Rights Activists converge on the National Mall in Washington DC for “Sink Misandry,” apparently some sort of protest against the lifeboat-boarding policies of the RMS Titanic, which sank in the North Atlantic one hundred years ago. (There was a movie about it.)

Sorry, correction: When I said “thousands of MRAs” I meant to say “none.” While the Sink Misandry protest was announced with great fanfare in December of 2011 on A Voice for Men, it was later called off due to unspecified logistical problems. Understandable, given how difficult it is to get to our nation’s capital, inconveniently located on the sparsely populated East Coast and served by a mere three airports.

May – June: The Men’s Rights movement has lunch and takes a little nap.

July:  Seven Men’s Rights activists make it to the steps of the Capitol in Washington DC, evidently for some sort of anti-circumcision protest. On Reddit, one MRA blames the poor attendance on the machinations of the “Government and the Fem lobby.”

August: In order to more effectively harness the activist energies of MRAs on Reddit, Paul Elam of A Voice for Men sets up a Men’s Rights Activism subreddit alongside the longstanding Men’s Rights Subreddit. Only a handful of MRAs subscribe, possibly because Elam seems more interested in banning people he doesn’t like than in organizing anything, and the subreddit is abandoned by its founder and everyone else within a month.

September:  In Vancouver, Men’s Rights activists hold a lively, well-attended debate with feminists on the question “Has Feminism Gone Too Far?” at a local used car dealership.

Oh, sorry. Another correction: After being announced, and cancelled, then resurrected and reannounced, the event is ultimately cancelled after the organizers lose the venue for the event due to a weird turn events that involves an MRA car salesman being removed from his place of business by police after some sort of dispute with his business partner. Also, the MRAs never bothered to round up any feminists to take part in the debate with them. You can read the whole complex and confusing saga of the Great Vancouver All-MRA Debate That Wasn’t in these three Man Boobz posts: 1, 2, 3.

October: Recess

November: Artistry Against Misandry holds a lively and well-attended concert and fundraiser in Nashville to celebrate International Men’s Day.

Whoops! One more correction: The event never happened. Apparently the organizers lost their venue, and were unable to book another one, as Nashville isn’t really much of a music town and musical venues there are as scarce as … wait, no, it’s fucking Nashville. NASHVILLE. Music City. The home of the Grand Ole Opry. I’m pretty sure that every building that isn’t a house or a restaurant there is a musical venue.

Also, the Artistry Against Misandry website seems to have vanished from the face of the earth. Might I suggest a visit to Artistry For Feminism and Kittens instead?

December: Christmas shopping.

I should note that when not organizing, then cancelling, events many MRAs have been busily harassing individual women online and posting many very angry comments. A few have also been putting up some very badly designed posters. So there’s that.

With a year of such triumphs behind them, how will the Men’s Rights movement manage to keep up such a blistering pace in 2013?

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

356 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
pecunium
7 years ago

I don’t think they are in Sweden, but that’s where they have their address. I think it is exactly that… a ruse meant to make it easier to get away with a crime.

Boy are you quick.

As to evil intent. That the site seems to be nothing more than a scam is one thing. But it’s not, prima facie a sign of evil intent. They could just be assholes. But going to such apparent lengths shows an understanding of the illegal, as well as immoral aspects of the model.

That’s where it shows the mens rea needed to infer intent.

Argenti Aertheri
Argenti Aertheri
7 years ago

I had the joy and wonder of trying to sort out how to deal with suing a German national once, had to tell the lawyer 3 times to call the US embassy, and have his father (the owner) ask before they called the damned embassy. Point here is that that’s who to ask, as this is wtf they do.

Could possibly do it with the state as complaining party in Sweden, for example.

That they’re assholes goes without saying.

pecunium
7 years ago

The problem here is scale. You’d have to find a prosecutor willing to try and make a RICO case, because each count is probably trivial, and the victims are going to be separated in time/distance.

That’s how this sort of thing manages to work, it’s a distributed risk model, same as with identity fraud on credit cards. The individual payoffs are low, so the banks accept it as a cost of doing business, but the people organising it are managing to aggregate those small payoffs to equal a large return.

On the flip side banks have, “small” charges on cards, but 100,000 people getting dinged $2.50 a month is a quarter of a million dollars. If you can make it 30 bucks a month, etc.

Each person feels it, but not enough to try and find another bank.

Here, if they find out about it, the easiest course may seem to be to pay the bastards off. Especially since it seems wrong, but most people aren’t likely to realise it’s actually a criminal enterprise.

Bee
Bee
7 years ago

I dunno, pecunium. Granted, I’m in contracts and real property law, not criminal, but without additional facts I don’t see RICO here and I don’t see fraud. Can you explain what your thinking is?

pecunium
7 years ago

It’s plainly extortionate, and while it’s fraudulent (as they make no pretense of confirming the veracity of the claims). The case for fraud is weaker, but since they have no control over the ways things are archived, they can’t actually guarantee the removal will be either total, nor effective.

RICO is a really broad statute, but all it takes is two criminal acts in furtherance of a pattern of behavior, It was designed to make it possible to use very different things (say an arson, and an extortion) to cripple the Mafia.

One of the more egregious uses of it was in Florida, where a prosecutor decided Marvel Graphic Novels were porn, so he had two 17 year olds go in, ten minutes apart to buy one.

Then he swooped in, arrested the owners, charged them under RICO siezed all their stock, and hardware (wire racks, cash registers, etc.). They were acquitted, but the evil genius of RICO is that it doesn’t matter. The seized goods were forfeit, used to pay the prosecution, and they didn’t have to be recompensed for the loss.

I think RICO is unconstitutional. I can’t see any difference between it and a bill of attainder; save that a bill of attainder was less draconian, because while the case was being decided the Crown has to keep the attainted goods/properties in escrow, and was liable for losses in the event the accused was acquitted (which happened, not often, but it happened).

This is pretty clearly something one could make a RiCO case for,

pecunium
7 years ago

Clarification: The bookstore owners were acquitted on the basis the graphic novels weren’t pornographic. It was a 1st amendment ruling. The mechanics of the RICO charge were held to be legitimate.

Bee
Bee
7 years ago

Yeah, I actually know what RICO is, pecunium, but I the thing is, it doesn’t apply to every crime. It applies to crimes listed under USC Title 18 — which includes extortion, but only certain kinds of extortion (extortion involving federal employees, basically).

On fraud: Prosecutors must be able to prove each element of the crime. Basically, fraud entails the defendant’s knowing misrepresentation of a material fact, with another rightfully relying on that misrepresentation, leading to damages. Again, I don’t see it applying here, without additional facts.

I think extortion, harassment, and privacy/publicity torts are the best options here.

Diogenes The Cynic
Diogenes The Cynic
7 years ago

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=960&sid=19302544

Theres one winning data point.

pecunium
7 years ago

Bee, I’m sorry if I was presumptive.

I think, from having followed a lot of RICO prosecutions that the courts have rule it’s a substantive offense under RICO to use an enterprise to conduct criminal acts. It’s also allowable to take state offenses as the predicate acts.

Bee
Bee
7 years ago

I’d have to do a lot more research than I’m willing to do on this to be thorough, but on the face of it, the statute defines racketeering activity in an exhaustive list, most of which consists of federal crimes.

Not saying it couldn’t happen, but I’d be really surprised if a court interpreted Congress’ clearly defined language to define racketeering activity as something other than the list set out in the statute.

pecunium
7 years ago

Looking at the statute, and some of the case law, it seems extortion is both broadly defined

18 U.S.C. § 1951 (2) The term “extortion” means the obtaining of property from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right.

The 7th Circuit was really broad in one RICO prosecution: SCOTUS had to reverse them (twice) Scheidler v. National Organization for Women, Inc., 537 U.S. 393 (2003), and the subsequent retrial Scheidler v. National Organization for Women, Inc., 547 U.S. 9 (2006).

The holding in the first ruling implies that this site could be in violation of the Hobbs Act, and so have the requisite violation:

Petitioners may have deprived or sought to deprive respondents of their alleged property right of exclusive control of their business assets, but they did not acquire any such property. Petitioners neither pursued nor received “something of value from” respondents that they could exercise, transfer, or sell.

I don’t know that this SCOTUS would uphold it, but if money changed hands it seems it would be in keeping with the rulings.

But I’m not a lawyer, just a very interested lay-observer, and I hope I’ve not gone on too much on this.

Bee
Bee
7 years ago

You forgot to read part 1 of 1951, though. I’m not a lawyer, but I am a 3L. Scheidler v. NOW can be distinguished because the clinics in that case fall under the definition of interstate commerce. I don’t really see an interference with commerce here. You’d have to argue that the individual women in the site are engaged in interstate commerce in a way that the extortion directly interferes with/prevents, and I don’t see that without additional facts.

pecunium
7 years ago

Scheidler also holds that state laws are enough to create the predicate offenses for a RICO charge.

petitioners had committed extortion under various state-law extortion statutes, a separate RICO predicate offense.

So I think a case can be made.

Bee
Bee
7 years ago

No, not really, pecunium. Look, I know you hate to be wrong, but I’m sorry. Scheidler does not say what you think it says.

The opinion states that the common law and state definitions of extortion can be used under the Hobbs Act, which is included in the list of identified federal crimes that RICO applies to. You’d still need an element of interfering with commerce that doesn’t exist in the present case.

pecunium
7 years ago

Ok.

Tina
Tina
7 years ago

OMG..kittyvideoskittyvideoskittyvideos..

The Kittehs' Unpaid Help

::waves burning feather under Tina’s nose::

Steady! You’ll be all right in a minute!

The Kittehs' Unpaid Help

Speaking of feathers –

http://youtu.be/g2ewcYuv10s

Argenti Aertheri
Argenti Aertheri
7 years ago

That is one very patient cat!

The Kittehs' Unpaid Help

Luckily for the bird! 😀

URGH – Fribbie just did a mighty stench and is having a mighty complain about it

*cough*

*hack*

Austin McWin
Austin McWin
7 years ago

This might be my favorite feed on the internet right now, please keep this up, you make my sanity possible. Thank-you for making these ass clowns so laughable! Mad props to you.

completelylostforwords

Oh come on, that’s horrible, laughing at the low number of people supporting legit rights? Dude, whether they’re men or women, having those issues suck. If women had the issues they were fighting against in men’s rights movements, and someone laughed at the low support of THAT, you’d think that was low-down, right?

I better not find that you shared that post about MRAs making it “impossible” for decent men to get help with (those men’s issues that FtB woman talked about… forget what) the men’s issues… cos you’re acting like it’s not a big deal.

titianblue
titianblue
7 years ago

Hahahahahaha!

Sorry. That was rude. But just to reassure you, @completelylostforwords, I’m not laughing at the low number of people supporting legit rights. I’m laughing at you and your disingenuousness.

titianblue
titianblue
7 years ago

What I really came onto this thread for was to invite you all to feel as nauseated at this charming Toronto Standard interview with Mr Elam as I did.

http://torontostandard.com/culture/the-revolutionary-an-interview-with-a-voice-for-mens-notorious-founder-paul-elam

katz
7 years ago

I better not find that you shared that post about MRAs making it “impossible” for decent men to get help with (those men’s issues that FtB woman talked about… forget what) the men’s issues… cos you’re acting like it’s not a big deal.

I’D BETTER NOT FIND OUT OR ELSE!

cloudiah
7 years ago

What does that “I’d better not find that” sentence even refer to? The sentence structure is … opaque.

laura lostumo
laura lostumo
7 years ago

please sign my petition for fathers to have equal rights as a parent, the Boston DCf does not recognize father’s rights,- thanks for your help-
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/262/927/335/abuse-of-authority-by-the-boston-dcf/

Marc A
Marc A
7 years ago

Yeah, Manboobs sure spends alot of time talking about a movement that they claim nobody cares about and is getting nowhere. LOL! Lots of time to spare on a nothing movement, huh? Yeah right. You forgot to mention the mainy gains of MRAs throughout 2012. Some states have adopted joint custody laws. In CA, Judges are now being educated on the data on male DV victims, no longer by radical feminist groups. MRAs are getting leverage now in getting due process protections and non-discrimination clauses in VAWA, and educating legislators about its misguided focus on law enforcement as opposed to mental health approaches. MRA groups are forming all over the world. They had a march in Costa Rica a few months ago. http://insidecostarica.com/2012/11/25/dozens-march-to-demand-rights-equal-treatment-for-men/ They are growing bigger and bigger in India, where only men can be prosecuted for adultery and where male victims of rape and DV are ignored. MRAs have helped the L.A. DV Council to create a task force on male DV victims and the Council now has male DV victims listed as a major topic of discussion. The San Diego DV Council has come around completely to pay attention to male DV victims because of MRAs, who used to be ignored by the Council. The National Coalition For Men is getting anti-male posters removed from the walls of courthouses and child support services offices. MRAs successfully protested and ended Verizon’s hateful ant-male ads.

A growing “womanist” movement, mostly minority women, are distancing from feminism because womanists support BOTH men’s and women’s rights.

“One of the primary ways Womanists differentiate themselves from feminists is their concern about men’s rights and their willingness to include men’s rights within their advocacy issues http://wesleyanargus.com/2011/03/25/womanist-house/

Austria, Germany and surrounding nations are forming official commission on men’s rights issues. The UN and EU human rights courts have both addressed fathers’ rights now.

Like it or now, Manboobs, the men’s rights movement is going the same route the fathers’ rights movement went. Ten to fifteen years ago any mention of fathers’ rights was met with immediate ridicule and distain. Not anymore. The men’s rights movement will go through the same path. The BBC News and the UK Guardian have both done good, balanced articles on the MRA movement and are covering the issues very well.

Sorry, Manboobs. Scream and whine against MRAs all you want.

pecunium
7 years ago

Oh look, a necro-gloater.

thenatfantastic
thenatfantastic
7 years ago

Part 1: Tagline of the website: “Misogyny. I mock it.” – so yeah, that does entail talking about MRAs a lot, because they’re horrid little misogynists.

Part 2: ll those things – tell me a) how women/feminists were opposed to them and b) exactly how being horrible to women on the internet achieved them?

Part 3: Womanism has been around since the 70s, idiot. And Jesus fucking Christ, you ignorant little shit, thinking womanism started because of a desire to pander to men?

Part 4: Again, tell me a) how women/feminists were opposed to them and b) exactly how being horrible to women on the internet achieved them?

Part 5: The Father’s Rights movement is in disarray. It splintered about five years ago in the UK when some of them wanted to commit acts of kidnap and terrorism and the others didn’t. The last time anyone heard a peep out of them was when the ASA pulled their advertising campaign for being libellous and fraudulent. I’m assuming, from your reference to the Graun and the BBC that you’re from the UK, so you damn well know this.

Part 6: Laughing at how stupid you are and grimacing at your obscene childish tantrums about how not getting everything you want, up to and including the use of other human beings, is neither screaming nor whining.

Diddums.

Kiwi girl
Kiwi girl
7 years ago

A growing “womanist” movement, mostly minority women, are distancing from feminism because womanists support BOTH men’s and women’s rights.

And backed up a quote from a single university’s student paper.

From that same student newspaper site (http://wesleyanargus.com/2011/03/25/womanist-house/):

“What surprises me the most about living in Womanist House is that almost no one outside of the house has heard of womanism,”

It’s not as though it hasn’t had enough time, from the same webpage:

The term “womanist” was first coined by Pulitzer Prize-winning novelist Alice Walker in her [1983] book “In Search of Our Mothers’ Gardens: Womanist Prose.”

I’m tired of people railing against strawfeminism. Also:
– feminism is inclusive of males, because equality is what we’re after. For example, I don’t like non-custodial parents withholding child support, regardless of the gender of the custodial parent.
– it’s so cute about how any action to assist males (probably he meant men, but I’m going with the wider definition here to be generous) is automatically assumed to be due to MRAs.

Some Gal Not Bored at All

This is a particularly strange thread to come into and gloat about how much the MRM is gaining ground.

Also, VAWA is helping men? (I mean, I know it would have, but wtf.)

cybroo1a
7 years ago

The Christians are creating a church state in response to this shit, so, you may very well find your face at the end of a riffle. I know your nothing you’re an idiot troll, but people are getting very pissed of and as you know 70% of America is Christian. So if you think you hold a candle to them when this war comes, think again… We all know how crazy the Christians are! They are pissed off, I would piss them off any more if I where you… what is you choice, Men will win, they always do, but we can avoid repeating the past… Do you want the Christians to take over and put all the women back into their place, or do you want to play fair,and respect men’s rights? Again, men will win, but if you make them win by force, everything you have worked for will be gone. I doubt the Christians will put up with this much longer. As it is they can already ignore all of your feminists laws now that they have church states, and there is nothing you can do about it. You should join the fight for men and women’s rights before it is too late, and we only have the Christians right to follow.

hellkell
hellkell
7 years ago

Way to necro a thread with your big talk, Fights With Keyboard.

katz
7 years ago

you may very well find your face at the end of a riffle

That could be nice. I like streams.

00000
00000
7 years ago

Just want you to know that I am a Christian and I hate MRAs. Great way to generalize.

Alex Reynard
Alex Reynard
7 years ago

I’m sure it would be absolutely impossible to find a comparable amount of failed feminist events for this same time period, which, if such a thing were possible, would of course be a completely accurate representation of the movement as a whole.

PJ
PJ
7 years ago

Alex

Why don’t you set up your own blog where you do just that.

Viscaria
Viscaria
7 years ago

And when you go to your blog to look for feminist activism failures in 2012, Alex the Necromancer, I suggest try to find any examples of a successful MRA protest during the same period. Otherwise, when you triumphantly announce how feminism failed to do anything in 2012, we will simply point at all the activism that actually did occur; and when you are unable to do the same for your own movement, you will look extremely foolish. And we can’t have that.

Howard Bannister
7 years ago

Alex Reynard | July 30, 2013 at 3:16 am

I’m sure it would be absolutely impossible to find a comparable amount of failed feminist events for this same time period, which, if such a thing were possible, would of course be a completely accurate representation of the movement as a whole.

Yes, Alex, it totally would.

Name one event that failed.

Go on, name one.

I’m sure it’s out there, Al. Come on. Just one.

Then, if you can name one, survey out all the feminist events above a certain size attempted, and graph out the percentage that failed, and perform a similar survey of MRA events.

We’ll wait.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
7 years ago

More to the point, name an MRA event that succeeded. Not just in 2012, ever.

I would offer to wait, but as we know MRAs could fuck up the opening of an envelope, so…

Ally S
7 years ago

Paper cuts are misandry.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
7 years ago

Into which we pour the lemon juice of femicommunaziliberalism.

hellkell
hellkell
7 years ago

Alex came to this thread to drop that off? You know we’re looking at what passes for his best work.

cloudiah
7 years ago

Good morning, thread zombies!!! 😀

Viscaria
Viscaria
7 years ago

I feel like you get to be a drive-by troll or a necro troll but doing both is just rude.

Shiraz
Shiraz
7 years ago

What the hell is cybroo on about? Ladies, comply or else the christians will take you down with a shotgun? Or something close to that? I’m not sure. Maybe I have to be drunk to understand.
Oh and Alex, you are so brave….so brave….**chuckles**

carnation
carnation
7 years ago

So…. Paul Elam is off to ABC news… Avfm is positively buzzing about it.

What could possibly go wrong for the MRM? They’re sending their best man onto a news program to discuss his views…

I eagerly await him being scrutinised with an audience. There’s a danger than ABV won’t do their homework on his hateful little outfit, but a cursory glance at his diatribes gives the game away.

With avfm at the helm, looks like 2013 is going to be an even worse year for the MRM.

Credit where it’s due, folks: they’re usually pretty (unintentionally) entertaining.

grumpycatisagirl
grumpycatisagirl
7 years ago

Mr. Elam wrote about the interview after it happened. He called the interview “every bit as skewed as I expected” and talked about the interviewer obsessing on “cherrypicked bits of his most provocative writing” . . . so it sounds like they did their homework,

http://www.avoiceformen.com/misandry/back-from-new-york/