Here’s the entirety of a recent post by an MRA who calls himself Snark:
Uh, dude, I think you’ve confused “feminists” with “Daleks.”
Our new friend Fidelbogen thought this was such a brilliant idea he devoted a post to it himself, declaring:
Such economy, such concision. …
Really now, we wouldn’t go far wrong to make our rhetoric revolve around this above all, and very little more. The saying is deceptively simple, for it goes deep and reaches into many corners.
It puts them on the spot, and nails them there.
I knew Fidelbogen was a bit of a pompous doofus, but this is a whole new level of stupidity for him. I don’t even know what to say about something this idiotic.
Also, check out the comments to Snark’s piece. There’s something about potatoes you kind of have to see to believe.
Weapons of mash destruction… potato salad made from veterans… spud guns… this thread was making my day until Toysoldier’s slap of reality. He makes a valid point. The majority of child sexual abuse takes place within the home. Of that 30% is perpetrated by females. There is an even larger percentage of mothers who, like Oprah’s, isolate a child and allow abuse to occur. It took Oprah until her last show to mention her own mother locked her out of the house when she came to stay, after the grandmother who raised her fell ill. Sometimes the rape begins with mom. These are domestic violence issues that just don’t register to feminists. Mums the word (pun intended).I hear feminist silence as tacit approval of maternal domestic violence. It’s a big reason why, according to the Center for Disease Control, American women kill more of their own children than any other mothers in the industrialized world. A 25% increase since 1985, which coincides with the feminist politicalization of domestic violence to define “women & girls” as sole victims and the inherent evil of “the patriarchy ” as the reason why.
So let’s analyze Toysoldier’s argument here: if his aunt had been an anti-feminist instead, she would believe herself inferior to males and therefore would not abuse them. It’s the feminist idea that she is as good as a man and should be entitled to civil rights that somehow made Toysoldier’s aunt an abuser. Why? Because abuse is a male prerogative? Anyway, I confess I do not have statistics on this, but my personal impression is that it is exactly the opposite. People who believe themselves socially inferior also tend to feel less moral responsibility towards those who are socially superior.
On the other hand, we’ve seen plenty of evidence that the MRM condones, or at the very least turns a blind eye to rape, sexual abuse, and sexual exploitation of female minors by men.
Toysoldier is a liar and a coward as well. I would be shocked, but he is an MRA apologist, so it fits with the rest of his garbage philosophy.
If anyone is turning “a blind eye to rape, sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of female minors” it’s the followers of Eve Ensler and the Vagina Monologues. In the monologue the “Little Coochi Snorcher that Could” a 13 yr. old girl plied with alcohol and seduced by a 26 yr. old woman. It ended with the line “if that was rape it was good rape.” After complaints the girls age was later changed to 16. Perhaps Oprah actually read the “Monologues” and is the reason she was one of 11 out of 17 headline acts not to show up at the 2008 10th Anniverary Convention in New Orleans. 11 out of 17…that’s alot.
Toysoldier:
and
and
You can’t say that your aunt’s actions (like child rape) were caused endorsed/prompted/informed by feminism, and then claim you never said feminism supports child rape.
If you say feminism made her do it, than you are, in fact, implying that feminism makes people rape children.
If you want to object and say “No, I only implied that feminism made my aunt rape a child, not that it made people in general rape childrenl!” then maybe it has less to do with feminism and more with your aunt being a sick and abusive individual.
Because feminism is against violence and abuse of any kind, no matter which genders are involved.
The problem is that, if the MRM is “absolutely about treating people of all sexes and genders with respect”, they…aren’t very good at showing it, to put it mildly.
I, once again, refer you to my reply here, were I provided you with links from this very blog.
I also recommend reading the comments on the first entry I linked there. They are…enlightening.
You know Toysoldier, I kinda get where you are coming from.
Your aunt did a horrible thing to you, and she claimed it was in the name of feminism.
So of course you would think that an antifeminist movement like the MRM must be good, right? Because she hurt you, and she used feminism as a pretence, you probably associate feminism with hurt and bad things.
If feminism is bad, the MRAs have to be the good guys, right?
Is that why you try to tell yourself that the MRM is good, and against violence of every form, and for equality, despite the contrary evidence?
Because if the MRM is bad too, you don’t know who you can turn to?
As said, I can kind of understand you. I still think that you are wrong, and that I find it very sad that you support such a hateful movement.
Especially because it’s a movement that, again and again, displayed how little they respect survivors of abuse and rape.
The cognitive dissonance of the average user here most be physically painful, and possibly growing out in a visible lump.
Check your heads.
Ugh, reading Toysoldiers entry, I think I probably cut him too much slack, especially since he links to the False Rape Society blog.
Liar and coward indeed.
I have seen Toysoldier around other sites before, he argues in bad faith and tries to derail conversations about rape and abuse into condemning feminism. He claims to not be an MRA, but defends them to everyone.
He celebrates hate and rejoices in the rape and abuse of women, because he claims he was abused by a woman.
He is nothing but a liar and a coward.
Cut no slack for the liar.
Why have my posts been “awaiting moderation” for the past three hours? Especially since the comments are themselves quite “moderate.”
People throughout the two American continents, rather than just in the United States of America. Specifically, Catholics throughout both American continents, where I said it.
revapin, new people are moderated here.
ToySoldier’s capacity for misrepresentarion does not surprise me. Here’s an example in which he turns “not meeting my needs is a dealbreaker” into “respecting boundaries is her dealbreaker” presto change-o, right before your very eyes:
http://toysoldier.wordpress.com/2011/08/08/sex-sexism-boundaries-and-coercion
He’s a magic man.
Why does my ipod’s autocorrect turn revspin into revapin? Is that even a word? Better yet, it turns revapin into revspin now, too.
revspinnaker, your comments were in moderation for several hours because:
1) All comments by first-time commenters here are held until I approve them.
2) I was asleep. I do not monitor my website 24/7.
They are all up now.
Moewicus: If everything we know about child abuse shows that it has little to do with the ideas people hold, would that imply that “patriarchy” does not cause or contribute to abuse since it too is an ideology? My aunt believes that men perpetuate an oppressive system that leads to violence against women, the same as any other feminist. However, that is pretty hateful view of men, and a person who thinks that might become violent. On that note, I do not mind Rutee projecting her anger against men’s activists on me, but if she hates me that much it should please her to know someone shares her views.
Rutee Katreya: I do enjoy these kinds of discussions because it reveals how feminists think. I said my feminist aunt hurt me using feminism, and the feminist response was “That’s not feminism”, even though I never said it was. I find the immediate defensiveness and straw man arguments curious. Is it really that difficult to believe that feminist views might lead to violence against males? And I am sure you know a lot about shitty people.
Pecunium: Actually, the argument that my aunt cannot be a feminist because no feminist commits child abuse is a no true scotsman fallacy. Breivik does not identify as a men’s rights activist, and only feminists claim he shares their views, so there is no fallacy in pointing out that distinction.
Bagelsan: A good example of a feminist view that can lead to violence is the view that women are under constant threat of rape because all men are potential rapists. That paranoid view could cause a woman become violent towards men who approaches her. Many ideologies are universally and explicitly opposed to violence, and yet have had led people to violence, particularly political ideologies and religions.
Amused: Is it possible that if Scott Roeder were a pro-abortion atheist that George Tiller would be alive? If yes, then would that not suggest that Roeder’s anti-abortion Christian ideology played a role in his actions? It is curious that you claim that “people who believe themselves socially inferior also tend to feel less moral responsibility towards those who are socially superior” because that aptly describes the general feminist view about women.
Kollege Messerschmitt: Unlike feminists, I do not hold to “us versus them” dichotomies. Feminists do not show their desire for equality either. As for the other matter, I can claim I never said feminism supports child rape because I never said it did or that my aunt thinks it does. The proper question to ask is in what way feminism caused her behavior, to which I would answer that as a result of feminism, my aunt developed anti-male views and chose to proactively fight “patriarchy” by correcting her nephews. The difference between her and other feminists is only her methods.
Bostonian: I love the hypocrisy of feminists claiming they support and believe all victims of sexual abuse as they deny my abuse occurred. That hypocrisy, contrary to what Holly thinks, is why I do not support feminism. Thanks for demonstrating ye tagain how little feminists respect male survivors.
[i]ACK[/i]
ACK
Um, Toysoldier… I said my feminist aunt hurt me using feminism, and the feminist response was “That’s not feminism”, even though I never said it was.
Come on. Let’s not lob them softballs.
Thanks David. I must have posted here before because my screen name and icon popped right up. I guess it’s been a while. Moewicus, I guess we all put our own spin on things. I read the “dealbreaker” article and was suprised by the shear volume of responses. All of a sudden the politics of oral sex is a huge feminist issue. You may recall in my comments at the Toysoldier link you provided. I managed to change the subject the best I could to maternal child abuse and got Toysoldier to confide about his childhood rape. That’s not an easy thing to do and I commend him for it. And I agree with him that feminist influences have silenced the male perspective of child abuse, by leaving boys as victims and women as abusers completely out of discussions of domestic violence.
I respect male survivors. I do not respect people who lie and misrepresent people at every opportunity.
You are a known liar. You even lied in your post about this post. Everything you say is suspect because of that.
Actually, revspin, if you had entered your name and gravatar on any other WordPress blog, it would show up here automatically.
You say that your feminist aunt hurt you using feminism.
You also say that you never claimed her abuse was feminism.
Do you not see a contradiction between these statements?
ToySoldier, patriarchy is what enables abuse, not what causes it. Furthermore the proposition that your aunt did not sexually abuse you because of feminism is not the same as the proposition that feminism does not lead to excesses. I think every ideology has lead to excesses, including feminism. You think you have feminists in a double bind, but you are referencing a Straw Feminism of your own creation:
You are charging at windmills.
Ever heard of David K. Meller?
This crap is why I say you still need lots of therapy. You do not realize how messed up your aunt truly is.
Toysoldier:
No, he doesn’t identify himself as such, and I don’t think anyone here has labeled him an MRA.. But many of his views are indeed shared by many MRAs, and some MRAs have explicitly endorsed his views:
http://manboobz.com/2011/07/28/peter-nolan-anders-breivik/
http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2011/07/global-echo-of-violent-misogyny.html
Other MRAs have offered justifications for violence:
http://manboobz.com/2011/08/02/angry-harry-violence-is-justified-but-dont-blame-us-for-it/
revspinnaker, if you post from a different IP address, you’re counted as a new commenter, so maybe that’s what happened.