How to Lose a Debate in 45 Minutes: Paul Elam fumbles his debate with Matt Binder
So, that happened.
The debate between Matt Binder (from the Majority Report) and Paul Elam (from A Pile of Money for Paul Elam) went off yesterday. I can’t say it went off without a hitch, because it was actually quite hitch-full. Indeed, it was kind of a disaster — at least for one Paul Elam.
Paul’s the one who wanted the debate. He chose the topic, he chose the format, he controlled the venue. And he lost the debate rather spectacularly, grimly reading a succession of prepared statements while Binder shot down his arguments with common-sensical one-lines and raised issues that Elam didn’t or couldn’t address.
Binder rattled Elam early by presenting him with an unattributed quote that sounded virtually identical to Elliot Rodger’s misogynistic rants and which Elam dismissed as something that no MRA would ever say; Binder then revealed that it was a quote from Stefan Molyneux, the MRA “philosopher” who was one of the featured speakers at AVFM’s recent conference. (Indeed, it was a quote that I highlighted in my first Misogyny Theater videos on Mr. M.)
Then, after Elam read off a list of all the various women who have associated themselves in some way with AVFM, Binder knocked the wind out of him by asking, quite simply, so what?
The most surreal moment, in a debate full of surreal moments, came 39 minutes into the debate. Binder had spent much of his previous two segments discussing an assortment of issues that the Men’s Rights movement largely ignores, even though they primarily affect men, and men of color in particular — from stop and frisk policies in major cities to the deaths of American soldiers in wars overseas.
But instead of answering Binder’s question –why hasn’t the Men’s Rights movement actually tried to do something about these problems? — Elam instead read his prepared “closing statement,” responding not to anything Binder had argued but to the arguments Elam, writing the statement before the debate, had assumed he would make.
And so, after hearing Binder passionately argue that the MRM needs to fight for the rights of men in prison and for the lives of men sent to fight and possibly die in wars, we heard Elam beating away on a straw man, declaring — after calling him a bigot — that Binder
has been led to believe, quite falsely, that gender justice mandates the summary rejection of all men’s problems in favor of a view that can only see men as the problem.
The debate, such as it was, lurched to its conclusion in an assortment of miscues and technical glitches a few minutes later. Dean Esmay, the incompetent and often ineffectual “moderator” of the debate, rocking back and forth on his chair in a darkened room, eyes mostly closed, plaintively asked Binder to send him “that particular story” on stop and frisk in New York city that Binder had referred to earlier in the debate. Esmay, defensive and exasperated, explained that
we are an all-volunteer organization and we don’t see every story. I’d like to see that story from Matt, please do send it to me.
Binder, incredulous, pointed out that stop and frisk has been in the headlines for years, as Esmay, visible in a small box at the bottom of the screen, rubbed his head as though he were developing a migraine. Esmay repeated his request, saying that
we cover a lot of stories; I’m just asking for you to send me that.
There were then a few uncomfortable moments as Esmay and Elam tried to figure out how to close down the Google Hangout that was hosting the debate.
Esmay: “Are we off?”
Binder: “Still says ‘live’ for me.”
Esmay: “Paul?”
Elam: “Yeah, I’m still having problem with the button.”
Esmay laughs.
Elam: “Isn’t that wonderful?”
Long silence. Esmay rocks back and forth on his chair.
Esmay: “Just close the window.”
A few moments later, he did.
I think we may need to have another AVFM graphics contest, incorporating what I think should be AVFM’s new slogans:
“I’m still having problem with the button.”
“We are an all-volunteer organization and we don’t see every story.”
A Voice for Men is clearly not ready for its closeup.
Posted on July 11, 2014, in a voice for men, misogyny, MRA, paul elam, straw feminists and tagged a voice for men, anti-feminism, antifeminism, men's rights, misogyny, MRA. Bookmark the permalink. 649 Comments.
sam sedar offers paul some debating advice!
Sir Bodsworth, I don’t know whether to groan or laugh evilly ‘cos I got it.
@ kittehserf — I’m just surprised no one got to it before I did!
I went to the VforM FB just to see if they mentioned this debate. No. But it’s full of those nonsensical memes still. Look at this one. They keep out WTFing themselves with these.
Really. WTF?
@ Sir Bodsworth Rugglesby III
I’m dying.
Wow and most of the comments I read earlier, as well as my own statement, on this forum were worried that Binder was young and probably would not be prepared as Elam would be. We need not have worried! It’s so obvious that Elam has no real plan of action to help men at all…oh well, he is helping one man: himself. He’s lining his pockets. I wonder how long it will take his sheep to pick up on this. He is NOT a man of action. He’s a man of words…or rather a blow hard.
@ grumpycatisagirl – that poster is inspiring!
I’m not sure the debates are worth doing.People will always see their side as having won. I doubt it will change anyone’s mind. {And I am speaking from a place where Cordell and Cordell “screw that bitch you married” ads air daily even though at least one Cordell isn’t licensed to practice in my state). I think a (to paraphrase) “by you words you will be know to be assholes”is a better approach..l
Oooooh, can we do another poster-a-thon? That would be even more fun than Bodsy’s Matt debation joke (which was glorious)?
I must find my way to a working computer…
Sir Bodsworth, that poster wins the Internet for the foreseeable future.
I think David should feature it in a post. It’s so good.
I only listened to the audio of the debate instead of watching it, so I didn’t see the visual details. I’m glad I caught the commentary here, because a lot of what I missed was hilarious.
FWIW, I did competitive debate for eight years and I cringe at these types of debates because so little of it is on-topic or even remotely productive. Paul absolutely sinked the possibility of a good debate when he brought out his prepared speech. He guaranteed he wouldn’t be addressing Matt Binder’s actual points.
I did laugh when Paul accused Matt of fascism, though, so the debate had some entertainment value at least.
I laughed for a minute straight! This is just AVfM in a nutshell. So unprepared for anything that doesn’t involve mouth frothing.
@Sir Bodsworth
Groan!!
Could someone explain the joke (because I thought it was really homophobic and assume the positive reaction means there’s another meaning)? My thanks.
I bet Paul Elam was dead chuffed with all the writing he did for this. I wonder if he showed it to a teacher and they told him what neat handwriting he had.
Ohhhhh MRA memes and posters!! I just can’t get enough of them! I don’t know why I find them so fascinating, or maybe they’re just hilarious.
Thanks grumpycatisagirl and Sir Bodsworth Rugglesby III for the links!
Thanks all!
@DJG Homophobic? How so?
I can’t even match Sir Bodsworth:
Can someone explain DJG’s comment? Cause I’m lost.
@ cloudiah – Truly awesome!
@ cassandra – Yeah, I don’t get it either. Hoping for an explanation, not sure I’ll get one.
Unless DJG is talking about some other joke, I’m lost too.
I’m not even sure which joke DJG meant. Maybe I need more caffeine.
Maybe DJG thought the joke was making a homophobic punchline about Matt and Elam as opposed to the “Matt debating” pun
I think DJG meant the joke from eariler:
I didn’t get it either, but assumed it wasn’t a euphemism for a handjob…
@Tessa
It’s a play off of “Matt debating” sounding similar to masturbating
Huh, and I thought I had a filthy mind. Didn’t even notice that one.
Oh ok. No, DJG, it was just a play on words to mean ‘Elam is a wanker’. Childish, yes; homphobic, no.
How is that homophobic, though? I’m not seeing where David suggests that one man giving another man a handjob is a terrible awful thing.
Phew. I’m glad it actually went well for Matt. If he hadn’t have done his homework on the MRA he might have been too stunned and bamboozled to respond to their claims.
Honestly guys I love the stuff you and Dave are doing. But sometimes when I come here I honestly get ashamed. I am ashamed that I am of the same gender such as people as Paul Elam. I get ashamed at the shit people like him say. And it’s embarrassing and it makes me feel dumbfounded. I seriously just wish the MRA’s would stop embarrassing men. .
@Robert, I feel pretty safe in saying no one here would ever lump you in with Elam and his merry band of bigots. No need to feel shame on their behalf. You’re pretty awesome.
Seconding cloudiah, Robert. I find TERFS and honeybadgers horrifying and wrong, but I can’t bring myself to feel shame about having the same kind of plumbing as them.
If it’s wrong to make wanker jokes, I don’t want to be right.
I’m really sorry if this comes off as snappy, but you’re condemning TERFs in the same sentence in which you equate plumbing to gender. I hope you realize why that’s contradictory.
Hey, Ally, OT but I wanted to thank/”curse” you for the conversation we had on gender identity a few weeks ago. Thank because you made me realize I might be nonbinary, “curse” in a lighthearted tone since I was perfectly happy being cis and male until you made me think more closely about gender shit.
@Leum
I’m glad it helped you, but can you please tell me what I told you that you found helpful? (I’m pretty forgetful these days…)
Sarah: “The thing that really struck me was the fact that Esmay was wearing a shirt with visible stains”
Esmay’s slovenliness never ceases to amaze me. I’m speaking as a guy who can’t exactly be accused of physical vanity myself. I will bet money the reason he’s always in a darkened room in videos is that his place is as ill-kept as his personal appearance (and again, that’s not something I can criticize someone on per se, but I’m not making videos ostensibly meant to promote a ‘human rights’ group I’m a part of). Actually between his clothes, apparent reluctance to shave, and the constant rocking/gliding back and forth he does I wonder if Esmay has ADD or a similar disorder (Yes, hat trick, I’m speaking from experience).
@Ally, yes, but not until you pointed it out. Thank you for that.
You talked about trans people not needing to experience dysphoria, which got me to think more deeply about what it meant to me to be male, and I ended up realizing that being male meant nothing to me intrinsically, except that once I’d questioned being male, the idea of going back to firmly identifying as male was abhorrent. So I didn’t. I’m not quite sure what to ID as now, but probably agender.
@Leum
I see. Thanks for telling me. I like to know those things because there’s a lot of misinformation about transness that is perpetuated even by trans people themselves, and I want to try to counter all of that.
And just so you know, it’s okay if you don’t ever figure out what exactly your gender is. I know people who feel that way and just call themselves non-binary because, while they don’t know what exactly their gender is, they sure as hell aren’t strictly male or female. Your gender is entirely up to you, of course, but I thought it might help to hear what I said.
Thanks, Ally. It is nice to hear.
My thanks for the explanation. [it was just a play on words to mean ‘Elam is a wanker’. Childish, yes; homphobic, no.] No problem with that.
I took “MD” not as a soundalike for the W-word but as some new euphemism for carnal congress (thinking of wrestling mats). Thus it all sounded as if the joke were setting up the debate as being how the two of them decided who got to be on top in an imagined encounter and laughing at PE for losing. That pushed two buttons.
I’d hope for consensus here about making fun of those who bottom being wrong. And I frequently see highly objectionable straight men derided in nasty jokes “pinning the F on the donkey”. This felt at first like the way supposedly right-thinking people gleefully attack Marcus Bachmann by calling him gay instead of going after his easily-shredded (and highly dangerous, thus much more objectionable) opinions, actions and positions.
Perhaps it’s just a personal guilt-by-association vulnerability.
There is literally nothing in the actual post (or in David’s posting history in general) that suggests that drawing that conclusion about what was meant would make sense. Zero, zilch, nada.
Interesting debate. Elam does not seem to do calm and logical thinking very well – much of his “debating” seemed to consist of “ad hominem” attacks on Binder, which I did not find all that compelling. His failure to answer most of Binder’s points was also problematic. All in all, I would say that Binder won, hands down.
Hi, delurking to ask if we can please not make fun of whatshisface for rocking. That’s an autism thing, which I do pretty often, and it makes me kind of uncomfortable to see people making fun of someone for what could probably be trying to cope with a stressful situation. …Even if that person is odious.
Also, hi. Cool blog, and all that jazz.
I have ADHD and can dress, shave and move (or not move) just fine. Equating “unsightly” habits or ticks with a condition is pretty unfair.
Maybe Esmay is just a weird dude. Maybe it was just laundry day. Maybe he just likes to have a beard. None of those mean he has or doesn’t have ADHD.
@cassandrakitty – I was referring *only* to the joke about “Matt debating”, not to anything said by Mr Futrelle. As I didn’t see any joke in the original post, and people were responding to Sir Bodsworth’s, it seemed clear. My apologies for being confusing.
I have not been here very long, and have found no homophobia in Mr Futrelle’s posts.
This is where I get confused on the ableism thing. Is it ableist to say “I have [condition] and this guy appreas to have the sae symptoms as me? Is it ableist to say “[disability] is one possible explanation for this behavior”? On the one hand, it seems like an honest attempt to keep a person from being shamed for something that might not be under theinr control; but on the other hand, I could see how it’s basically internet diagnosing and could veer quickly into “that creep might just have autism!” territory.
I’m not disagreeing with you, I’m just wondering what people’s thoughts are. I’ve been known to look at someone’s behavior and think “that sounds like me when my depression ramps up”, and I’d hate to think I’m hurting people by doing that :-/
I also have ADD and can dress in clean clothes and shave.
Now, if the depressions get me, all bets are off. If that’s Esmay’s issue and he still managed to drag his sorry ass to the computer and interact with people, I’m impressed.
Maybe Dean Esmay is just someone who doesn’t have the skills or concern to dress for public appearances. Why are you trying to internet diagnose him?
Maybe he’s dragging off his ecig so hard because Blues give puny little puffs of nicotine and when you are a smoker trying to quit, you end up trying to suck them inside out when you first transition to ecigs. I’ve been there.
I have no problem with turning mean girl on someone’s outfit, but let’s not pretend to care about his well being while we take digs at him. Otherwise, you’re veering into territory I don’t think you want to visit.
@emilygoddess–
Honestly, this one is tricky for me, too. I also have depression and addiction problems in addition to ADHD, and it really is a fine line between what is caring and concern and what is promoting negative images of these disabilities. I will speak only from my personal experience and my own thoughts, because that is what I have to draw from on this one.
Let’s use the quote I pulled as an example. It lists three items–(dirty) clothes, an unshaven face and rocking/gliding. These are all negative traits, and to me, associating them with ADHD perpetuates the idea that people with ADHD are also negative–Esmay can’t keep up on his physical appearance and he moves around a lot, so it must be ADHD. He is a slob and a weirdo, so it must be ADHD. That’s a really negative view of a brain condition.
If it had been something like “Esmay has trouble staying still and appeared to have a hard time staying on task with the timer,” that would have been different. Those are more primary symptoms of ADHD, and are not negatively connotated.
Ugh, this one is hard to nail down.
I guess my issue with it is that, as someone who has ADHD, I see the condition being treated as a synonym to laziness, which is just not true. Sure, having ADHD makes it hard for me to stay on task for things like laundry, but that doesn’t make me a messy slob–it just means I have a hard time staying on task.
To me, it reads as the difference between like what you said with depression:
“that sounds like me when my depression ramps up.” Super legit concern an observation.
The statement about ADHD, to me, would be more like saying “That person has really let themselves go…must be depression.”
Paul just kept on skirting around all the questions and bringing up the same straw men over and over. Matt actually had valid points. Paul is lying you can see and it’s obvious.
I dunno. I think it’s a sign of empathy to try and find reasons for things other than “doesn’t give a shit what people think of him (since nobody is worthy to judge his superior self),” but it’s also a little, um, intrusive?
I guess my feeling is to take him at face value, unless and until it becomes apparent that he does have empathy-inducing reasons for presenting himself in a socially non-standard way.
Because, you know, we’re here to mock socially problematic behaviour, partly because its fun, but also because it’s something of a corrective action. Maybe one day, he’ll get tired of being mocked for Behaviour X and change the behaviour to avoid the mockery. It would be nice if Behaviour X was his misogyny, but if mocking causes him to do his laundry occasionally, that’s cool too.
@emilygoddess
I think it’s only disablist to attempt to diagnose people as some default reaction to behavior perceived as abnormal, in spite of evidence to the contrary. For instance, it’s disablist to automatically attribute Elliot Rodger’s motivations to mental illness because everything we know suggests that he was a violent misogynist who was entirely unaffected by mental illness. It is also disablist because, while in theory he could have been motivated by mental illness, mental illness doesn’t render people incapable of making decisions on their own. Regardless of whether he was mentally ill, he was entirely capable of choosing to murder all of those innocent people.
But I think disabled people, by virtue of having experience with disability, have every right to make judgments about whether someone may or may not be disabled. For instance, I have friends who have PTSD, and they think I have PTSD as well given what I have told them about my behavior and personality. I don’t mind this at all, especially since 1) I’m mentally disabled as well and 2) they don’t try to pressure me into accepting their judgments.
It’s a tricky issue, but overall, I do think that saying “I have [this condition] and I think that person has the same thing as me” so long as one has the requisite knowledge and experience to make such a judgment is okay at least sometimes.
Also, this is only a somewhat related matter, but as a trans woman, I don’t find it inappropriate to speculate about whether someone is trans. Obviously I have no way of confirming that at a glance, but I can tell when someone at least might be a trans woman based on various cues. If a cis person did this, it would be highly inappropriate, but not if a trans person did likewise. Trans people have knowledge and experience that cis people lack, and so they can use it to make certain judgments about people. It’s kind of like how some gay people speak of using a “gaydar” to tell if someone is in the closet.
@WatermelonSugar, your point about basing the speculation purely on negative traits is a good one. (I don’t even think rocking is itself a negative trait, precisely because it can be due to so many conditions, but you’re right that the culture as a whole sees it as weird and inappropriate.)
@Ally, you also have a vested interest in finding someone who’s much more likely to be safe for you to be around – much like scanning a crowd for other women or other PoC – whereas for cis people it’s likely to devolve into “spot the t****y” pretty quickly and it shouldn’t matter to us, anyway.
I know that I often am hyper vigilant about eating disorder red flags. I would never accuse someone of being anorexic simply for being skinny. It’s the behavior and attitudes towards eating and food. Sometimes I see it in people who are really hyped up over a fad diet and declare food groups good or bad. I try to keep it to myself a little bit in case I’m wrong but there’s been so many times I’ve been right about people. I recognize the signs because I’ve had those behaviors and thoughts too. You have to be careful though. I don’t like diagnosing people on sight alone. Just as you can’t tell from weight or body type if someone has an ED you can’t assume a slovenly appearance means someone as ADHD or depression. I say when in doubt, zip it.
@emilygoddess
Yes. The same reasoning actually applies when speculating about whether someone is disabled. As a disabled person, I feel much safer around other people who are disabled for obvious reasons. Of course disabled people are capable of being shitty to me as well, but that’s besides the point.
I think Eliot Rodger did probably struggle with mental illness, it just baseless, lazy and insulting to say his shooting spree was crazy.
I have to say this website has been allowed me to see to what degree people, including myself in the past, will label a wide variety of behavior and thinking as crazy because it’s a quick way to stigmatize people we dislike or disdain. To realize that I used mental illness to do that, despite struggling with it myself for decades, was a disturbing and bracing personal revelation. I use to say “batshit crazy” a lot, I just never used it to describe people suffering from the same mental illnesses I did or those I could relate to.
THIS.
I feel like when you only focus on negative outward symptoms, it completely erases the negative inward symptoms of the individual in question.
As in–“he can’t wear a clean shirt because ADD/ADHD” doesn’t consider how difficult it is for that individual to struggle with basic things like laundry, or “she has really let herself go because depression” doesn’t consider how terrible it feels to be so depressed that personal care feels overwhelming. “Because X appearance/trait” doesn’t speak to any mental or emotional connection of the individual in question.
Does that even make sense? I don’t know. These things are hard.
In the opposite direction, positive traits can also be used just as negatively. I can’t tell you how many times I heard “you’re so smart, why can’t you just do your homework” growing up. It didn’t make me feel smart or do my homework, but set me up with a really strong negative core belief that I am somehow defective for not being able to do certain things and that failing to do them makes me not smart.
@Ally, as a mentally ill person, I’m not comfortable with people attempting armchair diagnoses of people they dislike, if that makes sense. Like, if I have a friend and say “Ooh, they might be on the autism spectrum too!” that’s fine, but it’s not okay for me to read an MRA’s posts or watch a video of him etc etc and say the same thing.
Also, male privilege. Men can get away with being complete slobs about their appearance, and they know this. Coming from an aggressively misogynistic man a lack of attention to personal grooming could well be a way of asserting privilege, whether consciously or unconsciously, in a way that’s not unrelated to the PUA tendency to nitpick at women’s looks in an attempt to reinforce the social assumption that women’s looks matter and men’s don’t.
Which is also just a theory that I have no way to confirm without actually meeting and talking to the guy, but hey, it sure beats pretending to be his doctor over the internetz. It’s one thing to think that you spot an issue that you have yourself in someone else and want to reach out to them because you like them and want to help, but quite another to make the same diagnosis in an attempt to gotcha them as part of an internet argument.
Yes. This. All of this. Because a that point, it becomes an insult and not an illness.
Thank you, Leum. That is exactly what I have been trying to spit out.
@Leum
In many cases, I agree. For instance, I certainly wouldn’t feel comfortable saying that Paul Elam is “obviously sociopathic” because he’s an asshole. This is definitely a tricky matter with no totally clear answers, so I’m sorry if I sounded like I was saying that it’s always okay for disabled people to armchair-diagnose someone else. Mentally ill people are capable of being disablist as well.
@Leum
Upon a more careful reading of your comment, I find myself agreeing completely. An autistic person suspecting that someone else may be autistic is nothing like saying that an MRA is a terrible person because of a mental illness. I’m definitely not advocating the latter.
I’m a big fan of politeness, there are very few things more annoying than an immature nitwit bragging about being a “equal opportunity offender”, but I personally like to highlight how that there are good persuasive arguments to be made against ableism, racism, sexism, etc. It’s important to counter the PC myth that progressives are simply censoring themselves to seem open minded and minorities are making irrational demands based on feels. I’ve seen the 4chan hoax minority women accounts on twitter and tumblr, and, contrary to anti-SJ caterwauling, they’re easy to spot because it’s just shitbag parodies thrown together by ignorant jagoffs.
I’m rambling a bit, but I’m still angry at the hoax accounts exposed by #yourslipisshowing and I’m off the charts enraged at assholes claiming we have trouble telling the difference between what actual progressive minority women say and what 4chan dolt parody versions of them word vomit on social media.
I think my favorite moment of the debate was when Elam said to Binder (post Elliot Rodgers/Stefan Molyneux point), “Oh, you think you got me with that…” …or something like that. I just had to laugh and say to myself, “Yeah Paul, EVERYONE who isn’t your minion thinks he got you with that.” HA!
And seriously… AVFM isn’t aware of “stop-and-frisk” in NYC??? What kind of men’s rights movement isn’t aware of one of the biggest civil rights infringements currently happening in America targeting men? Its so crystal clear that they are completely caught up in being anti-feminist/anti-female, not with being pro men’s rights.
Long time lurker, first time poster.
I’m semi-trolling Dean Esmay in the comments section. He’s pulling out the persecution complex and comparisons to civil rights greats, as expected.
Some other guy is pulling the line that he lived near Erin Pizzey and he’s read the police report about her dog. Anybody here have some more info on that? I can’t find anything online. Was it just her word that it was the doing of feminists, or that she’s been threatened?
Katz — thanks for the QI episode advice!