Categories
antifeminism douchebaggery manginas MGTOW misandry misogyny MRA oppressed men paul elam threats violence against men/women

>If you don’t agree with me, angry dudes will kick your ass

>

Anyone who’s seen Taxi Driver will remember Travis Bickle’s late night soliloquy on the “whores, skunk pussies, buggers, queens, fairies, dopers, [and] junkies” he saw every night driving his cab. “Someday,” he told himself, “a real rain will come and wash all this scum off the streets.”

Of course — SPOILER ALERT! — what he really meant by “a real rain” coming was that he, Travis Bickle, would lose his shit and start shooting people.

Bickle wasn’t the only one to mix his predictions with a heaping helping of threat. Those who predict the end of the world at the hand of gods or men or some vague terrible cataclysm are all too often rooting (secretly or openly) for the civilization-destroyers they are ostensibly warning against. We saw this the other day amongst those MGTOWers who are now talking giddily about how complete economic collapse will serve to put foolish women and their “mangina” pals in their proper place.

And we see it again and again in the Men’s Rights movement, when MRAs sternly warn their detractors that if people don’t start listening to them, and pronto, the men of the world will rise up and, well,  kick the shit out of everyone who opposes them. This is a warning only in the sense that a mafioso telling someone that, if he doesn’t pay what he owes, his legs just might possibly get broken, is a warning; by all reasonable definitions, it is a threat. As opposed to the leg-breaking, the threats of these MRAS aren’t very specific threats, but they’re threats of violence nonetheless.

I ran across one recent example of this sort of “warning” in the comments to Paul Elam’s piece on misandry — or at least what he labels misandry — in the Good Men Project’s package on the Men’s Rights movement. (My own contribution to the debate is here.) Here’s “Factory,” responding to another commenter who pointed out that some of his wording in an earlier comment had been awfully violent:

Who said I was interested in proving I wasn’t violent?

In point of fact, I continually warn people that if these issues are not MEANINGFULLY addressed, and soon, there will be a LOT of violence (see: Middle East) that we MRAs won’t be able to stop.

And frankly, if it comes to that, society (and all the women in it along with the men) flat out DESERVES whatever is coming.

Your hubris as a movement is causing a lot of men to be angry. You all vastly underestimate both the anger, and the ubiquitous nature of this anger.

We MRAs do nothing except act as weather vane and map. That’s why we have no central authority, or funding, or organization of any kind. We are average guys mad enough to stand up like we do. There are a LOT more guys that are just as mad, but content to let others lead.

And there are a growing number of men that take Feminist (and ‘official’) dismissal of mens issues as indication that ONLY violent revolution will lead to change.

And speaking for myself, if it ever comes to violence, I will stand aside, and feel bad while all manner of nasty things are done…but I won’t lift a FINGER to stop it.

Just like people like you are doing right now.

Notice the not-so-subtle, and rather thoroughly bungled, rhetorical sleight of hand here. Factory paints the violence as something he won’t indulge in (but won’t stop) — forgetting that in the very first sentence he admitted that he was himself violent. He refers to MRAs as little more than a “weather vane” for male emotion — but somehow later in the paragraph they are leading things. He claims that he will “feel bad while all manner of nasty things are done,” but this is only after stating in no uncertain terms that he thinks “society … flat out DESERVES whatever is coming.”

So, yeah, this is as much a “warning” as the hypothetical mafioso’s reference to broken legs.

Naturally, Elam himself stepped up to second Factory’s emotion, declaring that “[m]en, when disenfranchised and pushed to the edge, have frequently become violent.”

On his own site, Elam has been much more frankly threatening. Recently, telling off one commenter who had the temerity to actually question the gospel according to Elam, he finished off a long rant about male anger with this:

I would not suggest that treating half the population, the stronger half at that, with too much continuing disregard is a very good idea.

Thinking they will never come out swinging is a stupid, stupid way to go.

This kind of logic might best be called the Appeal to an Ass-kicking. The structure of this argument could be broken down as follows:

1) Source A says that p is true
2) If you don’t agree that p is true, Source A (or perhaps some other dudes) will do you bodily harm.
3) Therefore, you’d better fucking agree that p is true.

This is probably the oldest and crudest form of logic there is, and one that is popular amongst many animals as well. (My cat is a master of it, at least when p = “you will give me treats now.”)

Perhaps the best way to respond to it is the way that the commenter calling herself fannie responded to Factory on the Good Men Project:

You’re arguing that men are going to be so angry they’re not going to be able to control their rage and are therefore going to start inflicting mass amounts of violence upon others.

I’m not sure a feminist could be more defamatory of men than you are being.

MRAs sure are misandrist.

I, and feminists like me, think men are better than that.

Me too.

If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly* use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.

*Yes, that was a Bioshock reference.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

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

109 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
David Futrelle
9 years ago

>evil, you have hit a new low in offensive stupidity.

shaenon
9 years ago

>I think, if pushed to do it, MRAs will collapse the economy through deliberate refusal to contribute to it and then push for a favorable change of government in the ensuing chaos.A threat to go Galt! Ha! When I saw the "having to obey laws is VIOLENCE!" argument, I knew it was only a matter of time. I say go for it, dude.

thevagrantsvoice
9 years ago

>you only interested in making snide remarks on other people's points? Yeah, I guess that about sums it up. I've already got a feminist calling me a troll (Triplanetary) and I wanted an MRA to balance it out. Thanks bro!Still, if you looked a little harder–just a wee bit, mind you–you might see something a *bit* more substantive in my posts. You were kind enough to note it yourself–might makes right. However, it seems the feminists and their government have a lot more "might" than you MRAs do at the moment. You're shooting your own position in the foot–why should anyone who's not an MRA side with you? You're weaker, you don't have the guns on your side. Hell, why shouldn't your fellow MRAs defect and sell out their brothers to the feminists? Even if the only reason you're here is either to amuse yourself, "sharpen your rhetorical skills," or cheer on your fellow MRAs, the whole "might makes right" schtick you're on isn't really conducive to any of those goals.Is this blog of yours a warning to men to stay away from MRA/anti-fems ('cause we all low life scum) or an advertisement?Why can't it be both? If someone wanted to end up hating both feminism *and* the Men's Rights Movement, this blog would be one of the first things I'd recommend to them.

evilwhitemalempire
9 years ago

>David Futrelle said… "Wait, Cold, do you actually think that things are going to come down to some sort of actual, literal gender war?"-lol-You probably imagine a bunch of camo wearing rednecks roaming Manhattan shooting it out with a bunch of dykes that look like Aeon Flux.-lol-Nope! No MRA's are going to duke it out with no Spice Girls.The way it'll work is this. More white men do the MGTOW thing. The white population continues to decline and the Muslims move in and take over just like they are doing right now in THIS model feminist utopia.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=56ZGe75udM4http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=am3vndwjmDghttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeJPx-jHhtU&feature=relatedhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaPz7p-1-bkhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQ6VI_bc1j4&feature=relatedYou see the political left only protects women from WHITE male patriarchs. NOT black or brown ones. And judging from some of these vids I'd say the Muslims put us evil white male patriarchs to considerable shame.(This is what I meant when I once wrote that there would be plenty of evil in the future. Just not MY evil.)Maybe they can design one of those beekeeper outfits for career grrrrrls?

laura-magic
9 years ago

>Right so…men are like black slaves and women are like slave owners…The racism and false analogy really add to your cause. Can I legally own a man? Nm, once the revolution goes down I'll just use my 'government pimp daddies' and 'manginas' to defend me. Because I'm a woman. Lol.Also 'the immigrants are taking over', keepin' the white man down, 'feminist utopia'. I may as well just go and read the Daily Mail, it will keep me about as well informed!

Cold
9 years ago

>The racism and false analogy really add to your cause. Can I legally own a man?It's a rather extreme analogy, but it's not false. If you can put a man in a situation where he must fork over a large amount of money to you every month, even if he loses his job and is unable to find another one that pays enough, on pain of being sent to prison and possibly raped if he fails to pay, then I'd say that's pretty damn close to legally owning him.

Cold
9 years ago

>Speaking of Muslims, I have a difficult question for you, David:If this blog is really about mocking misogyny and not MRAs, then how come there isn't a single post about Islamic misogyny? MRAs like me practically look like feminists compared to what Islamic fundamentalists have to say about women. For example, I want an end to affirmative action and all other special treatment for women in post-secondary institutions while many Islamic fundamentalists believe that women simply shouldn't be allowed to attend them at all.I have another difficult question:You make reference to "Paul Elam's piece on misandry — or at least what he labels misandry", implying that there is something wrong with his definition, perhaps that you consider it too broad. Yet, when I criticized your definition of misogyny on the same grounds, you said "I'm not even going to bother with rese of the bullshit you posted". Hypocritical much?Are you going to answer these difficult questions or are you going to stay true to form and run?

Cold
9 years ago

>Yeah, I guess that about sums it up. I've already got a feminist calling me a troll (Triplanetary) and I wanted an MRA to balance it out. Thanks bro!I didn't call you a troll, but I find it annoying that you never seem to be 0% point and 100% counterpoint.You're shooting your own position in the foot–why should anyone who's not an MRA side with you?Why should anyone ever take the side of anyone other than the ruling class? Hmm, maybe because the ruling class makes someone's life miserable, while the underdog is fighting for equality and a fair shake in life? Could that possibly be reason enough? Again, I'm not calling you a troll yet but you sure do ask a lot of inane questions and make a lot of baseless attacks on my character. I have good reason to wonder what your real modus operandi is.

Joe
Joe
9 years ago

>> I think, if pushed to do it, MRAs will collapse the economy through deliberate refusal to contribute to it.An empty threat–the MRM is not big enough to accomplish this, and doesn't seem to have a political strategy for growing, except to assume that the MRM ideology is self-evident. That doesn't work for liberals (a standard liberal fallacy is that if people knew what liberals know, said people would somehow thereby become liberals), and it won't work for the MRM.And it begs the question–if things are as bad as many MRA's claim they are, then why not start refusing to contribute to the economy now? Is this process underway? Who's organizing it? How many people are participating, and what impact have they had? How many people would have to participate in order to "collapse" the economy? If the economy collapses, how would that result in MRM concerns being addressed?I haven't seen any serious answers to any of these questions yet. If you have some, I'll be surprised. If you don't, then you're bluffing.

Cold
9 years ago

>It wouldn't just be MRAs, MGTOW would be the main crushing blow. Every MRA knows he is an MRA, but most MGTOW have never even heard the term, they are just doing it and the results are already being felt and reported by the likes of Kay Hymowitz. No formal organization is required here. Oh, and economies don't collapse overnight, but you can see the writing on the wall if you look closely.

Elizabeth
9 years ago

>Cold-I posted the statistics for the battle casualties. IF your premise was correct, the battles that were won by the American rebels would have turned into bloodbaths. They did not so obviously it was not "we will slaughter you." There was no wholesale slaughter of anyone during the American Revolution. Those who were captured after battle were imprisoned like usual and then handed over in prisoner exchanges. Your premise fails again.

Cold
9 years ago

>A threat to go Galt! Ha! When I saw the "having to obey laws is VIOLENCE!" argument, I knew it was only a matter of time. I say go for it, dude.Laws are backed by the threat of violent force and only an idiot would have trouble recognizing this fact.As for going Galt, I've been doing so since 2009. I earn about half my income under the table and so I pay no tax on it, I am not reproducing and thereby not providing more fodder for the system, and I have modified my consumer behavior to deprive western corporations of as much of my money as possible. I still contribute something to the economy, but it's a small fraction of what I could be contributing if I wasn't going out of my way to try and be economic deadweight. My country can only support so many men living the way I live, and our numbers are only growing. So there.

Cold
9 years ago

>The only thing that continually fails, Elizabeth, is your reading comprehension.

walkertall
9 years ago

>The only thing that would make watching cold flail about in hypocrisy and delusions of oppression better is a bucket of popcorn and a beer. Anyone got any craft beer?But, wait a second, I thought women were so powerful that they get all the jobs and education, leaving the poor poor boyz in the dust. If that's the case, how is the poor poor boyz' refusing to work going to hurt anything? The country already doesn't need you. You're already obsolete. Please feel free to stop working. It'll free up the job for someone who deserves it.

walkertall
9 years ago

>Its very telling, isn’t it, that MRAs and other cowards, always resort to threats of violence, rape, murder, etc., and feminists don’t? Actually, in a way, I have to thank MRAs. I almost ended up as one of them during and just after my divorce. If it wasn’t for their need to troll feminist websites,, I would never have been exposed to feminist blogs, or their actual arguments and would have ended up a bitter, broken, terrified MRA like our bitter, broken terrified MRA buddies here. Men are better than the overly-emotional, irrational, violent, hate-mongering douchebags that Elam et al think we all are. That MRAs clearly don’t think so is very tragic; that they blame feminists for that is cowardice and an inability to be acountable for their own lives and behavior. I’m glad I encountered them at such a low point in my life. I’m even more glad I saw through them and didn’t become one of them.

Elizabeth
9 years ago

>Cold-you used a bad example. My reading comprehension was fine because I saw that your claims were completely false and proved it.

Joe
Joe
9 years ago

>> It wouldn't just be MRAs, MGTOW would be the main crushing blow. Every MRA knows he is an MRA, but most MGTOW have never even heard the term, they are just doing it and the results are already being felt and reported by the likes of Kay Hymowitz. No formal organization is required here. Oh, and economies don't collapse overnight, but you can see the writing on the wall if you look closely."The results are already being felt"?Seriously? Your credibility on economics just dropped to zero (hint: Kay Hymowitz is not an economist).Can you cite a credible economic analysis that supports your absurd thesis that MGTOW are having a measurable effect on the economy; i.e., one that's not dwarfed by the financial crisis of 2008, and the rise of China and India running up commodities prices, both of which have not caused the nations of the world to accede to MRM demands.No. You can't. If you think that men will spontaneously become MGTOW in such great numbers that they can cause an *even greater* economic catastrophe, and further that it'll lead to people adopting MRM ideology, then you're being about as ridiculous as a socialist thinking that the crisis of late capitalism will spontaneously bring about a popular socialist revolution. Back in the real world, revolutions require organization, mobilization, and political legitimacy, and they don't succeed without all of these factors. The armchair revolutionaries who sit back and wait for it to happen–are neither organized or mobilized, and after crying wolf enough times, lose any political legitimacy they might have had.

carswell
9 years ago

>@ColdYou do realize that Ayn Rand's books are fiction?

ScareCrow
9 years ago

>Well, I do not consider myself to be an MRA – however, If you do not do what I say and suggest – I WILL CURSE YOU ALL WITH DIARRHEA!!!HA HAAAAA!

percyprune
9 years ago

>Oh, my poor old sides! Judging by his mitherings about 'MGTOW collapsing the economy' I don't believe Cold lives in the reality-based community.

Elizabeth
9 years ago

>Counter with lopermide! And Bismuth subsalicylate!ScareCrow becomes a sticky pink mess!

shaenon
9 years ago

>As for going Galt, I've been doing so since 2009. I earn about half my income under the table and so I pay no tax on it, I am not reproducing and thereby not providing more fodder for the system, and I have modified my consumer behavior to deprive western corporations of as much of my money as possible. In a previous thread, you said you have a real job, at an office and everything. (I have to admit I remember this because you bragged about enjoying a refreshing Pepsi on your break, which I found strangely charming.) Why don't you quit it? Wouldn't that make a bolder statement than doing occasional freelance work, not having kids, and buying shoes from Hong Kong sweatshops? Sheesh, I do all those things and I'm not even trying to bring down the government. I do pay my taxes, though.Look, let's move out of the realm of ego-stroking Randian fantasy for a moment. Successful boycotts require three things: a large committed base, a specific target, and a specific message. The classic example is the Montgomery bus boycott. The organizers were able to get a large chunk of the city's population organized against a single, specific target: a bus company that segregated black passengers. By boycotting the company, they hurt it financially while sending a clear, prepared message to the public: segregation is unfair, and African-Americans would no longer tolerate it at the businesses they patronized.What you've got is twelve guys on the Internet (and, yes, a million billion imaginary men who will totally join you once they hear your inspiring message) threatening to boycott EVERYTHING IN THE ENTIRETY OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION because, um, WOMEN! And then not actually boycotting anything.I feel kind of dumb wasting space explaining these basic concepts, but there are people of all political stripes who think "boycotting" something by just personally avoiding it will accomplish stuff, so I might as well try to clear that up. I mean, if you want to claim you're cheating on your taxes as a courageous if convoluted move to stick it to the Woman, I guess that's you're prerogative. I'm just trying to explain why people here are chuckling indulgently at your threats instead of shaking in our hopefully non-sweatshop-made boots.

Captain Bathrobe
9 years ago

>OK, Cold, so your argument does in fact come down to Might Makes Right. I guess there's really nothing more to be said, then, since argument and ideas are therefore obsolete. I will refrain from engaging with you in the future and instead concentrate my efforts on those who are amenable to reason, or at least fun to mock. Sadly, you are neither.

Lady Victoria von Syrus

>Sometimes I wonder if the 'going Galt' idea is just sour grapes or a coping mechanism for being unemployed/underemployed. "I COULD find a better job if I wanted to, but I'm not because fuck women. But seriously, I could totes get an awesome job and the economy is going to be ruined because not only am I not working, I'm also growing my own food, sewing my own clothes and bartering carpentry for my neighbor's biodiesel."

Captain Bathrobe
9 years ago

>As an aside, Vagrant, you've long since proven you're not a troll–at least to my satisfaction. Continuing to reference triplanetary's accusation long after most of us would have otherwise forgotten about it seems a bit, well, churlish (though I appreciate its place in the present context). I mean that in all friendliness, as I usually find your comments to be argued in good faith, even if I don't always agree. Just sayin'. FWIW, I completely agree that most cops wouldn't touch the coming MRA Takeover of the World without a long nightstick. Cops like their jobs, generally speaking; many of them even like women in their lives. The idea that they would put that all at risk for the MRA bill of goods is a bit far-fetched. They are too invested in the status quo, and the current system still probably has too much–oh, I don't know–legitimacy in their eyes to warrant violent overthrow. Which is not to say that individual police officers might not support the MRA agenda or their political aims.But, as I suppose the MRAs would say, "tomorrow the world."

David Futrelle
9 years ago

>Cold, a couple of things:1) Religion: There are Christian patriarchs too. I have generally avoided writing about religion. I may write more about it in the future. Generally speaking, those who advocate traditionalist religion do it in a way that is not as completely batshit, and thus entertaining, as MRAs and, especially, MGTOWs. 2) So you're a tax cheat? Setting aside for the moment your seekret plan to bring down the world economy by being a tax cheat, the practical effect of you not paying taxes means that you are taking advantage of govt. services (roads, fire departments, safe food and water, national defense, etc etc) without paying for them. Doesn't that make you a leech?

wytchfinde555
9 years ago

>walkertall said… "Its very telling, isn’t it, that MRAs and other cowards, always resort to threats of violence, rape, murder, etc., and feminists don’t?"They don't, correct? Here's the first post:Alex_P said… "And what makes them think that men would take their side? I'm a weight-lifting feminist male, and chances are good I could kick the shit out of these shut-ins."

Pam
Pam
9 years ago

>1) Religion: There are Christian patriarchs too. I have generally avoided writing about religion. I may write more about it in the future. Generally speaking, those who advocate traditionalist religion do it in a way that is not as completely batshit, and thus entertaining, as MRAs and, especially, MGTOWs.Like Vision Forum and the Quiverful movement? Though, in my opinion, they ARE completely batshit, they're not as entertaining as MGTOWs.

atuinsails
9 years ago

>@ColdThis economic collapse you hope to bring about by you and all of your friends "going Galt" is not what you think it is going to be. Let me give you some insight, oh urban dwelling, apartment person.Economy collapses, militia is called out, chaos in the streets. Three things happen at once — power goes off, phone lines go out, roads are blocked by people trying to leave the city. Gasoline and water are quickly going to dry up when people try to get ahead of looters.And that is only the beginning. How many of your Galt going friends knows basic first aid and has an appropriate first aid kit? How many maintain a garden? Somewhere to live with access to fresh running water and animal life?How many of these friends live in the country? How far away are they? Can you walk there? Do you have a go bag in you are evacuated? In case you have to evacuate yourself? What is in your go bag? Do you have a good map? Can you use a map and compass? Don't tell me your big plan is to sit in your apartment drinking energy drink and WOW. That is not reality. Reality says that you are going to very quickly need to make sure you have the necessities of life.Can you do that?

Elizabeth
9 years ago

>The hippies who decided to go farm had a very difficult time doing so because so few of them had done anything remotely resembling farming.After a long period of time, they were able to start producing good quality food but it was not as simple as they assume it is.

Captain Bathrobe
9 years ago

>walkertall said…"Its very telling, isn’t it, that MRAs and other cowards, always resort to threats of violence, rape, murder, etc., and feminists don’t?"They don't, correct? Here's the first post:Alex_P said…"And what makes them think that men would take their side? I'm a weight-lifting feminist male, and chances are good I could kick the shit out of these shut-ins." Promising to defend yourself is very different from threatening violence if you don't get your way (not you specifically). Alex wasn't threatening violence to achieve a political goal, but rather stating his ability to respond with violence if attacked with violence. There's a big difference.

David Futrelle
9 years ago

>Pam, yeah Vision Forum and the Quiverful movement are pretty out there, but my limited forays into that whole area haven't netted me much in the way of blatant, over-the-top misogyny. If you have any suggestions of places to look, let me know. It's something I will continue to look into, though I may not end up posting about it for awhile.

David Futrelle
9 years ago

>Elizabeth, exactly. Back in my younger days I was sort of fascinated by communes (I later realized I'm really not a commune person at heart). I remember reading something about the psychologist BF Skinner visiting a commune based on his ideas (which sounds a lot scarier to me now than it did at the time). He was sort of bemused by it, and wondered why all the college-educated commune members had decided to forgo jobs they were well-suited for to take up farming, which they didn't know jack shit about.

thevagrantsvoice
9 years ago

>Hah, hah, thanks, Captain Bathrobe. I know, I'm just needling cold, lol.In any case, back to what he said, in response to this:Why should anyone ever take the side of anyone other than the ruling class? Hmm, maybe because the ruling class makes someone's life miserable, while the underdog is fighting for equality and a fair shake in life?But as you said yourself, might makes right, doesn't it? And since right now the feminists and their government have the preponderance of military power (a situation which is unlikely to change, as Bathrobe pointed out), they have the might, so they're right, which means the "oppressed" men out there deserve their subservient lot. Not only that, but the ruling class can treat "underdogs" who suck up to it quite well–for instance, prosecutors can make lots of money sending innocent men to jail on false charges of rape, people who work in media can make a lot of money off negative depictions of men (the popularity of characters like Homer Simpson attests to this), and so on. If might really did make right, one would expect the weaker underdog to either just roll over for the "mightier" feminists or try to make as much money as he could off of them rather than stand up for himself.Still, in any case, perhaps all this is merely addressing a misunderstanding–though I don't think you quoted my original post directly, looking at your comments you seem to be referring to what I said about "legitimacy." Perhaps that was a poor/confusing choice of words on my part. How to make it more clear…hmm. How's this: An appeal to force, at least from people in a position of weakness does not make the stronger party more likely to accede to their demands. We didn't accede to the demands of the KKK, various Neo-Nazi organizations, or a wide variety of other fanatical hate groups whose murders, bombings, and other acts of violence merely resulted in their getting crushed. All these groups told us, "do X or we'll fucking kill you" (where X was "deny non-whites their rights" or something similar). In response, we essentially fucking killed them. When you tell the feminists and their government "do X or we'll fucking kill you," what makes you think they won't simply ignore your demands and crush you like they did the KKK?

anthonybsusan
9 years ago

>@David, it's slightly off topic, but if you want info about Vision Forum and the Quiverful movement that includes blatant examples of misogyny, please contact me. I grew up in fundamentalist Christianity and have done extensive research into the movement. I'd planned to eventually run a series about it on my own blog but I would really happy be work with anyone on this topic.

wytchfinde555
9 years ago

>"Promising to defend yourself is very different from threatening violence if you don't get your way (not you specifically)."—CBWhat makes you think that's what I was saying—just defending himself? Funny.

jupiter9
9 years ago

>" Both of those arguments use the same logical structure and are therefore equally legitimate. Claiming otherwise is intellectually dishonest. March 11, 2011 2:01 AM "No, because the unstated premiss is P: I have the right to tell you what to do, based on laws given to me to uphold by our legally elected government.In the case of the police, it is generally true. In the case of MRAs, it is decidedly not.

Pam
Pam
9 years ago

>@David,Although I think that they are completely batshit, they don't engage in the same type of 'so off-the-wall that it's f'ing hilarious' misogyny that you showcase on this blog; in fact, I do not find them entertaining at all.If you are serious about looking further into the misogyny and extreme male supremacist ideology of that movement and perhaps showcasing it, I would recommend writing about it in a different venue.I rarely refer to my religious beliefs in my comments, but it was my research into varying Christian beliefs about men's and women's "ordained" roles that led to my discovery of the MRM and MRAs.@anthonybsusan,Visited your blog after reading your comment, and as a Christian (converted from Buddhism) feminist, I am interested in what you have to say and will continue to visit your blog as time permits.

Captain Bathrobe
9 years ago

>wytch wrote:"Promising to defend yourself is very different from threatening violence if you don't get your way (not you specifically)."—CBWhat makes you think that's what I was saying—just defending himself? Funny. Actually, I have no idea what you're trying to say here. I believe that Alex was stating his intention to fight back if attacked, which makes sense in context. You were attempting to conflate that statement with MRA threats of violence if they don't get their way in terms of…well, whatever they it is they want. Threatening violence to achieve political or social aims is generally considered a form a terrorism, whereas threatening violence if personally, physically attacked is generally not.

Alex_P
9 years ago

>@Captain BathrobeExactly. I don't advocate or perform violence. I do believe in self-defense, though. I wouldn't kill you just because you're spouting inanities, but I would use any means necessary to incapacitate them if they tried to hurt my mom. I am responding to a threat of violence by scoffing. I strongly doubt these Internet trolls form the strongest part of the population, and they shouldn't assume that men would ever join in their supposed revolution.Also, I think it's spelled "Witchfynde", not "Wytchfinde". I'm going by band names.

Captain Bathrobe
9 years ago

>Hah, hah, thanks, Captain Bathrobe. I know, I'm just needling cold, lol.No worries. It's all good.

evilwhitemalempire
9 years ago

>walkershort"Men are better than the overly-emotional, irrational, violent, hate-mongering douchebags that Elam et al think we all are. That MRAs clearly don’t think so is very tragic; that they blame feminists for that is cowardice and an inability to be acountable for their own lives and behavior. I’m glad I encountered them at such a low point in my life. I’m even more glad I saw through them and didn’t become one of them."Bet your also glad your new girlfriend is reading this ain't ya?

evilwhitemalempire
9 years ago

>jupiter9"I have the right to tell you what to do, based on laws given to me to uphold by our legally elected government."You have the right to have your 'make me feew eeemportant button pushed' by using the law as an excuse to boss people around.Men ignore you all da time?Aww poor wittle baby don't get no attention!

percyprune
9 years ago

>"And since right now the feminists and their government have the preponderance of military power"Um, is this not a line pregnant with false assumption? The last I saw the feminists do not own or control the government. Rather, women have won some fragile and incomplete concessions over issues such as discrimination. Insofar that those concessions are backed by the apparatus of law, women have some degree of protection. But to frame this as 'feminists and their government, backed by a preponderance of military power' sounds as absurd as the formulation 'muslims and their government' when talking about religious discrimination, or 'the gays and their government' when it comes to the repeal of DADT.Or does this not simply become a lame way of saying 'a government of the people', the 'people' in this instance including feminists, as well as MRAs?

thevagrantsvoice
9 years ago

>Well, percyprune, it's a common MRA meme (I'm not sure whether or not Cold subscribes to it; I assume he does) that the US government (as well as any 'big government' in general) is, if not "anti-male" and "pro-feminist," at least not working for his bests interests and, if not his enemy, at least not his friend. The "feminists and their government" line was just playing off that–if one really does believe, as many MRAs do, that the feminists have that much political power, then they, with the army and cops at their disposal, are the "mighty" ones if might makes right. :p

wytchfinde555
9 years ago

>"Also, I think it's spelled "Witchfynde", not "Wytchfinde". I'm going by band names."—AlexActually, you are correct if you are referring to the British band. Mine is simply a play on spelling. "Cloak and Dagger" is a good album, btw. If you like that sort of thing. "I don't advocate or perform violence. I do believe in self-defense, though. I wouldn't kill you just because you're spouting inanities, but I would use any means necessary to incapacitate them if they tried to hurt my mom."I understand that, so we are in agreement here."I strongly doubt these Internet trolls form the strongest part of the population, and they shouldn't assume that men would ever join in their supposed revolution."You underestimate the movement (which is not surprising considering the nature of this blog), but my 2 cents is thus: I honestly think men don't even need to know about MGTOW as a train of thought to have its influence spread. I read blurbs online and talk to men in person about how they are being mistreated and how it effects them personally, socially, and even politically and legally some times. They may not have the depth as MGTOW blogs, but they know on some level they are getting the run around even if they don't know the ingrained misandry in this culture. I also think that these men will create change over time, reactionary or not, and don't have to claim to be MRAs but have things in common with the basic themes.Captain Bathrobe, if you are reading this, it should answer a couple of things. I got cut off as a posted a response to you and was multi-tasking in a way—not the best thing to do before hurrying before work.

Xtra
9 years ago

>How to treat an mra like a second class citizen(in their eyes)—-women:don't be a house servant fuck toy and let them have total control over your life. Men:hold the belief that women should have some rights.

Steve
9 years ago

>This isn't quite what you're thinking of when it comes to "angry dudes will kick your ass", but it's close. Be sure to scroll down for all the comments about how fathers should kick the asses of guys who have sex with their daughters. If that's not bad enough the original comment was talking about an ADULT woman having sex.The worst part is that a lot of the commentors that want fathers to beat up guys who have sex with their adult daughters are women. I guess they view themselves as their husbands' property. So it's no surprise that they view adult women as their fathers' property until they get married and become their husbands' property.This is "angry father dudes will kick your ass".

captainawkward.com
9 years ago

>Wow, Steve, that link started off strange and then took a turn into Bizarre Tautology Theatre. Who knew that if, as an adult woman, you have sex, you are "trashing your father's genetic legacy" and wasting all that money he spent sending you to school?

Cold
9 years ago

>I really have little interest into responding to comments that attribute belief to me that I don't actually hold("fuck women" for example) or that refute points that I never even made("I am an authority on economics" for example). Same for ones that accuse me of hypocrisy without providing evidence. If you can't be bothered to carefully read what I write before responding, or can't be bothered to do copy/paste a few relevant quotes from me to back up a charge of hypocrisy, then I probably can't be bothered to respond.