Categories
antifeminism crackpottery evil women MGTOW misogyny MRA oppressed men the spearhead threats victimhood violence against men/women

Arms and the Men's Rights Movement

Democracy is not a First-Person Shooter

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.

771 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Diogenes The Cynic
Diogenes The Cynic
12 years ago

Princessbonbon “Rambling screed”

Is that how you welcome all newcomers?

Snowy
Snowy
12 years ago

Yeah, I’d say “rambling screed” works pretty well for the kind of newcomer you are, that is to say, a ramblingscreed writing new troll. Care to try commenting on any of the threads that aren’t over a year old? You’ll probably get a little more feedback that way.

hellkell
hellkell
12 years ago

AndrewV: and who the fuck are you again?

Diogenes The Cynic
Diogenes The Cynic
12 years ago

@hellkell

I read the whole thread. CrackEmcee or whatever his name was was a weirdo that didn’t like yoga. Someone kept posting “xd” and I have no idea what that means, and the level of discourse actually dropped when the person (I assume a regular troll here) left.

Snowy
Snowy
12 years ago

Lots of Thomas Ball idolizers here today. Weird.

hellkell
hellkell
12 years ago

Is there some Thomas Ball Day in MRAland, and they thought they’d come to a dead thread to party?

Diogenes The Cynic
Diogenes The Cynic
12 years ago

AndrewV, he was probably a giant jerk that couldn’t let things go.

But then again, it was his perogative to be a jerk. No law against it.

Diogenes The Cynic
Diogenes The Cynic
12 years ago

@Snowy, did I say I idolize him? I just got in here, and already get this. C’mon.

hellkell
hellkell
12 years ago

You’re getting a nicer welcome than most trolls.

Snowy
Snowy
12 years ago

Aww was that mean of me? Here’s an idea, maybe you could leave!

Diogenes The Cynic
Diogenes The Cynic
12 years ago

@Snowy

Don’t be a jerk, and don’t call me a troll. It reflects poorly on you. If there is a thread you want me to cmment on, by all means post a link.

Snowy
Snowy
12 years ago

Uh oh, does it reflects poorly on me to call you a troll? Because you sure sound like a troll. Needless to say I’m heartbroken that a troll called me a jerk. Utterly and completely.

Diogenes The Cynic
Diogenes The Cynic
12 years ago

@Danelian

No, no abuse, but I can empathize. Its not like were a different species.
Ball was probably a jerk, which makes dealing with people socially makes things worse, but social workers shouldn’t be petty tyrants about how they’re talked to.

Being a jerk isn’t smart, but it was within his rights to be one without being punished by the whim of a social worker.

Cliff Pervocracy
12 years ago

Poor Thomas Ball, a victim of the cruel system that says you can’t hit a child and be a jerk and refuse to cooperate with family court and still get custody.

When SHOULD someone lose custody, if not after that? When they, like, EAT a kid?

And he STILL had the chance to go to therapy and try in good faith to get his children back. Instead he chose to make a big dramatic statement that hurt his own children worse than anyone.

He’s no victim of the system.

Amused
12 years ago

The social worker’s responsibility was to ensure the safety of the child — a child, mind you, who had already been deliberately injured once by her father. And so, the social worker was merely doing his job when she wouldn’t let him see his children on the basis of his attitude.

Bottom line, he would not cooperate with the system that gave him numerous chances to do so. He may have had a Constitutional right to be a jerk to the social worker, but when your exercise of your Constitutional rights presents itself as evidence that you may be a danger to your kids, don’t complain that you don’t get to see them. How committed was he to his kids, anyway, if he could not even be bothered to reign in his attitude? Seriously? When you really think about it, his complaint boils down to the “system” not letting him do things his way and on his terms, without requiring any sort of compromise or adjustment on his part. Forgive me if I don’t find that complaint entirely sympathetic.

Shadow
Shadow
12 years ago

I’ll let everyone here draw what they can from the quote to the case of Thomas Ball.

I’m curious, did anyone manage to draw anything from that quote?

Snowy
Snowy
12 years ago

Thomas Ball… is the Frankenstein monster? I really have no idea what Diogenes The Pretentious was trying to say there.

Sharculese
12 years ago

If there is a thread you want me to cmment on, by all means post a link.

there isnt.

thanks.

Sharculese
12 years ago

on a happier note, i think this was like just before i started posting here so i dont think ive seen that thread title before, but nice work david

denelian
12 years ago

my fault for responding to the first guy… sorry 🙁

and not as well as Cliff and everyone else, too. i can never quite make myself believe that someone who isn’t cussing or calling names or whatever is REALLY a troll [and fuck – even the cussing isn’t over the line, considering how much *I* do it]

is it REALLY that hard to spell my name?

denelian
12 years ago

i do have to say – Andrew. thank you for not throwing platitudes. that was actually rather astute of you.
i’ll say this, too – i’m always more upset about a child that can’t be saved than i am by my own past. my past is written, i can’t change it – but if i’m allowed, i could change someone else’s. na da?

AndrewV
12 years ago

@denelian | July 12, 2012 at 12:32 am

Toy Soldiers
For the forgotten men and boys who suffer in silence
http://toysoldier.wordpress.com/

AndrewV
12 years ago

@Diogenes The Cynic | July 11, 2012 at 9:44 pm

“CrackEmcee or whatever his name was was a weirdo”

I did not get that he was any more weird than anyone else here (including me).

What I did think was that he had an issue in that he came here to “win” which is not usually a good idea as far as I can tell. Far better to state your side, hear what the other person has to say, ask for clarification and so on. So, even if both sides agree to disagree, both can win.

The other issue he had was (probably because he came here to win), was that when it was pointed out that Ball had in fact hit his daughter, he refused to (if memory serves) concede the point and address it. Instead, well he kept trying to ignore that inconvenient fact and still tried to “win”.

No one “won” in that exchange as far as I am concerned. The folks here as far as I know, continue to view Ball through their own ideological prism. They probably think they “won”, and in terms of how the argument was set up, they did, no question.

But they also lost big time in my opinion, because while I believe I understand where they are coming from, and the other persons point of view, they do not see where their view was lacking, and at this point, are highly unlikely to.

“Someone kept posting “xd” and I have no idea what that means”

That was probably Ami Angelwings if I remember correctly. A very nice person in my opinion, and someone well worth knowing. As to the others, well they run the full spectrum here, at least they did when I was last here. Some are worth engaging, others not much so.

denelian
12 years ago

that’s already in my feed. or is that what you’re mentioning it?