Good news, ladies and manginas: Apparently some MRAs don’t think it’s time to go out and start shooting people. At least not quite yet.
Some background: In recent days numerous MRAs have taken up the cause of a man named Thomas Ball – who burned himself to death outside a courthouse in Keane, New Hampshire in a protest against what he saw as unfair treatment in family court. Ferdinand Bardamu of In Male Fide has declared him “a martyr for the cause of men’s rights, a casualty of feminism’s stripping one half of the population of their humanity.”
Before killing himself, Ball wrote a long manifesto outlining his grievances and suggesting that the time had come for men “to start burning down police stations and courthouses,” describing the inhabitants of such buildings as “[c]ollaborators who are no different than the Vichy of France or the Quislings of Norway during the Second World War … So burn them out. “ (He offered specific advice on how best to do this, including tips on how to select the proper bottles to use for Molotov cocktails.)
All this has inspired some in the MRA to start talking ominously about violence. On The Spearhead, W.F. Price has responded to this talk with a piece suggesting that the time isn’t quite right for the MRAs of the world to take up armed struggle. Not just yet, anyway. As he puts it:
It is never a good idea to pick up a gun and start shooting to address some vaguely defined injustice — that is savagery. Before the American Revolution, for example, patriots took pains to spell out a long list of grievances that justified rebellion. …
We have to make our own lists, air our grievances, and give the state the opportunity to redress them. … Before anyone resorts to the same methods the state uses against us, we must put every reasonable effort into working with the law and the political system we have. Because this effort is still in its infancy, any calls for armed resistance are entirely premature and counterproductive, and shouldn’t be taken seriously.
Obviously, the flip side of this argument for delay is a justification for killing people if these “grievances” aren’t dealt with in the way that those in the MRA would like. Price’s reference to the American Revolution is an interesting one, because of course the central issue of that struggle was, you know, taxation without representation. The colonists couldn’t vote out the king if they didn’t like his policies. In case anyone has forgotten: we actually do have the vote now, which was kind of the whole point in the first place.
Of course, many of Price’s readers are a bit more impatient than he is. In a comment that drew (last I checked) more than 40 upvotes and only two dissenting downvote, Taqman took issue with Price’s call to delay the armed struggle:
Tell that to men who are facing imminent imprisonment for failure to pay child support.
They don’t have the luxury of time and can’t wait a couple of decades for the manginas of the world to wake up and decide that a gentlemanly form of armed resistance is now acceptable.
The ironically named Firepower, meanwhile, took a little swipe at Ball’s own actions, but didn’t challenge his advice for the rest of the men of the world:
What IS crazy is having to point out that setting YOURSELF on fire is a ridiculous way to “win” anything.
Set your enemies on fire. To even have to remind this questions the long term chances of victory for such a pathetic lot.
Jean Valjean suggested that political action was pointless — due to all those damned women who vote:
No amount of “stoic logic” will make politicians see our point of view.
Politicians are in the business of getting re-elected rather than the business of good governance. So long as women are the majority there will only be tyranny of the majority.
Peter-Andrew:Nolan(c) — you knew we were getting to him, right? — expressed his profound disappointment that more Spearheaders weren’t willing to embrace a violent solution:
Gee you guys are whimps and tiptoe around the ‘use of force’ like freaking ballet dancers. Are you so scared to speak about this when it is CLEAR the guvment LOVES using force against you and lots of other people too?
And he made the argument personal, explicitly denouncing, by name, the judge he claimed had “criminally abused” him with his rulings:
Judge [name redacted’s] life is now in my hands. He lives by my consent and my consent alone. …
And, like Ball, he declared judges to be essentially treasonous:
These judges pretended to be your servants. They are evil, evil people who deserve the kind of treatment reserved for those who commit treason.
There is more to Nolan’s comment(s) than that, but to get into it would require going down the rabbit-hole into his particular brand of crackpottery, which seems to involve him setting up his own courts to try judges he doesn’t like. (I frankly don’t understand his belief system and don’t care to.)
Now, it should be noted that a few Spearheaders actually objected to Nolan’s violent talk. But the last I checked, the comment I just quoted had more upvotes than downvotes. W.F. Price took more flak for suggesting men wait a little longer before taking up arms than Nolan did for, well, you saw what he wrote. That tells you a lot about The Spearhead, I think.
EDIT: Added quote from Ferdinand Bardamu; removed similar quote from The Spearhead.
darksidecat,
“My mother also hit me, emcee, and it was abuse. Your mother’s actions were also abuse. Ball’s actions were also abuse. Stop trying to normalize violence against children. The fact that abuse is sadly common does not make it okay.”
Repeating that does not make it so. I am grateful to my mother for what she did. She raised a better man than most. Actually, she raised several good men. Out of 20 of the guys I grew up with, there are 4 left – 3 raised by her. (Maybe if Anthony Weiner had been hit, he wouldn’t have turned out to be such a shit, you know?)
Why can’t you guys deal with the idea you’re a bunch of doctrinaire pussies, demanding the rest of us be like you because it means your nonsense goes unchallenged, whether it makes sense or not?
That admission would make life so much easier.
Jesus, Pec, you’re dumb:
I never said you called her pathetic – I said “it’s pathetic women support me”. Another lie.
Are you still claiming there’s no photo there? Another lie.
Like I said, it’s like a compulsion around here. You all are simply incapable of telling the truth.
Another one is not addressing the topics. C’mon, Pec, tell me there’s no photo on my blog again or admit you lied.
Somebody here is going to admit to being a liar – I came to win.
I would suggest you guys drop it at this point.
All I see is an argument. No discussion. No exchange of viewpoints. And the argument has degenerated to the “Is so” and “no you” stage.
I do not see how either side could even “agree to disagree” by now.
Crack… I didn’t poke around enough to figure out that your handle is a stage name too. My error. Then again, I’d didn’t pretend to know your background from your posts here. I never said anything about where you grew up, or what, “your world” was, or wasn’t like.
So, Mr. Dixon… you were in the Navy. What was your rate? Did you pull a 4 and out, or extend a bit. I mean this was the 80s, Reagan was spending money on the military like a sailor on leave. Lots of room in there.
But I understand, being in the service isn’t something everyone can hack. But since you are so proud of your hitch, using it to try and show people how tough, and manly you are with your time in the service (Snowy, dear, I’m a military vet from South Central, Los Angeles.) perhaps you’d care to share your exploits, tell us what deeds of personal valor you did.
You must have some, right? Because it’s part of the credentials you tied to wave in our faces…
Or not. I know lots of vets who posture. Who make veiled references to being in, and let the implications people have about it try to cover what was, for most people, esp. in peacetime, just a job; one that comes with room, board and clothing.
And before you get your knickers in a twist yes, I know that being on shipboard is a pain in the ass, and there are hazards that come, just from being in the Navy (since that’s what you did), but really, esp. in the early 80s, being a seaman wasn’t all that special; certainly not in the, “living where violence is common” dept.
Then again… when were you in the Navy?
o_O
He came to win… xD I’m amused XD
so he shows up, insults everybody… some ppl are v nice to him, even if he believes it’s misplaced… he insults everybody again… every person who tries to engage w/ him he responds w/ insults.. you’re an idiot, you’re stupid… or childish xD and you’re not addressing his points! which are… that we’re idiots, and can’t be engaged w/ xD
i think this is another troll that’s dancing in the end zone while everybody else is playing hockey xD
He’s in over the line… he’s not waiting..
xD
and yus I believe I will continue to destroy the world w/ my new age ttlly not related to tarot evil hate cards of Magyc doom xD
Dixon… I didn’t say anything about her being pathetic. I said you were, “pathetically grateful”
The pathetic modifies grateful, which is a quality of yours. This is the sort of things which makes me say you aren’t all that good with language.
@AndrewV yeah that’s what I see too xD it’s not like nebody’s going to convince nebody else to change their definition of abuse.. .also now it’s just everybody calling each other a liar xD
Dixon… I didn’t say it wasn’t there, I said I didn’t see it.
So, no, you can’t make me admit to something I didn’t say.
Now… how long were you in the Navy? What was your rate? How much sea-duty did you pull?
@The Crack Emcee:
“Somebody here is going to admit to being a liar – I came to win.”
You’ve already lost. I’ve been following along here, and this is the only stuff I’ve seen that is you making an actual point, and not violently leaping on other posters for not reading your mind after you communicate badly.
1) Thomas Ball’s daughter was not abused. You were hit consistantly as a child, and that certainly wasn’t abuse (and anyone who says otherwise is a liar), so therefore she wasn’t abused.
2) We are invested in “new age culture” as evidenced by mentioning yoga and creating magic cards.
3) We have no right to complain about feminist issues, because your wife killed three people and you fared badly during the ordeal.
4) One female author has come to the conclusion that men actually have it worse than wome, so therefore it is true.
5) Feminism only exists because men allow it, and since men are opressed by feminist policies, men will soon put an end to feminism.
So yeah.. To paraphrase yourself, “saying you weren’t abused doesn’t make it so.” Worse, saying that violence against children isn’t abuse it to normalize violence against children, which you seem to think is just dandy. Nobody here is “invested in new age culture,” and the yoga that some posters do probably has no more relevence to new agey woo than magic cards do. Playing the victim game does nothing to prove your point; sure, you went through terrible stuff with your wife, but to say that therefore women shouldn’t complain about systematic mistreatment in society is just plain retarded. A lot of women here have shared stories about being raped and or assaulted. Does this make them right, and make you wrong?
You can find individual women who think MRAs are exactly correct, and you can find men who think Feminism is a noble cause (I am one). So what? You can find people who swear up and down they’ve been abducted by aliens. Doesn’t make them right. We provide evidence for our claims, you provide bluster. Finally, in terms of feminism only existing because men allow it, citation woefully needed. If I say that the movement would have never started if men controlled its outcome, you would counter by saying that some men wanted women to have equal rights. This would play into your narrative without you ever having to prove it true in the first place, like how creationists say everything is evidence of a creator, though they never prove the existance of a creator in the first place. So first, prove your claim.
This conversation has gone downhill, with you making vauge statements, then tearing the throat out of posters who dain to disagree or contradict you. That’s not winning an argument, that’s getting wrapped up in a pointless debate about what was said, not what is.
@AndrewV and Ami:
Well, I can try, anyway. Consider this a last ditch effort to combat a troll. *shrug*
And what are the details of your wife again? She killed three people? When was this?
Dammit, now I”ve got “In the Navy” stuck in my head.
And was it your actual mother, or your foster mother who was beating you?
Speedlines, it could be worse. I’ve seen some that would be worse, and recently.
In the MRAvy!
Since his condition is that he’s not leaving till he “wins” and I dun think nebody’s going to agree w/ his definition of “not abuse”.. I suspect this is going to end w/ him declaring victory or that he’s proven what dumb clods we are, and then flouncing xD
Pec,
Crack… I didn’t poke around enough to figure out that your handle is a stage name too. My error.
Wow – the first concession on the entire thread and it’s between two vets. Gawd, I love people with integrity. Good job, Pec. You didn’t address saying I had no photo, but whatever. You’re trying.
As far as the rest, sorry, but you are the one hiding behind a handle – not me – so feeding you information that you want to possibly beat me over the head with would be silly. (Just like feminism!) I’ll take your concession as my trophy, thanks.
Dixon… I didn’t say anything about her being pathetic. I said you were, “pathetically grateful”
Really? Ann Althouse is a feminist Democrat who voted for Obama and has roughly 800,000 visitors to her blog a day. I get a significant bit of her runoff, and we enjoy each other’s company because we’re both free speech advocates who insist on integrity. I have raked her over the coals countless times, as I’m doing you all here, but she handles it like an adult – not in the bullshit, cowardly, and deceptive manner you guys engage in. And, yes, I am grateful for her support. If that’s “pathetic” then I want to know what your claim not to have seen my photo on my blog is.
Ami,
“so he shows up, insults everybody… some ppl are v nice to him,…”
Lying about my mother, and condescending to me, is not being “nice.” You are cruel beyond belief, partially because of how you go about it: you think you have plausible deniability, which – with most idiots – you probably do. But I’m unique – I demand accountability, and will hold you to what you say. You are not “nice,” you are insulting and cruel, which is how I found this blog to begin with:
The cruelty that exists here was pointed out to me by others.
I guess they’re all crazy.
Ami Angelwings: Cruel Beyond Belief xD (fact or fiction)
sry i have to add “Fact or Fiction” after I say “beyond belief” every time just cuz of that stupid show in the 90s xD
tho now I do get it… since even to the feminists here, I’ve been giving hugs and sympathy for trauma they’ve shared.. I’ve apparently been cruel to everybody O_O;;
Ami Angelwings: Vile Cruel Demon of Evil Cat Land
Concession.. not really.
Funny thing… that, Integrity.. You said I was stupid, clueless, etc. because when I looked at your blog I didn’t click through to other places (and avatars…. anyone can use anything as an avatar), and so I was a sorry excuse for a vet.
You could have done the same for me. The link is right there on my handle, and that handle is what I use most places.. It links to a lot more details about me than are on your blog.
So, we have a disparity of integrity… but hey… keep telling yourself how you “won”.
Wait… wait.. so ppl are actually pointing out to you how cruel, specifically *I* am? 😀
rly? 😀
like do they go “omfg Manboobz was bad before but have you seen this awful Ami chick, she’s like queen bee alpha evil bitch face of doom! she’s like every cheerleader you hated in high school ROLLED INTO ONE! she’s sarah palin, hilary clinton, the borg queen, the T-X and dark phoenix put into a blender w/ a sprinkling of lindsay lohan in for good measure!” ? 😀
like do the MRAs rly point to me and go *POINT* AMI IS THE VILEST OF THE VILE ON THAT SITE AND THAT’S SAYING A LOT!? Have you SEEN her cards!? xD
@Pecunium, yus he’s not rly clicking on our handles to find out about us either xD
tho if i’m being cruel here, it means my entire blog is filled w/ just pure cruelty… so that might be like looking into hell xD.
“Ami Angelwings: Vile Cruel Demon of Evil Cat Land”
I think you need to make another card.
Ami,
tho now I do get it… since even to the feminists here, I’ve been giving hugs and sympathy for trauma they’ve shared.. I’ve apparently been cruel to everybody</i.
Changing the subject, to how you've engaged others, doesn't change shit about how our interaction went down. Why can't you guys stay on point? Is everything a dodge, a lie, or another opportunity to change the subject? Where's Plymouth? Can't tolerate being held to the issues? So, ZOOM, she's gone, baby, gone! You guys have no – NO – integrity.
Pec,
You could have done the same for me. The link is right there on my handle, and that handle is what I use most places.. It links to a lot more details about me than are on your blog.
Did I question your service? Did I suggest you were less than you stated? Then why would I be look you up? You’re back to making no sense, Pec. I really don’t think this is a healthy environment for you:
Like Ami, with her “magic cards,” you guys live a life of delusion.
But, in case you haven’t noticed, I’m really into breaking that shit.
Like Ami, with her “magic cards,” you guys live a life of delusion.
XDDDD
rly? like you’re not being sarcastic right? you believe this? 😀
If so… I want to know more XDDD srsly :3
(& apparently I changed the topic by being on topic XD but then that’s what a CRUEL PERSON DOES XDDDD )
Ami,
“yus he’s not rly clicking on our handles to find out about us either”
Same question to you: why would I? It is the crowd here who claimed I’m all talk, I’m not what I seemed, I’m a bluffer – whatever. I called you liars.
Now that it’s been proven that I’m a real person who stands by his words, you have to look for new angles – anything but admit you’re liars.
Shit, at this point, if I were to look up your profiles, I would have no reason to trust them because you’ve proven yourselves to be such liars here. I, on the other hand, am exactly as I’ve presented myself, and have been for years:
Get used to it.
Dixon: You made assumptions about our lives; Said we didn’t know about violence, etc. Said I wouldn’t be willing to say the things I’d said in real life. Here, I’ll help you out…
Oh – and one more thing – I was thinking about this line again, and I think it explains you perfectly:
““People who talk, are generally more bluff and bluster than actual bully-boys”
In your world, people don’t hit, so of course you can lie, be condescending, irrational, etc. – you have no restraints on your behavior – which is the way you want it. You scream “abuse” at anything that could get in your way.
You didn’t take any time to see if the person (i.e. me) who said that might have some ideas about the things you said weren’t “in [my] world.”
I am asking questions about the things you’ve said. You graduated high school in 1980. You say you graduated from San Francisco City College in ’84. So you are boasting about a 2×6, and talking about how much time you spent “seeing the world”, so your rate, and the time you spent on WesPac, or MedPac is relevant.
Also… I can’t find any references to your being married. Makes me wonder.
You say you’re mother raised you, but your public biographies say were you were taken in by foster parents. I was just wondering which of those two was the one who wasn’t abusing you when she administered beatings, ‘when she felt like it”, with boards and suchlike.
Just trying to put the pieces together.