Today, a trip down memory lane to revisit an until-recently lost classic of modern misogyny: Jay Hammers’ “The Age of Consent is Misandry.” The piece, originally published on Jay Hammers’Men’s Rights blog, inspired some heated discussions amongst MRAs online, with some harshly criticizing the piece as an apologia for pedophilia and others hailing it as a “politically incorrect” masterpiece. Stung by the criticism, Hammers ultimately took his blog down. But the piece has since been resurrected on the Human-Stupidity blog – another blog that seems rather unhealthily obsessed with the supposed injustice of men not being allowed to fuck underage girls.
Here are some of its highlights (that is, lowlights); the headlines are mine.
ALL ABOUT THE MENZ
The arbitrary age of consent is not about protecting women/girls. It is about valuing females and their virtue over males and their freedom. The intent of the laws is to stop older men from having sex with younger women and that is how it is enforced. It was never intended to stop younger men from having sex with older women.
MORE BETA BLUES
Age of consent laws are designed to punish beta males. A beta male in his 20s, unsuccessful with women his own age who are infused with a sense of feminist entitlement and deride all but the top alpha males who take interest in them, who seeks companionship with a younger, sexually mature female who desires him, should not go to prison for acting on that which is normal male sexuality.
FEMINISTS WHO SUPPORT AGE OF CONSENT LAWS ARE TREATING WOMEN LIKE CHILDREN
If we are to treat women as children then we should be consistent. Young women who have sex with older men are as much victims as women who have sex with a pick-up artist after meeting at a club. In both cases, feminists are angry because the woman has been “fooled” into having sex with a less than ideal mate in terms of value. …
This is what makes feminists angry and this is why age of consent exists still today, because it is assumed women are not mentally mature enough to give consent AND because older women want to limit men’s options to increase their own value in the sexual marketplace.
BUT WOMEN ARE CHILDREN, BASICALLY
Older women … are generally not of a much higher intelligence level than teenage girls. The big difference between the two is that older women are less attractive and that is what makes them so damn angry. …
Females generally do not significantly mature mentally past puberty so it should always be illegal for any woman to have sex or it should never be illegal for any woman to have sex. There is no arbitrary age where females suddenly become self-aware, realizing the consequences of their actions, and stop seeking out alpha males. Thus there must not be an arbitrary age of consent for sex.
A MODEST PROPOSAL
If anything, it should be illegal for women to have sex with men until men have been educated on the truths of women, Marriage 2.0, Game, feminism, and men’s rights.
Discuss?
@NWO:
One more thing. Remember how I said that answer a question isn’t as easy as putting a little @ symbol in front of someone’s name, and perhaps quoting the appropraite question? Using links as evidence isn’t as simple as splashing a url into a text box. First, it has to be relevent, second, it has to say what you think it says, third it has to be credible. The first two links were relevent (sorta) and credible, but didn’t say what you thought it did. Namely, there are better explanations for why these organiations are focused more on women then men, namely actual human rights violations in other countries.
The third link was decently credible, but lacked relevence because it didn’t say what you thought it said.
There’s a difference between simply dismissing a link, and having reasons to dismiss it, and you are oblvious to it.
@ngz3120:
“Provide proof that the manboobz spearhead comments section/angry marginalized abuse victim fallacy invalidates all creating awareness and advocacy for gender apartheid is compassion, law and services?”
Erm, we’re the spearhead now? Weren’t you making the case that the spearhead was a legitimate site? Aren’t you saying we are legitimate with the comparison?
“For example, how does the manboobz spearhead comments section/angry marginalized abuse victim fallacy invalidate, fathers rights, advocacy for victims of female pedophiles, creating awareness of the false accusation epidemic (1 in 10 report being falsely accused http://www.saveservices.org/false-allegations-awareness-month/survey-results/ ), changing the feminist abuse system to something that’s inclusive and non discriminatory or campaigning for equality in compassion and an end to mocking men that need help?”
I dunno about specifics, but there are numerous commenters here who actively campaign for both men’s and women’s rights. Ami Angelwings works at a women’s shelter that provides shelter for men as well, and Ozymandias has recently started a blog dedicated to men’s rights.
But a lot of what you say are real problems are actually not, and these people would be in the best position to inform you of what problems real men face in the real world.
“Because that’s the whole sites premise.”
The whole website’s premise is to highlight stupidity in the MRM. In other words, this is a website dedicated to mocking. -_-
@theLaplaceDemon & Kirbwarp
The majority of links for men on the UN and Corporate sites entailed how men could do more/why men should do more to help women. That’s men rights for ya, helping women. Thats my privilege, helping women achieve more.
A little snippet that they posted in the media link.
“Often women are seen as more honest, more sincere, as harder working,” Clarke said. “This may be an opportunity for more women to step into those positions.”
ABC’s Claire Shipman, co-author of “Womenomics”, says there are numerous studies that show that a company with more women in senior positions will be more profitable.
“In every decision, diversity leads to better decisions,” Shipman said. “In other words, a group of all white men are not going to reach the best decision.”
Referencing a quotation from Debbie Walsh, the head of the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University, Amanpour said, “The shorthand of it is that women run for office to do something, and men run for office to be somebody.”
“I think that’s absolutely right. And you just listen to different members of Congress and how they talk,” said Clarke. “The female members of Congress often say, ‘this is what we’re trying to get done. This is where we want to be five years from now.’ Versus a male member of Congress who says, ‘this is what I want to do.'”
I know being indoctrinated from birth that women ARE “more honest, more sincere, as harder working.” Or so were told.
And that, “a group of all white men are not going to reach the best decision.” No insult there.
And, “The shorthand of it is that women run for office to do something, and men run for office to be somebody.” I mean this is accepted and endorsed, reguritated on a daily basis that woman do things for others, (there so moral and spiritual) while men are, ya know, shit.
“The female members of Congress often say, ‘this is what we’re trying to get done. This is where we want to be five years from now.’ Versus a male member of Congress who says, ‘this is what I want to do.'” Women do for others men again are shit.
All this would be the misandry in the very air we breath, that is accepted, endorsed and propogated on a daily never ending basis.
NGZ: I went and read it. Blather. Lots of vagueness; links to studies of bad methodology, and unspported assertions. A lot of, “Shaming Language” and question begging/many questions fallacies.
The things she says which are true (men have feelings, cut them, they bleed [NWO, that’s a Shakespeare reference]) are buried in implicative attacks. The rest of her site is much the same. That she supports Ron Paul makes me question her ability to reason. His policy decisions are usually suspect. It’s not that he is always wrong in result (his opposition to the War in Iraq) but that he gets there in a very sideways manner (the US has no interests outside it’s own borders).
His policies on money (the Gold Standard), etc. are more of the same. To bring up his attitudes on women/abortion/civil rights is several other cans of worms.
Before anyone says this is, “ad hominem”, it’s not. I am looking at her ability to engage in critical thinking, based on her public statements about things she believes. I have not said, “she’s a Republican, ergo she’s wrong).
That she has no published papers, and is making a living catering to men who feel they’ve been wronged by women isn’t, in itself a bar to her being right/reasonable, but her actual arguments, and the structure of them (e.g. You are not a princess are slanted in style, and have fallacies in structure, starting with, NAWALT, and then accusing everyone who reads it (and happens to be female) of doing terrible things;
Her recent appearance to talk about, “Accidental” pregnancies and the, “entrapment” of men suffers the same problem. Does it happen that a woman decides she might be able to “keep” a man by getting pregnant? Yes.
Is it an epidemic? No.
But she implies it is, and that men need to act as if it is, <a href =http://www.shrink4men.com/2011/06/17/dr-tara-j-palmatier-on-avoiceformen-radio-tuesday-june-21-2011-accidental-pregnancies-entrapment-and-children-as-weapons/#comment-2710“He know the condoms at his place won’t have pinholes in them”.
I’m also the one who said you are doing what you accuse us of doing. You say there are all these good sites, without the misogyny… all we have to do is trust you; while you insult and abuse us. As soon as we come to our senses, and agree with you, will you show us the “good” sites?
XD *stretches* I got a ton of sleep and I feel way better now :3 *looks up* o_O bizarre o_o
@Kirby it is kinda interesting the selective noticing of abuse victims, given that many here have talked about their own assaults, abuse and rapes : But apparently it’s not okay for women to vent their anger on that when ppl like MRAL are saying “you’re making it up” XD
I’ve also apparently been doing my job wrong and I should also let all the agencies I work w/ (both male and female run who *gasp* work together! xD ) that they should just go wave their magical anti-oppression hands and the state will come down and solve all the problems of the men and women, girls and boys that are victims of assault, abuse, homelessness, rape… : We must REALLY hate them for not taking the magical Voyager reset button to these serious problems… and apparently the ppl who run and work in the men’s shelters and women’s shelters didn’t get the message there’s a gender war on and they should be trying to wipe each other out rather than work together to try their best to help the people they care about >_>;; This is why all the yelling and screaming by trolls here makes me XD cuz it doesn’t matter… it’s all arguing hypothetical and theory, but there’s an actual real world out there. It’s like ppl arguing what weather.ca says or about meteorological trends and stats to talk about whether it’s raining outside, when you can stick your hand out. xD As usual, I’ll reiterate my support for the passion shown tho, and encourage ppl who are passionate to go out and volunteer, men and women’s shelters, crisis centres, addiction centres, etc can always use more help :]
I like how in all the railing about YOU PPL SUPPORT THE STATE, apparently everything I said last night just kinda vanished into a big black hole of “I DUN WANNA HEAR IT” xD
@Kristin that if kids don’t have bodily autonomy about sex they don’t have the autonomy to make decisions about their bodies that only they can make.
That’s not rly what I was saying : But I think that sex should def be something in the discussion about body autonomy, but I wasn’t trying to say everything HAD to be one way or the other. I dun rly have much of an opinion on when ages should be when, but the focus on body autonomy, rights to your own body and personal decisions, and when human beings should have them is what’s key to me, and I was just hoping it doesn’t get lost along with other issues like protection, coercion, etc etc..:]
@NWO:
“In every decision, diversity leads to better decisions. In other words, a group of all white men are not going to reach the best decision.”
Yeah, not actually an insult. Its about diversity of opinion and experience, and white men are used because most powerful groups are composed of white men.
“The shorthand of it is that women run for office to do something, and men run for office to be somebody.”
This doesn’t surprise me either, because at the moment women can’t be somebody in office. In otherwords, once equality eventually sinks in, women will be just as corrupt and selfish as men. The same as the next quote:
“The female members of Congress often say, ‘this is what we’re trying to get done. This is where we want to be five years from now.’ Versus a male member of Congress who says, ‘this is what I want to do.’”
Also I find it interesting that had I succeeded in my suicide attempts, I would be one of bodies being waved around as proof of “male genocide” and feminism, gender freedom, etc killing ppl xD
Pecunium
“ngz: It was a serious question. Here’s the problem. You say such a place exists.
I’ve tried to find such places. I’ve failed.”
That not true, your references and understandings are limited to the ones that that manboobz gives you, thats why you mention the spearhead comments section nearly every time you give an example and repeatedly defer to the manboobz spearhead comments section / angry abuse victim fallacy. He has trained you well.
You can go find them if you want, but you don’t want. You can also find feminist areas that are as misandrist as the most misogynist men’s movement spaces….. but we are on manboobz where men and women are hold to different standards of behavior and compassion.
Misandry isnt heracy, its fun what about teh menz lol.
Misogyny is taboo, its modern heracy even coming from abuse victims.
That’s why you hold the double standards. Its ok for feminism to campaign for gender apartheid in compassion, services and law for abuse victims.
Its not ok for the marginalized abuse victims to get angry about it or speak ill of women or the system that keeps them that way, or so feminists keeps telling us.
Kirbywarp
“Seriously, do you know of any cases where this actually happens? Its fine to make hypotheticals to prove a rhetorical point. Its quite another to make hypotheticals and use it as evidence of what the world is like.”
What do you think is generating the out outlandish commentary? Its all rooted in abuse and inequality in compassion, law and services…. and its being compounded and used for entertainment by the “what about teh menz” and manboobz types.
kirbywarp, Your excuses at the insults being directed at men is proof of your acceptance as misandry being normal, good and should be encouraged. What else can it be? Take everywhere that said man/woman and reverse it. Would it now be misogyny Xtreeeeme?
Every State agency, Media/Corporate outlet, University would be screaming for blood.
@ngz3120:
Yeah. Avoiding answering the question is a great way to proove you are correct. Its easy to talk about evidence that exists, much harder to actually present it.
Also, how exactly do you know what Pecunium has been up to? Do you have access to his search history? And are you expecting him to prove a negative, that such websites don’t exist? You keep saying that they exist, why not actually give the link to one that you obviously have. Unless you’re just blowing smoke. Deflection, deflection, deflection.
ngz:Provide proof that the manboobz spearhead comments section/angry marginalized abuse victim fallacy invalidates all creating awareness and advocacy for gender apartheid is compassion, law and services?
Can you put that into English… because I don’t think I can parse it. I keep trying to figure out what it says and the end result is gibberish.
The best I can come up with is you asking for proof the commenters here are in favor of equality. For that… well the site speaks for itself. In this thread I’ve linked to two places which are talking about the problems in the way sex-offender registries are built. In this thread we’ve talked about how/why age of consent laws need to be in place, and what to do to make them better.
We’ve in this thread, said women who take advantage of immature boys should be punished as much as men should, and prosecuted as often.
As to the rest, you are the one making the affirmative defense of the MRA sites on the blogroll. It’s your job to defend that position, if you don’t we can take it you have no actual support: note, this is different from your nonsense about, “I’m not here to debate, if I don’t respond it’s because you are making shit up” defense. This is simple argument.
1: Person A makes claim of fact.
2: Person B makes request for supporting evidence.
3: Person A provides evidence. If no evidence is provided, the assumption is no evidence exists.
It’s not always true, and some things (e.g. if one doesn’t eat/drink for “x” period of time, one is almost certain to die) don’t need such a supporting defense.
But I’m not willing to trust you (as you ought not me) if I say, “go look it up.” Because that gives you/me the chance to say, “that site doesn’t count, you need to find the one I was talking about.”
In other words; show your work (the Put up, or Shut up, principle)
No, Ami you would still be part of the group that are 4 or 5 times less likely to kill themselves.
Gendercide is in reference to the high numbers that kiil themselves while a high conflict personality is using the courts and their children as weapons.
But hey what about teh menz!
Male suicide scoff scoff lol!
@NWO:
These comments aren’t made in a vacuum. If the genders were reversed, the statements might start getting offensive because equality between the genders does not exist (it better than it used to be, but the two aren’t entirely equal in modern days). Is there any particular reason why you don’t think my arguments work? Or do they just not agree with your presupposition, and therefore must be dismissable?
@Kirby Ami Angelwings works at a women’s shelter that provides shelter for men as well,
Actually I work WITH women’s and men’s shelters, crisis centres, and other agencies (addiction services, homeless shelters, youth shelters..) But many women’s shelters do provide shelter for men b/c men’s shelters turn away some men (not out of a lack of space, but b/c of fears for their safety as men from various intersecting marginalized groups, which is something that we are trying to fix :] ), and the trauma therapy programs run by women’s shelters or crisis centres are open to both genders (I know this from personal exp as being part of these programs) :] Altho you do get ideologues like VRR and their transphobic policies, on the ground, a lot of ppl are working together and not engaged in an ideological gender war :] (and we’re also working to reduce the ideology if there IS attitudes like that)
Pecunium
You are being asked to prove that the anger in the spearhead comments section invalidates and defines the whole the mens movement.
Put up or shut up.
@ngz3120:
It doesn’t invalidate the whole mens movement, you ass. It invalidates the spearhead. (and since the spearhead seems to be representitive, and you continually refuse to show otherwise, it invalidates MRAs to an extent as well). Many of us here agree that men’s rights are important, and some of us are actually out in the world doing things to help.
ngz: That not true, your references and understandings are limited to the ones that that manboobz gives you, thats why you mention the spearhead comments section nearly every time you give an example and repeatedly defer to the manboobz spearhead comments section / angry abuse victim fallacy. He has trained you well.
Where did I leave my clue x four?
Before about six weeks ago, I’d never heard of Dave Futrelle. He’s not trained me in anything. Go take a look at my blog… see how long ago (before manboobz existed) I was taking down idjits like Roissey, and Derbyshire, and Cohen.
You’ll all see me being supportive of men who are being shafted by the system. I’ve never said there aren’t women who are of the opinion feminism means being angry at men (some of whom are anti-male). Hell, I don’t think anyone here has said that.
What we keep saying (and you keep ignoring) is that the man-haters are outliers. You keep saying the women-haters are outliers.
When we ask where the non-women haters are (you know, the ones which aren’t outliers, i.e. the mainstream) you can’t be arsed to help your fellow men out, and show us uppity-manginas and nasty-feminists how wrong we are.
Which makes me think the reason I can’t find them, is they don’t really exist. I wish I didn’t think so, but the more defenders of MRAs I’ve seen (and trust me, in the past 25 years I’ve seen a lot of them), the more I think they, as rule (thought NAMRAALT) hate women.
Here are my options to dealing with people who hold me in utter contempt for no reason other than being female, who think I’m inferior to them in every way, who equate me with children, who think I need a man to lead and protect me, who don’t think I’m competent enough as a human being to vote, work, enjoy activities outside the house, or to just lead a life I want to lead….
1) Ignore them.
2) Get angry.
3) Sympathize with them and try to get to the basis of their hostility.
4) Mock and laugh.
You can’t ignore a problem. To use as an example some people who have built their reputation around hatred of a group – the Phelps clan and Westboro Baptist Church. For years they picketed the funerals of gays, lesbians, and AIDS victims. They got some degree of attention, but society as a whole ignored them. Did they go away? No. Did they smolder, never changing? No. They kept going until they found a way to get the attention they wanted by picketing soldiers’ funerals (and from my own personal viewpoint, my analogy falls apart here because I don’t think they actually got worse, I don’t see the funeral of a soldier as being more sacrosanct than the funeral of Matthew Shepard, but that’s what it took for them to get serious “mainstream” attention).
You can get angry. I do get angry. But that anger needs to be channeled in healthy ways, and I refuse to let it turn me into the festering pile of hatred that so many MRAs and MGTOW seem to have become. I think lesbian separatists are almost as ridiculous as MGTOW (and I say “almost” because coming from a place of actual repression instead of coming from a place of losing privilege does give a tad more legitimacy to their grievances).
I will sympathize with those who understand their anger and hatred isn’t healthy and want to honestly heal. MRAs are no more a solid block than feminists, and if someone is open to accepting that actual feminists and actual men’s rights activists want the same thing – equality, fairness, and justice between the sexes, I will work with them and try to help with the pain that’s making them lash out.
However, when so many of them come together to stew in a cauldron of boiling hatred that only works to enhance their resentment, I will mock and laugh. To go back to the earlier Westboro example, mocking and laughing is working wonders. Passing laws against them gives them a twisted form of legitimacy. Attacking them often lands the attacker in court giving them money through lawsuits. Mocking and laughing though, that pulls their teeth. They never look more ridiculous and harmless when they are surrounded by people mocking and laughing.
If someone is lashing out to hurt me, my sympathy will only go so far. I’ll be damned if I’m going to let someone tell me I should keep taking it. No, the mocking and laughing WILL begin because at some point it becomes the only reasonable defense.
@ngz3120 Um… rly? XD How do you figure? XD My group actually has a 41% rate of suicide. xD But had I succeeded before… I would have been added to those suicide stats of men (unless they are stats ONLY for men who kill themselves cuz of divorce) And suicide rates of groups rly do concern me incl for boys and men, and I think there’s a ton of rly awful reasons that need to be fought, like bullying, and pressure from family and parents, queerphobia…child abuse :
@Kirbywarp
These comments aren’t made in a vacuum. If the genders were reversed, the statements might start getting offensive because equality between the genders does not exist (it better than it used to be, but the two aren’t entirely equal in modern days). Is there any particular reason why you don’t think my arguments work? Or do they just not agree with your presupposition, and therefore must be dismissable?
The only thing you’re right about is equality doesn’t exist.
All law favors women over men.
Obviously the media favors women/otherwise that misandric rant couldn’t have aired on a major netowrk.
All schools teaching style and cirriculum favors women.
Medical expenses 2 to 1 women.
Reproductive right, only women.
There is no realm of society, social, political, economic that doesn’t favor women.
Misandry is accepted and endorsed in all realms of society. It’s funny.
Pecunium
Explain how the angry abuse victims in the comments section of the spearhead, invalidate all advocacy for abuse victims and awareness raising against inequality in compassion, law and services undertaken by the fledgling international men’s movement?
Explain how the angry abuse victims in the comments section of the spearhead invalidates the drive to push gender bigotry out of victim services, law and compassion and replace it with a non discriminatory system?
ngz: No. I am saying that, for lack of better evidence (care to provide one, just one, MRA site that’s not full of women-hating commenters? I’ll wait. I’ve been waiting a long time already, I’m good at it), the commentariat at The Spearhead seems to map to the rest of the MRA movement.
I’ve even explained why… the up/down votes allow lurkers to express their views on the comments. I don’t have to extrapolate, I can look and see how people who say they hate women are received. The overwhelming evidence at The Spearhead (which is a high traffic site) is that MRAs hate women.
So, I’ve shown my work.
Gonna show me up with one of those more reasonable sites now?
“@ngz3120 Um… rly? XD How do you figure? XD My group actually has a 41% rate of suicide. xD But had I succeeded before… I would have been added to those suicide stats of men (unless they are stats ONLY for men who kill themselves cuz of divorce) And suicide rates of groups rly do concern me incl for boys and men, and I think there’s a ton of rly awful reasons that need to be fought, like bullying, and pressure from family and parents, queerphobia…child abuse :”
Divorce is the most common outside factor of suicide, men going through a difficult divorce are 8 to 10 times more likely to kill themselves. What group are you including yourself in?
ngz: Explain how the angry abuse victims in the comments section of the spearhead, invalidate all advocacy for abuse victims and awareness raising against inequality in compassion, law and services undertaken by the fledgling international men’s movement?
Explain how the angry abuse victims in the comments section of the spearhead invalidates the drive to push gender bigotry out of victim services, law and compassion and replace it with a non discriminatory system?
Strawman.
Show where I said any of those things.
“The overwhelming evidence at The Spearhead (which is a high traffic site) is that MRAs hate women.”
No, the overwhelming evidence you have found just confirms that the spearhead, can have a lot of angry abuse victims venting against women and the system in the comments section.
Women rarely experience the sort of abuse these men do, abuse compounded by legal abuse and financial and children used as weapons etc all assisted by the state. But nobody cares except the men’s movement.
You have to prove your silly assertion, that the comments section of the spearhead invalidates the whole mens movement and everything that it stands for.
And you can also explain how misandric comments on feminist sites don’t invalid the whole feminist movement.