Quite a few MRAs and MGTOWers seem to have have convinced themselves that women rarely if ever serve real time, or face any real consequences, for committing crimes. In the parlance of the manosphere, this is known as the “Pussy Pass.”
Now, this is, of course, almost complete bullshit. Why the “almost?” Because women do in fact receive somewhat lesser sentences when compared with men committing the same crimes. (So do white people, though you don’t hear the MRA crowd talking much about the “Honkey Pass.” )
Are the lighter sentences for women the result of evil feminist man haters? Not so much, Ampersand of Alas, A Blog argues in a thoughtful look at several studies on the subject. The author of one study concludes, as Ampersand summarizes it,
that this may be caused by sexist paternalism among judges; women are seen less as full adults, and as being less capable of being responsible for their own actions, and as a result judges depart from sentencing guidelines to give women lighter sentences.
Another study found that, contrary to what virtually every MRA or MGTOWer would assume, male judges were more likely than female judges to give especially harsh sentences to men. Let me repeat that: Male judges gave the harshest sentences to men. As the study’s author noted, “the greater the percentage of female judges on a district’s bench, the smaller the gender disparity.” (Emphasis mine.)
Just don’t try telling this to the MRA/MGTOW crowd. We saw the other day how the idea of the “pussy pass” – the notion that “the law does not serve justice” – has led some MRAs to advocate or voice their support for lynching female perps (with what degree of seriousness I don’t know).
Meanwhile, over on NiceGuy’s MGTOW forum, nigeles175d “humorously” suggests that the supposed existence of the “Pussy Pass” should also give guys the right to rape women who happen to give them boners:
[I]f we men cannot control our passions as women often claim, why don’t we get a Dickie PassTM like women get the Pussy PassTM? If women cannot control their tears, their screams, their giggles, and if women are driven to poisoning or murdering their sleeping husbands and use the excuse of years of abuse and being unable to control their mental state, why do we not consider a similar excuse for men. The way some women dress (hint, hint, SlutWalkers) to deliberately entice men to want sex with them, why is it not an exonerrating circumstance in the same way as it is for women? It seems women are never made to take responsibility for their actions, nor are they ever held accountable. Alternatively, if men are not allowed it, but women are, then we’re treating them like children and they don’t deserve the vote or positions of authority.
And of course it all goes back to women having the vote — the source of all evil in the modern world. Attitudes like this are, of course, what make the Slutwalks (and feminism in general) necessary in the first place.
And Chavonne is a teacher. No wonder students can’t write.
It’s entirely possible that “Chavonne Ramirez” is exactly who she says she is, and she and her students are really learning a lot from the moderate MRM, but … why do I get the feeling that “Chavonne Ramirez” is unknown MRM writer Tim Goldich?
Because you see with uncommon clarity Bee.
@David, I think some of them (such as use of a firearm) are controlled for by dealing with offense levels, but others, such as the issue of killings of strangers vs intimates, are not.
@Chavonne, you have some really obvious issues with your comments. First of all, while there is a relationship (statistically) between race and poverty, not all people of color are poor and not all poor people are people of color. While classism, racism, and sexism interact in complicated ways, suggesting that one oppressed group should just sit back and take oppression because there are other forms of oppression is bogus. Secondly, having a child “out of wedlock” is not a problem in and of itself. Shifting the blame from black fathers to black mothers (who, let’s face it, are already given far more than their fair share of blame) is no solution. Women of color also face disproportionate imprisonment (as compared to white women) and police violence. The problem is not black and latino women having too much power over their lives and bodies, the problem lies in the fact that we as a society do not give sufficient support to poor, single, or people of color who are parents, period, and that we live in a racist, classist, sexist, etc. society. Using black women, particularly black mothers, as the eternal scapegoat here is not a positive move either. And, the suggestion that poor mothers (or poor women in general) have less responsibility put on them than wealthy mothers (or wealthy women in general) is flat out bullshit, poor parents parent with far fewer resources and do it while working far more average hours outside of the home. Look, if you want to have a discussion in the ways that the benefits of the feminist movement have not been spread out equally among women, we can have that discussion (it is an excellent discussion, and one worth having), but this nasty attitude you have towards poor women and single mothers is just ridiculous sexist crap.
Chavonne, many feminists do care about men’s issues. I do not think the MRM is doing much to actually address the issues, though. You brought up the name of Paul Elam, so I guess you and your class are reading the posts at his website, A Voice for Men. Do you or your students really believe that his writings are moderate? Did you not find any misogyny in his posts or from his commenters?
You mentioned the problem of prison rape. Just Detention is dedicated to helping both men and women serve sentences safely. Why isn’t the MRM working with Just Detention to help the victims rather than using the problem as a rhetorical weapon to minimize and deny the problem of rape outside of prison? You can read one of Elam’s own articles about rape here:
http://www.avoiceformen.com/2011/02/22/the-scourge-of-rape-yeah-whatever/
Read what he said and the read what his fans wrote in the comments section. You can form your own opinions about they wrote, and then decide if the feminists here are intellectually dishonest for disagreeing with him. Here is another link for the MRM take on the issue of domestic violence:
http://www.avoiceformen.com/2010/10/22/if-you-see-jezebel-in-the-road-run-the-bitch-down/
Could you provide links to the well written pieces you have found in the MRM? I realize that many men in society have serious problems. I just don’t believe the MRA’s are doing much to actually deal with them. Instead they are attacking women’s rights as a way to even the score for their perceived wrongs.
DSC, thanks. I’ll keep looking into the subject,and will return to it. If you have any suggestions for research or resources I should look at, let me know.
So…as a class we randomly selected and posted to your site as well as others. Your responses have been very telling. We have visited several sites (MRA’s and Feminist blogs). We must admit that we were uncertain about what we would discover. However,the past couple of weeks have been very revealing and in the case of many of our previously held beliefs about femini-sm/st it has been at times disappointing. One poster on this page actiually focused more on our writing style (purposely simplistic) than addressing the content.The truth is that the MRAs are no more hateful and sacrcastically dismissive than many of you have been on a number of sites. Given the recommended writings that we became familiar with during this time, we suspect that the voices of these MRA’s will continue to grow. Our personal belief is that they should become more apart of the mainstream dialogue on gender issues if we truly desire equality. Nonetheless, we apologize for being deceptive.
“chavonne ramirez”
Counseling Psychology
Practicum Seminar Students
Uh huh. And is that the royal we “chavonne ramirez”.
‘the truth is that the MRAs are no more hateful and sacrcastically dismissive than many of you have been..’ – Chaconne.
Being intolerant of the intolerant is not intolerance. As the saying goes: We may not be able to change the world, but at least we can embarrass the guilty. So when the MRAs spew their hate, they get snark and thorough mocking in return. Which, you may not have noticed is the purpose of this Blog, if not the purpose of feminism.
We have found your written comments regarding our tone to be humorously arrogant and presumptuous. We have also found them to lack merit. We are very disappointed. We will be grading you accordingly.
‘Yazatas Internetpersona’
Supreme Ruler of this corner of the Universe.
Speaking in the Imperial ‘We’
WE WILL SOON FEAST ON SPIDER-MAN’S SPLEEN!
Venom
How to kill Spider-Man
He’s also Peter Parker
You made it a class project to troll and sockpuppet a blog comment section?
You’re either the worst professor ever or the worst liar ever.
‘You’re either the worst professor ever or the worst liar ever.’ – Holly
Why can’t he/she be both?
Hay! Intersectionality! Can’t they be both? xD
Jinx. Beer. Now.
xD
Charizard. Hamburgers. Now.
>_>;;
@ chavonne ramirez – feminist sites do have lengthy discussions about the problems in the movement.
For example see some old but really excellent posts on this issue: http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2009/02/28/who-gets-to-say-what-part-i-tokenism/
http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2008/04/26/on-those-pictures-and-on-privilege/
These kinds of discussions seem absent from much of the MRM pages. I have seen some pretty big stuff ups on feminist sites relatively recently, of big feminist sites (Feministe) being accused of racism, but the thing is that these things were then at least discussed. Accusations of misogyny, from what I have observed, seem to receive short shrift from MRA.
Basically, yes, feminists fuck up (pretty regularly in regard to racism and ablism) but there are sections of the community that really want to fix that.
Chavonne,
I’m in the profession, and I’m curious: where do you teach? Also, what clinical skills are you hoping to teach your students with this exercise?
If this person does teach (yeah, and I’m an astronaut rock star dinosaur), it’s not under the name “Chavonne Ramirez.” That name only comes up on MRA blogs and on news blogs pushing MRA viewpoints.
…and once again you all missed it. WE are a class of seminar students. Chavonne Ramirez is a fictional character. We’ve been exploring culture bound barriers in counseling practice and the role of certain biases in preventing effective treatment. What started as a discussion amongst classmates led us to “look into” a few things for ourselves. Disturbing! ” Snark and thorough mocking of mras.. the purpose of feminism” the assumption you all seem to be making is that your “truth” is THE truth and that there is no merit to any of the mras position on the issues. We will no longer post to your site..our apologies again
Yeah, I noticed a thread on “a voice for men” where she claimed to know three women whose sons had been tricked into impregnating their girl friends and now had to pay child support. I suppose it’s possible, but it seems a bit suspect.
Also, a “practicum” in Counseling Psychology is where students go out and practice counseling at a site in order to gain experience for graduation and eventual licensure. It’s entirely possible to have a seminar connected with the practicum, but engaging in the activity described seems a bit odd. It’s not clear what clinical or training purpose it might serve, especially over the course of several weeks.
Wait. So a site who’s entire purpose is to point out misogyny, and happens to target MRA sites, is at blame for mocking MRA sites? I mean, i guess you can take issue with that purpose, but you can’t claim it’s masquerading as anything else.
Also, this is not a site to discuss feminist issues. They come up often, but that is not the purpose of this site. That is a biased sampling, and not representative of feminism.
“It was a social experiment!”
This isn’t a feminism blog. I mean, it’s certainly feminist-friendly, but it’s a blog specifically dedicated to mocking MRAs, not to general feminism. You can find more of that at Feministe, Feministing, Ms. Magazine, etc. Mocking MRAs is hardly a defining characteristic of feminism; it’s just the purpose of this particular blog.
Man, you’re jinxing all over today, Holly.
@chavonne ramirez
Well…I guess your concern is duly noted.
A tip, though, from someone who has worked in the field for a while now: empathy doesn’t solve everything. Some people are truly bad.
Have you considered the possibility that the leaders of the MRM are in fact misleading these damaged and angry individuals? Instead of encouraging them to work on themselves and take responsibility for their actions and lives, the leaders of the MRM encourage men to blame women, specifically feminists. Far from encouraging any kind of social activism, the MRM encourages its followers to marinate in their own hatred–with occasional tragic results (Jahred Loughner, anyone?).
If you are who you say you are, I frankly find your attitude to be dangerously naive. Sure, feel free empathize with your male clients, by all means. Sure, seek to remedy genuine injustices wherever they may be. But never forget that there are abusers and sociopaths out there. Believe me, this is something you will learn if you spend any time working in the field after graduation. Once you’ve had that experience, the motives of the leaders of the MRM at any rate may become clearer to you.
A “social experiment?”
Maybe “chavonne” is … SCOTT ADAMS!
Probably not, as “chavonne” didn’t make any comments about how certifiably brilliant Scott Adams is.
I would like to add, moreover, that we are a set of conjoined triplets with 17 different personalities between us. And yet we all agree on this one thing.