Hey, hostile visitors! Do you have an opinion about, for example, Mary Koss’ rape research? Do you want to discuss it even though the topic has not actually come up by itself in any of the threads and none of my recent posts really have much to do with the specifics of anyone’s rape research? Well, from now on you can discuss it here with anyone who wishes to follow you to this thread.
Added bonus: If you continue to try to discuss it in other threads you’ll be banned!
This also applies to future derailers riding hobbyhorses of their own having nothing to do with Koss.
Happy discussing!
Note: If you wish to discuss the topics at hand, you know, topics directly related to my posts and/or to what other people are discussing and that aren’t, you know, personal hobbyhorses of yours that involve long screeds and various things that you’ve probably already cut and pasted into the comments sections of various other websites until you were banned from them for endless derailing and general asswipery, feel free to remain in the original threads.
@pecunium – you mean you defended the indifference of society to men’s problems, in that thread. How predictable.
That article sucks because:
1) it fails utterly to focus on the problem Earl tried to fix
2) desperately tries to erase and minimise that problem
and in doing so
3) goes straight to what-about-the-wimminz
4) moves on to say but-feminism-so-great
5) and takes a stop at MRM-so-nastyville.
Oh, and it also fails to understand the CDC source it quotes – which is dealt with in the comments
Still waiting for any manboobzer to express any kind of regret at all for Earl’s death or even the tiniest shred of acknowledgement that battered men need help as well as battered women.
I won’t hold my breath.
…says the guy trying to use a man’s death as a bludgeon against those with whom he disagrees.
Uncle Joe: I talked about why that article isn’t the hatchet job you want to pretend it is.
It’s sad that he wasn’t able to keep it afloat. The MRM didn’t do shit to help him. That his death was seen as important enough to make a US publication says that he was getting attention. The sort of attention the MRM pretends, “the mainstream media” won’t give them. The feminists who were quoted said that DV shelters for men are needed; and they said that his involvement in the MRM made him less credible.
Manboobzers do think battered men deserve help. That the MRM doesn’t want to help them is one of the things we don’t like about the MRM.
You refuse to see it.
Pecunium: “Manboobzers do think battered men deserve help. That the MRM doesn’t want to help them is one of the things we don’t like about the MRM.”
You’re just pulling stuff out of your ass there.
There’s a couple of Canadian MR-types trying to get a shelter going in memoriam of Earl right now. They’ve just started, so it’s just a website right now, but let’s hope it goes on to deliver concrete help to men in need.
http://toysoldier.wordpress.com/2013/05/01/the-earl-silverman-center/
http://www.earlsilvermancenter.org/
So, a commenter named JJ says that David is gloating over Earl Silverman’s death, I ask for a link or proof (because frankly, I refuse to believe this, and I really want to see such an article if it exists) and I’m an MRA?
As I said in the comment, it doesn’t matter if David Futrelle is having a champagne party over this. Unless an article or comment exists somewhere that proves so, it’s not a good idea to say things like “Manboobz gloats over this”.
I really am in the process of learning more, because, frankly, my time here really showed me some things I was conceiving wrong. Which is why my commenting on AVfM has been scarce as of late.
And the Atlantic was by no means the only media article on it. The Salon piece was particularly grim. This says why:
http://toysoldier.wordpress.com/2013/04/29/r-i-p-earl-silverman/#more-8370
Um, no, Joe. The shelter had reportedly been in trouble for some time because of money. After Silverman’s death, Paul Elam has been sure to get his name out there with a memorial service, claiming that he had been in e-mail contact with Silverman. If he was in contact with Silverman, why didn’t he offer to host a fund drive? After all, he hosted one for the victims of “feminism”, particularly the “victims” of Adria Richards. Where was this outpouring of support then?
MRAs are always trying to prove that they’re a legit movement. Why were they not rallying around this actual example of a man getting up and doing something worthwhile for other men? Where was your support then?
Oh right. It didn’t exist. You people just want to be able to parade around a man’s corpse and cry your crocodile tears. You had a chance. You didn’t do anything to support Earl Silverman, or his cause.
More here about Earl: http://beaconnews.ca/calgary/2013/04/earl-silverman-mens-rights-advocate-dies/
@lensman – there *is* plenty of commentary out in the MRM that goes off the rails, no doubt.
Likewise in feminism (google “radfem”), but feminists just shrug that off by denying that radfems are representative of their movement / not-all-feminists-agree, aaaand in a double standard demand that anyone talking about men’s rights first repudiate everything any MRA ever said anywhere evAR.
It’s tiresome, and a deliberate effort to neuter any efforts to improve men’s situation.
You don’t have to rise to it. Men need to help each other, and we don’t need to wait for every man to agree or to behave properly on the interwebz* to start doing that.
(*a cold day in hell etc.)
@reginaldgris –
I’m separated from Canada by an ocean, and I was unware of Earl, or his work until the media outcry upon his death. Contrary to manboobz belief – people who care about men’s rights are not the borg, we do not share a hive mind.
I’m aware of at least one men’s shelter / hotline org in the UK. Mankind.org
As for your saying:
“you had your chance”???
WTF? Earl’s cause didn’t end with his death, you heartless schmuck.
Seriously, that IS some nasty gloating you’ve got going on right there.
Speaking of not-being-the-borg – don’t be waving Paul Elam around like he speaks for all men everywhere. He doesn’t.
Uncle Joe: Now that he’s dead they say they will get a shelter going. I’ll believe that when I see it. What were they doing before?
Bupkis. As I said, that the MRM isn’t doing anything to help male victims of DV is one of the things we don’t like.
I’m separated from Canada by an ocean, and I was unware of Earl, or his work until the media outcry upon his death. Contrary to manboobz belief – people who care about men’s rights are not the borg, we do not share a hive mind.
Right, because the MRM cared so much about the only Men’s DV shelter in Canada that they didn’t talk about it all.
Lensman: What do you mean then with, “I am not doubting the rest of what you say, but if you’ve spotted Manboobz gloating over a man’s suicide, you should make a record of this and share it with everybody else here.
As I said I really want to see this.
Why do you “really want to see it?
As usual, Joe is full of shit. Dude, read the damned thread, we did at least two pages on suicide already, and how the causes should be addressed, particularly the parts related to why men don’t seek help. So anyone with a functional brain, and not being completely dishonest, would, logically, assume that sympathy for suicidal people (whether attempting suicide or completing suicide) would extend to Silverman as well. But if you need it directly said, which apparently you do — as with any suicide, it’s quite unfortunate that Silverman killed himself.
Now then, onto his shelter.
Yep, society should support DV shelters for everyone, but with the safety net being cut away, and um, other things that I’ll get back to, it’s a bit of a stretch to say that he received no support because it was a shelter for men. Way to ignore the economy being sucktastic.
As for those other things, want to guess how many shelters are available for trans* people? If you said none, go have a cookie. Society fucking sucks sometimes.
But reginaldgriswold is right, the MRM did nothing, whatsofuckingever, to support his shelter. Which, considering the way they blow hot air over the need for such shelters, and the way they fund raise for people with far less serious issues, is rather telling as to their true motives (hint, bashing feminism trumps actual issues men face)
And my tone here? That’s at you, not the idea of men’s shelters. You are, constantly, completely full of shit, attempting to play GOTCHA, completely ignoring everything that’s been said, and frankly, a royal fucking asshole. No rants tonight about the C1A or Musl1ms? Too busy making up more ways to claim we hate all white cis men? (While, of course, ignoring that men’s shelters most certainly do exist, and they’re where trans* women are expected to stay…nawh, the inherent danger there is lost on you, because it isn’t a way to claim you’re the MOST OPPRESSED EVAARRRR)
I have fucking had it today, to every damned white cis man trying to claim he’s got it so damned hard, try spending 5 fucking minutes looking into what women, PoC, trans* people, disabled people, or god-for-fucking-bid, what disabled trans* WoC face. Seriously guys, you have it so fucking easy that apparently the slightest infringement on your status of assumed power is the WORST THING EVAAARRR. I mean fuck, genderneutrallanguage here either wants men to be allowed to abandon the results of impregnanting someone, or thinks us not wanting that is somehow sexist against men. Because it’s totally the WORST THING EVAARRRR for cis men to have to actually be responsible for their refusal to use condoms.
Can you tell that I’m fucking livid? I have goddamned had it with people claiming that losing the tiniest iota of privilege makes them oppressed.
By the way Mushroom Guy:
your continued desperate efforts to compare me to one of the worst mass-murderers of the 20th century are still a Godwin, and an ad hominem.
That you persist in posting it as a link in every post to me, comes off as deeply desperate and self-indulgent, pseudo-intellectual wankery.
Oh fuck you Joe. The issue with radfems, or the major one anyways, is their goddamned transphobia. You can see plain as fucking day that the rest of feminism has issue with TERFs and little tolerance of their shit. MRAs? I have never, not fucking once, seen any of you flat out say that any view isn’t acceptable within your movement (besides ones that say something isn’t the fault of women/feminism)
Seriously, fuck you.
OK, so let’s take people at their word for now and assume that the reason MRAs didn’t do anything to help fund Silverman’s shelter is that they didn’t know about it. That indicates an internal communication problem. There should be a way to get information out about potential fundraising/activist projects so that people can help if they want to.
Wouldn’t focusing on fixing that problem be a lot more useful than yelling at feminists?
It’d be an ad hominem if he dismissed you out of hand because of the comparison. And there’s absolutely no need for that as your views are quite repellant enough to be dismissed in detail.
Ad hominems are a sign of a weak argument, you make arguments against you way too fucking easy.
Pecunium — mushroom guy! You reproduce via spore?
Unle Joe: What they are is me amusing myself. You don’t listen to the arguments people make. You are in favor of oppressing people. I don’t say that because you are a totalitarian gasbag you are wrong. I deal with your arguments (pretty much at face value).
So, while there is an, arguable element of ad hominem, it’s attenuated (in that it’s a link, and someone has to pursue it). If you had been more clever I’d not have had to engage in this method. I do it because it annoys you.
Argenti: He is envious of my gills, and my skirt.
And your cap’s lovely white spots on the rich red background!
You are so flattering. I understand that mushroom is tasty, and the effects take days to show up.
@Argenti – “how the causes should be addressed, particularly the parts related to why men don’t seek help.”
– ^Nice victim blaming there, jerk.
Earl was a victim, he was beaten by his ex-wife. He sought help with all the DV agencies and was turned away because he was a man.
“Yep, society should support DV shelters for everyone, but with the safety net being cut away, and um, other things that I’ll get back to, it’s a bit of a stretch to say that he received no support because it was a shelter for men. Way to ignore the economy being sucktastic.”
-No, it’s not a stretch at all. With women and men suffering DV in a 60/40 ratio according to UK Home Office stats, that there are ZERO provisions for men in Canada is so far away from being a-proportional-cutback-due-to-economy that to even suggest it is a joke.
“I have fucking had it today, to every damned white cis man trying to claim he’s got it so damned hard, try spending 5 fucking minutes looking into what women, PoC, trans* people, disabled people, or god-for-fucking-bid, what disabled trans* WoC face. ”
– Ah, the Oppression Olympics argument.
Or – ignore-the-menz, because Everybody Else Before Men.
No. Fuck that. You’ve got the huge juggernaut of Feminism as a vehicle for all those problems.
Don’t ask men to fix them. That was patriarchy, when men were supposed to look after everyone else. That’s OVER now. Didn’t you get the memo? Because we did.
“Seriously guys, you have it so fucking easy that apparently the slightest infringement on your status of assumed power is the WORST THING EVAAARRR. I mean fuck, genderneutrallanguage here either wants men to be allowed to abandon the results of impregnanting someone, or thinks us not wanting that is somehow sexist against men. Because it’s totally the WORST THING EVAARRRR for cis men to have to actually be responsible for their refusal to use condoms.”
– Nice one trying to change the subject there. Not.
“Can you tell that I’m fucking livid? I have goddamned had it with people claiming that losing the tiniest iota of privilege makes them oppressed.”
– Why should I care that you’re livid? So what?
Yes, clearly Earl was soooooooo fuckin’ priveleged.
Being beaten by his wife must’ve been SUCH a privelege.
Being told he wasn’t a victim, because: man.
Being refused help by society, both for himself and his efforts to help others. Privelege.
Despairing at the collapse of his efforts and killing himself. Soooooo fuckin’ priveleged.
He should’ve just pulled out his Magic Man Privelege Card and alll his problems would have vanished. Amiright?
^That was sarcasm, by the way.
Seriously, fuck off with that “privelege” bullshit. Man gets beaten. Does the right things: asks for help, tries to create that help himself when refused (due to his gender), and is then crushed by a society indifferent to men’s suffering to the point he kills himself*
Don’t even start with that horseshit.
(*like many, many other men, four times as many as women).
“1: What do you want.
2: What are you doing to attain your desires.
3: What level of compromise are you willing to entertain; if what you want can’t be attained 100 percent?”
1)Well, in truth I think talking about man/woman equality is about like talking about dog/tree equality. There just isn’t a good basis to say we are “equal” when we are so different. We need a real concrete achievable and identifiable goal. Something much better and more clear than the very murky “equality”. Something with an end point where we can say “job done”. What should this goal be? I have no clue. I am only one person limited by my personal experiences. Making such a goal needs to be an inclusive process that takes all points of view into consideration. There is a long way to go before we are even in a position to realistically even talk about setting this goal. Setting and achieving this goal is what I want in the long run.
In the short run the conversation needs to change. We are still talking about equality, and in the short run that won’t change. In the short run equality is a good thing to talk about, it fails as a long term goal. The first step goal is get the idea out there, and accepted, that any talk of equality needs to include the benefits of being a man AND the costs/obligations of being a man as well as the downsides of being a woman AND the benefits of being a woman. Any talk of gender equality that does not have all 4 of these is going to be sexist and bigoted. The current conversation comparing the benefits of being a man to the costs of being a woman can’t result in anything good.
2)Well I started a blog, and am bothering to try and reason with you. But I’m guessing you meant what am I doing outside of internet activism. I’ve run for 3 different government positions (elected official, not sewage plant worker) in the last 10 years trying to get myself into a position of enough power to actually get something done. I didn’t get many votes, but it’s real world stuff.
3)Level of compromise? Well there will be Zero compromise on step one. Recognizing the 4 major factors for equality is not negotiable. The goal that I don’t even know where to start on starting it? Once the conversation is at a point where a real conversation on the topic is possible, I’m open to any sort of compromise. My opening position is “I’ve got no clue, what do you think”
^That was sarcasm, by the way.
Sure it was.
@Cassandra – that’s actually a very sensible point re. communication, thank you.
Really.
Man is to woman as dog is to tree? No wonder dude is so confused about, well, everything.