Recently Kloo2yoo, the founder and longtime moderator of Reddit’s Men’s Rights subreddit, stepped down. The remaining moderator, IgnatiusLoyola, has just announced his successor, a long-time commenter in the subreddit who calls himself AnnArchist. (Despite the female-sounding name, he’s a guy.)
This is an, er, interesting choice, as AnnArchist is a misogynist asshole who thinks that violence against women is hilarious. Indeed, he’s posted in the BeatingWomen subreddit, a thoroughly vile little forum devoted to posting pictures and videos of women being violently assaulted. He says he enjoys this particular subreddit because “I have a sense of humor so I can laugh at it.” Here’s one recent post of his, and another. I don’t know exactly what was in either video, since they’ve both been removed my YouTube, the first for violating the site’s rules against hate speech, the second for its “shocking and disgusting content.” If you look through the comments on these submissions, you may also note that the r/beatingwomen regulars, in addition to being misogynist assholes, are also racist as fuck.
“Welcome AnnArchist,” the_real_misogynist wrote in response to one of these postings, “with posts like that you’ll fit right in here.”
Needless to say, AnnArchist doesn’t find violence by women against men quite so risible.
AnnArchist has also advocated murder (many, many, many times), endorsed vigilantism against a specific young woman, and suggested that false rape accusers should be stoned and/or jailed with the word “liar” tattooed on their faces.
He refers to women as “whores” and “cum dumpsters.” He’s boasted about “persuading” girls to have sex with him after they’ve said “no.” (Meanwhile, he’s said that if he woke up next to a trans woman after being drunkenly “tricked” into sex he would violently assault her.)
Oh, and there’s this bit of wisdom:
If you hyphenate your child’s last name, well its just pathetic. It means the mother was an uncompromising shrew.
I’m sure there are many other vile comments in AnnArchist’s past; these are simply the ones I uncovered with a couple of Reddit searches and by going through his most controversial comments. Indeed, as he himself acknowledges, “there is no limit to the amount of screwed up shit that I’ve posted.”
So why exactly was he picked as a moderator? Is he truly the best that r/mensrights can offer?
Apparently a lot of the r/mensrights regulars think so; most of those who’ve commented so far have praised IgnatiusLoyola’s choice, and have dismissed the critics as “trolls.” (EDITED TO ADD: The tide seems to have turned; there are now more comments up critical of AnnArchist’s promotion to mod, and posts defending Iggy’s decision aee getting some downvotes.)
EDITED TO ADD: Just wanted to highlight one of his comments on the false accuser he was targeting:
I hope she was harassed. Fuck I hope her house was firebombed. Lets be clear, I really will applaud anyone who does anything to her, be it slash her tires or slash her throat.
Here’s the full quote in context. (EDIT: AnnArchist has edited this comment to remove the violent bits. Luckily, someone got a screenshot.)
And here is a comment of his on a specific female judge:
I hope someone kills her.
Catalogue, it’s a very simple question.
A major MRA community has appointed as moderator a guy who laughs at “beating women,” who calls for the death of judges and cops, and who collects dead body pictures.
Do you, personally:
A) Approve
B) Disapprove
I can answer simply: I disapprove.
What’s your answer?
What I really love is that post on his blog– the only one that has any comments, near as I can tell–that states that Dave Futrelle condones rape because he read comments calling for it on someone else’s blog without condemning it on his own blog.
I mean, that’s a powerful way to argue, right? By that logic, my reading about Mohammed Atta last night–without posting a powerful denunciation on my blog–means that I tacitly support the terrorism on 9/11.
This is Catalogue’s standard of proof, folks. If you read it and failed to denounce it, you must be in favor of it.
Oh, and the lone comment that wasn’t from Catalogue himself was from Dave, politely correcting the OP. And now he’s here trying to stir up more traffic. The lengths to which he carries his blog-whoring are really quite pathetic.
I’m just going to go back to Catalogue’s comment here:
“That sub reddit /r/beatingwomen is nothing to do with mens rights, its connected to a comedian that mocks misogny and misognysts.”
Guess what, it has EVERYTHING to do with r/mensrights now!
And trust me, neither A nor B makes you look as bad as twisting yourself in knots not to answer a very simple question. If I were going to make up a parody MRA to make all MRAs look bad, he’d look like you do right now–bobbing and weaving around a question as simple as “do you think ‘beating women’ dude is a good choice to represent your movement?”
Bostonian
The objection that shakespear sister had was how women are victimised by the way the the media handles female on male rape.
She also, until I did a blog entry about here, only ever talk about rape as if it was gendered.
She also depicts DV the same why, so she minimizes abuse and protects abusers.
You are a liar, as usual.
Where is the link to the MRA post opposing rape? of any kind?
Domestic violence? Of any kind at all?
A reasonable link? To an MRA site that is not violent?
Also, I doubt she reads your site.
What about the Feministe link?
You don’t have the human decency to say that cop-murder-cheering dude is a bad choice. And you don’t even have the cojones to come out and say that he’s a good choice.
(I assume you think the latter, and are just too cowardly and mealy-mouthed to come out and say it. Feel free to correct me.)
Catalogue, you are doing a bang-up job representing your movement right now.
Any equivalent of the Womanst Musings link? Opposing all physical discipline as abuse from an MRA perspective?
@Holly – he can’t say it, because feminists will be mean to him and twist his words!
Here is a challenge, someone from manboobz form an argument that doesn’t involve, lies slander or a misandrist trope?
how would that work considering that your response to everything ever is ‘shut up, youre lying’
Kita – Considering how much his lack of words leaves to be twisted, he could hardly do worse.
But he’s too dumb to realize that. Too damn dumb to realize that “I refuse to comment on whether I approve of judge-killing, woman beating, and gore galleries” is, in fact, a comment, and a rather damning one.
Bostonian
You are the proven liar here. You made blatant false accusations about me earlier in the thread which is standard tact for the lying internet bullies here on manboobz. You are debating in bad faith and you are lying scumbag.
I don’t owe you anything, a lying internet bully that supports a movement that openly acts as an abuser lobby accusing the movement that seeks an egalitarian evidence based solution of being an abusers lobby and attaching ever other slanderous, misandrist trope in the book to them has credibility problems.
That’s why you people are among the lowest in the online gender debate. The lies, the double standards, the false allegations the endless misandrist tropes …
And did I mention that I know the word “tropes?”
The only bully here is you.
You are the one who has taken double standards to a new low.
I linked to your own words, and those who read them found the same Abuser’s Lobby rhetoric that I did.
I stand by my words and my links.
You have provided no evidence, no links and no argument.
You are a failure as a human being and as a debater.
You will not even condemn someone who celebrates violence!
You have proven only that I tell the truth.
Bostonian – I don’t want to argue about feminism here. We could, but that’s not even related to the post. It gets very backy-forthy.
I want to hold this guy in the (apparently?) squirmingly miserable debate position of having to (yeeechh) either approve or disapprove of a guy who repeatedly calls for murder and laughs at violence. That’s what the post is about, and I don’t want to give him the chance to argue about other things that he can repeat himself (ABUSERS LOBBY, DID YOU HEAR THAT ONE YET? AN ABUSERS LOBBY!) ad nauseum on without that sense of keen discomfort he feels when asked to actually disapprove of something so controversially feminist as “don’t talk about killing cops and judges.”
Very well, I will accede to your wishes, Holly. I have proven my point many times over. I can let my words and links stand on their own.
Holly
That’s not what you asked me, initially you lied and made out that this mod was chosen by the community and that the community approved. If you approach me in good faith, I will do you the same in return, and if you want to find out about that moderating decision you can just go to the thread and read it for yourself.
I can’t answer about what he has said about violence and so on because I don’t know anything about it except that some of his commentary is offensive, Im assuming that manboobz piece is deceptive too and most of the links dont lead where they say they do.
And, your blog leads to all kinds of misandry and abuse denial, and protection of female abusers, Ive seen your do it yourself, so you aren’t in a position to judging others.
You can see that he is utterly unreasonable though.
That may be why he has not posted any links to reasonable MRA sites.
yknow catalogue its totally reasonable that holly said menrights picked the new editor by a community process by mistake. why do you always immediately jump to the most sinister motive you can imagine?
That’s not what you asked me, initially you lied and made out that this mod was chosen by the community and that the community approved. If you approach me in good faith, I will do you the same in return, and if you want to find out about that moderating decision you can just go to the thread and read it for yourself.
Okay, well, I’m asking you now:
Do you approve or disapprove of the choice of AnnArchist as a moderator? You don’t have to answer my earlier question if you think it was dishonestly worded; just answer this one.
I can’t answer about what he has said about violence and so on because I don’t know anything about it except that some of his commentary is offensive,
Does it offend you? You can answer that.
Im assuming that manboobz piece is deceptive too and most of the links dont lead where they say they do.
Haha, seriously? Click on them yourself.
And, your blog leads to all kinds of misandry and abuse denial, and protection of female abusers, Ive seen your do it yourself, so you aren’t in a position to judging others.
I confess I don’t read every blog on my blog roll every day. But I sure as hell read what *I* write, so would you link me to where I’m practicing misandry and abuse denial?
Catalogue, you wrote ‘“What ever I say, I am pro rape and abuse because thats how the manboobz people roll, false allegations, slander, misandrist tropes. Thats why you are among the lowest in the on line debate.’ This strongly suggests that you are opposed to abuse. Would I therefore be correct in assuming that you do not support the appointment of a moderator to the Men’s Rights Subreddit who advocates abuse?
Sharclues
“yknow catalogue its totally reasonable that holly said menrights picked the new editor by a community process by mistake. why do you always immediately jump to the most sinister motive you can imagine?”
Because Manboobz is about using deceptive means to smearing the men’s movement with misandrist tropes.
One mod chosing another mod and many in the community disagreeing is turned into “the whole community chose the mod, therefore they all agree, therefore they are all violent”.
That’s why you are among the lowest in the debate and someone like me would jump the the conclusion that one is lying, because that what manboobz is all about. Telling lies to stereotype the entire mens movement using misandrist tropes.
Holly, you probably once read something that smacked of misandry and abuse denial without immediately denouncing it on your blog, so therefore, by his logic, you at least tacitly approve.
If course, Catalog has no doubt read my comments calling him a sloppy troll and, essentially, an idiot, without immediately denouncing these comments, so…he must agree with me. Whee! This is fun!