Categories
bad boys beta males evil women misogyny nice guys rape rapey reddit

Nice Guy Redux: If you’d gone out with me, you wouldn’t have gotten raped.

The contest for the Most Ironic Use of the Term “Nice Guy,” When Applied to Yourself –otherwise known as the MIUTNGWAY Award – is heating up. The previous front runner – the Tumblr guy who compared his inability to get laid to the Holocaust – now faces a serious challenge from a Redditor calling himself DogmaDog.

The other day Mr. Dog wandered into a discussion of the SlutWalks in the Feminisms and offered his two cents: he declared them “stupid,” and suggested that they won’t really help victims.

And then he started in on his own tale of woe.

I know I’m going to be shit on for saying what I’m about to say, but please hear me out.

Not a promising start, Dog.

I’ve never raped a woman, and I’m the ‘nice guy’ who never took advantage of a woman.

Do you want an award for this?

But a girl I was infatuated with in high school blew me off and treated me disrespectfully. She ended up being raped one night, while intoxicated. I do not know how I am supposed to feel about it.

As Don Draper would say, “what?”

How do you think you’re “supposed” to feel? Did you accidentally dislodge the part of your brain responsible for basic human empathy?

Apparently, the answer to that is “yes.”

[H]ow do you suppose I am supposed to feel about this woman I knew who got raped? I mean, I’ve never taken advantage of a woman, but I don’t understand how my ‘friend’, this girl I went to high school with, could go out and party all the time, and in turn treat me, her classmate, as though I were an inferior person for not enjoying the atmosphere of drunkenness at high school parties.

As it turns out, you’re an inferior person for an entirely different reason.

That girl was a mean girl, no? And by being disrespectful toward men, and prejudiced toward men, wasn’t she asking men to behave badly toward her? The only men she gave attention and physical affection to were the ones who hurt her back.

So let me see if I get this: she didn’t go out with you, a “nice guy,” so she was therefore “asking” to be raped?

Naturally, this being the Feminisms subreddit, and not The Spearhead, some of the regular commenters took exception to Mr. Dog’s victim-blaming and his complete lack of empathy for the victim – especially strange, since Dog, who says he is suffering from an (unspecified) mental illness, considers himself “a victim, in my own way,” of prejudice towards those with mental health issues. This experience, alas, has not given him any sympathy towards other vicitms.

Indeed, it seems that DogmaDog didn’t misplace his sense of empathy after all; rather, he threw it out of the house and got a restraining order against it. Responding to someone who suggested he show a little empathy, Dog lashed out:

Your empathy can go suck a dick. Empathy does nothing to help my situation. I suppose that is just the excuse people give themselves so that they can feel like they are actually doing something.

You basically called me an inferior human being because I can’t or won’t empathize for my friend who was raped. Well, ask yourself this, smart-ass, have you ever really wondered what good your empathy does? It does nothing. …

In reality, you are doing nothing but attacking me, and I may or may not have a ‘complex’, even though I don’t know what that is, but I can guarantee you, I HAVE NEVER RAPED ANYONE!!!

The sound you hear is me banging my head, ever so softly, on my desk. Empathy is what connects human beings to one another, what allows them to understand one another on a deep level.

When people are suffering – as you are, Dog, in dealing with your mental illness – a little bit of empathy from someone else can make all the difference in the world.

If you can’t feel even a little bit of sympathy for this woman you were once “infatuated” with, you’re not a nice guy at all; you’re an even bigger asshole than those drunken high school partiers you disdain.  You may never have raped anyone — as you’ve repeatedly insisted, as if this should win you a prize – but “in your own way” you’re thinking like an abuser. Your lack of empathy for the victim, your continued bitterness towards her for turning you down, your sense of wounded narcissism; none of this is healthy, for you or for anyone who comes into contact with you.

You need help, dude. Please, please get it.

455 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Rutee
Rutee
13 years ago

“THOMAS JAMES BALL. Remember him? You guys made great sport of him here. He is a nut, you claim. Certifiable. Typical MRA.”

Actually, he was a devoted father of three kids who paid child support FOR TEN YEARS before losing his job in 2009 (along with half of the nation). He worked at a Ford dealership, see, and autos were not selling very well. I guess that is what courts call SLOTH. Anyway, he was scheduled to begin his incarceration on June 16, so he burned himself alive instead.”
You guys just invented a nice narrative wholesale, didn’t you?

He hit his wife. Child Support had fuck-all to do with it, you stupid git.

hellkell
hellkell
13 years ago

Aaaaaaaaaaaaand Godwin.

Rutee
Rutee
13 years ago

“He hit his kid, drew blood and refused to go to one lousy counseling session. That is why he was not allowed to see his kid. He did not go to jail, and would not have had he filed his unemployment status.”
Wait, it was his KID? I saw the name and thought wife… holy shit, and this is the guy an MRI (They’re not activists; they’re idiots) wants to defend as being a ‘good father’, who didn’t fucking deserve prison?

Bostonian
Bostonian
13 years ago

Rutee,

Yup Thomas Ball hit his little girl hard enough to draw blood and scare his wife into calling the police.
That is from his own rant.

Zarat, you are even nuttier than I thought.

Good Day to you.

Anthony Zarat
13 years ago

@Futrelle, you are right, I did not find it either. However, there is a recent post:

“British Judges Free Child Rapists, Say 12-Year-Old Girls “Wanted” Sex”

July 22, 2011

The cliff notes version is still there, under AntZ. Why do you care? Guns and sex, nothing special. I learned long ago that nobody has a story that matters. The only story that matters is the story that unfolds in the halls of congress and on the marble floor of our courts. The evil that is embedded in our court system and legal system echoes through millions of lives, taking a toll that no single person can comprehend.

THAT is why I am here. Why can’t even one person admit the obvious?That sending fathers to prison for falling behind on support is an unspeakable crime, and that feminists MUST STOP THIS CAMPAIGN?!?

Magpie
Magpie
13 years ago

Never met a bloke who went to jail for non-payment. Have met a bloke who claimed the dole and worked cash-in-hand so he only had to give each child $5 per fortnight.

captainbathrobe
13 years ago

Filing forms in court = just like Nazi Germany.

Houston, we have a Godwin.

Bee
Bee
13 years ago

AntZ:

IQs seem to drop around here when facts are presented. Again, A DIRECT QUOTE FROM THE LAW ITSELF:

“It is just as much a violation of the CSRA [Child Support Recovery Act] for a non-custodial parent to fail to pay child support where his refusal to work is motivated by sloth, a change of lifestyles or pursuit of new career objectives. For most people, bringing children into the world does limit life choices by imposing certain long-term financial obligations.”

Ability to pay has NOTHING to do with incarceration. Fathers are locked up when they lose employment, because the man-hating family courts simply call it “sloth”. Can you believe it? These femi-fascists claim that a father would face prison, violence, and brutal rape because of SLOTH. How can ANY OF YOU LIVE WITH YOURSELVES?!?

So, what you’re quoting is a 9th Circuit opinion from 1999 (US v. Ballek). Still a valid interpretation of the act (presumably — I’m not gonna log onto Wexis to Shepardize it), although (from what Lord Google tells me) it seems that courts and investigators are likely to divide non-paying non-custodial parents into “can’t pays” and “won’t pays.” Sloth refers to someone who won’t pay; not someone who can’t. If a parent can show that xie’s been looking for a job and remains unemployed, the state will put xir into a job search program — not prison.

From what I remember about Ball’s letter, he didn’t request support modification.

Anthony Zarat
13 years ago

“Also, we never made “sport” of Ball. We simply didn’t treat him as a martyr.

Ball’s manifesto suggested that men should start firebombing courthouses and police stations. Do you agree with him? How does his explicit advocacy of terrorism affect how you feel about him?”

Agree with him? God no. He said stupid things, no doubt. Fact remains (1) he was scheduled to begin prison time for late child support on the last Friday before fathers day, (2) he burned himself instead. The DV that he committed, and admitted to, was TEN YEARS EARLIER. It has nothing to do with his court appearances. He was found not guilty, by the way, and if he wanted to, he could have left that part out and nobody would be the wiser. Given that the only evidence that exists of any DV by Ball is his own words, I think we can agree that it was a single tragic mistake, that he made (and admitted making).

This was not a serial abuser or a violent man. He made a mistake, was found not guilty, and for TEN YEARS paid his child support and supported his family. Then, he lost his job. THAT is when the story begins, from the MRA perspective. The life that Ball lived before losing his job is NOT our concern. After losing his job, he was DENIED A MODIFICATION many times, and eventually ordered to prison.

Ball chose to burn himself alive, two days before his sentencing date. We will never know if he would have been sentenced to 5 years or 5 months — or even given a chance and set free. Not likely, given the current anti-male political climate, but a possibility.

The “Pendragon” article that was cited here asserted that Ball killed himself as a form of dominance/control of his ex-wife, a bold faced lie that is easy to debunk by even the most cursory examination of the facts. The 10 year gap certainly suggests that this man had long forgotten his ex wife. His “manifesto”, twisted as it is in places, hardly mentions his ex wife, and in fact generally excuses her as the only non-guilty party in the whole affair.

princessbonbon
13 years ago

Actually the case I cited talked about a man who went to jail for a year for failure to pay. The Court ruled that there should be efforts made (but not to the level of providing an attorney) to ensure due process is followed. This was a MRA dream case where the noncustodial parents now will have more efforts extended to make sure that they are not incarcerated willynilly by having them have their income records reviewed and procedures explained.

But since theMRAs could care less about the issue, there is little recognition of this fact.

Anthony Zarat
13 years ago

“Never met a bloke who went to jail for non-payment. Have met a bloke who claimed the dole and worked cash-in-hand so he only had to give each child $5 per fortnight.”

Well, that settles it.

If the law is never applied, why even have it? This issue is counter productive for the feminist movement. It is absurd, easy to attack, and exposes feminism as a hate movement. Why not stop? It does NOBODY any good to put fathers in prison for inability to pay, sloth, or any other reason. The level of obstinance here is remarkable. Not one person will come out and say the obvious, “we got this one wrong, we should stop this campaign and return to the previous model of a few weeks (not years) in jail (not prison) for a misdemeanor (not felony) crime of failure to pay child support.” Even that would be wrong, all debtors prisons are wrong, but at least it would not be a horifying crime against humanity.

Having more reasonable positions that ACTUALLY HELP WOMEN, instead of naked hatred of men and boys, would make feminism an immensely more powerful movement. Why this obstinate need to punish, imprison, torture, violate, dehumanize, and humiliate? Why the hate, the violence? It is pointless, it helps nobody, it is simply a mistake. Quite frankly, as an MRA I should LET YOU continue with this madness, it brings the troops straight to my doorstep. But, I still hope for a better day when this war ends, and man and women can discuss issues as equals.

PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth

It would help if you stop accusing feminists of things they have never done AZ.

VoiP
VoiP
13 years ago

Anthony Zarat:

You are either in favor of fathers being sentenced to hard prison time for being late on child support, or not. If you are in favor, you must accept all that this policy means in terms of tax payer expense, loss of income to the mother, and the unspeakable horrors that you are sentencing a father to experience due loss of employment that may be (you say)/probably is (I say) outside of his control
If you are against this practice, I am not sure how you can call yourself a feminist.
If you are in favor of this practice, I am not sure how you can call yourself human

No man would go to prison if he has the ability to pay. In practice, EVERY MAN WHO IS THROWN IN PRISON UNDER THESE LAWES IS INDIGENT.
Feminists cannot clean their hands of this blood with such sophistry. Not while MRAs still breath, to tell the story of the horrors that your hatred is heaping upon the innocent.

How can ANY OF YOU LIVE WITH YOURSELVES?!?

So, how would you change the status quo? I already asked you, and my questions were these:

Assume that you suddenly get dictatorial control over the US, or at least a small part of it. You can get rid of all the lawes you hate. As far as child support is concerned, you can make your perfect world, your Republic.

1. Who keeps the children when the parents split up? Is there a competence test, where the kids go to whoever is determined to be a better parent, or does the father get custody in all cases?

2. If the latter, why should the father always get custody? I mean, you say feminists hate fathers more or less automatically, but I want to hear your case for why we should like them.

3. How would you ensure that children whose parents split up are fed and supported? What if the parent they live with makes less money than the non-custodial parent?

Until you give me some constructive ideas for what you would do to change what you’re railing against, I’m going to assume you actually don’t care and are just interested in shrieking and hollering.

Bee
Bee
13 years ago

After losing his job, he was DENIED A MODIFICATION many times

Just curious. Where did you see this? I reread the letter (for the nth time), and although I may have missed it (it’s very long), I don’t see anything about modification.

I also didn’t see anything about the denied modifications in the local news stories about the incident. I also didn’t get anything googling. I’ll keep trying though.

I did see that he said he could have borrowed the $2-3K share of his children’s medical expenses (to reimburse his ex-wife for what she had already paid) and avoided jail, but he didn’t.

Unimaginative
Unimaginative
13 years ago

A little off-topic, and very late, but I think it’s important: men can and do get breast cancer.

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/male-breast-cancer/DS00661

Partially because they assume only women get it, they ignore signs and symptoms often until it’s too late to be effectively treated.

Men, check your lumps.

Hippodameia
Hippodameia
13 years ago

“Until you give me some constructive ideas for what you would do to change what you’re railing against, I’m going to assume you actually don’t care and are just interested in shrieking and hollering.”

I think that’s a very safe assumption to make.

Captain Bathrobe
Captain Bathrobe
13 years ago

Yeah, I’m going to go out on a limb and state that Thomas Ball is not exactly a credit to your movement. Representative, perhaps, but certainly not a credit.

Magpie
Magpie
13 years ago

(I have very little idea what this means in real life, because it’s in legal terms, but I guess it is a bit of information.)

Contempt of court

Part VII Division 13A of the Family Law Act provides sanctions for contravention of orders made under that Act. In particular, a court can imprison a person who contravenes a parenting order for child maintenance by not paying child maintenance.

If a court ordered liability is not registered with CSA for collection and remains enforceable by the payee, contravention of the order may lead to the imposition of sanctions under the Family Law Act, including imprisonment.

However, the law allowing for imprisonment for contravention of a court order does not apply to a person simply because they have not paid child maintenance to CSA in accordance with registered liabilities. Where a court ordered liability is registered with CSA, a failure to pay the registered liability does not amount to a contravention of the order. Therefore, a person cannot be imprisoned because of failure to pay amounts which arise under a child support liability which is registered for collection.

A liability that is registered with CSA for collection will cease to be enforceable by CSA if the payee makes an election under section 38A to have the liability and/or arrears no longer enforced. If the payer fails to pay either the current liability or the arrears to the payee directly, that failure may amount to contravention of the court order. This may make the payer liable to imprisonment or other sanction, if the contravention was wilful.

If, after court enforcement action by CSA, a liable parent breaches the court order for payment, an action for contempt may be an option open to CSA.

Captain Bathrobe
Captain Bathrobe
13 years ago

Anthony, you yourself are being quite obstinate. You continue to insist that jailing people for failure to pay child support is routine practice, when, in fact, it is normally reserved for the most egregious of cases of willful failure to pay. It’s obvious that no amount of evidence will convince you otherwise.

FWIW, I’m against jailing people for failure to pay child support in all but the most egregious circumstances. In other words, my beliefs are generally in keeping with current law and practice. If you can prove that paupers are, as a matter of practice, routinely jailed for failure to pay–due to no fault of their own–then I might reconsider. But as long as you keep flinging Nazi Germany references, grossly exaggerating the length of sentences (you earlier said “decades” even though the Rhode Island law you cited carries a maximum sentence of 5 years), and making stupid false dichotomies (“either you agree with me or you are inhuman”), I will find you impossible to take seriously.

tatjna
tatjna
13 years ago

@Anthony Zarat “Having more reasonable positions that ACTUALLY HELP WOMEN, instead of naked hatred of men and boys, would make feminism an immensely more powerful movement.”

What exactly are you proposing here? I’d love to know how you would ACTUALLY HELP ME.

Signed – a woman who is owed several thousand dollars in child support and lives in a country where the father will not be jailed for non-payment.

For the record, I don’t believe non-paying parents should be sent to prison, because they can’t pay from prison either and frankly I think there are already too many people in prison who shouldn’t be there. I’m also a feminist, much as you’d like to think that isn’t possible. So, what’s your solution?

shaenon
13 years ago

Dammit, sheeple, THEY HAD PAPERWORK IN NAZI GERMANY!

We are through the looking glass!

Captain Bathrobe
Captain Bathrobe
13 years ago

The Nazis had pieces of flair that the made the Jews wear.

Captain Bathrobe
Captain Bathrobe
13 years ago

Or “they” for the literate among us, of which I apparently am not one.

cynickal
cynickal
13 years ago

@NWA

Sounds like another feminist not seeing someone as human, yet they love to throw the ,”not seeing women as human” in everyones faces.

“I know you are, but what am I?”
Seriously, dude?

@David (Do you prefer David or Dave?) Can we get a better class of trolls than a PeeWee Herman knock-off?

Magpie
Magpie
13 years ago

Well, that was fun. Just been looking at Family Court judgements. The only case where someone went to jail that I came across was a custodial mother for breaching parenting orders (16 days).

There was one where the father appealed against running up a child support debt while he was in prison. What was he convicted of, you ask? Soliciting to murder the payee!

1 6 7 8 9 10 19