A Voice for Men, one of the most influential and popular Men’s Rights websites, is now offering a $1000 “bounty” for anyone able to track down the personal information of several Swedish women involved in a tasteless video advertising a theater production based on Valarie Solanas’ SCUM manifesto. As the anonymous poster calling himself John the Other – the second-in-command at AVfM – put it in a posting yesterday (emphasis in original):
We are asking for the full legal names, home addresses, places of employment, email addresses and contact phone numbers of the women and man who produced and starred in the video described above. We will pay 1000 dollars to any individual who provides and confirms this information, to be paid either directly to themselves or to a charity of their choice.
John explains that this information will be posted on the AVfM-affiliated site Register-Her.com, an “offenders database” that is being used to vilify individual feminists and “Fuck Their Shit Up,” as AVfM head honcho Paul Elam likes to put it. John notes that Regsiter-Her.com also intends to post the “government identification numbers [and] drivers licences” of the women they are able to identify.
John admits plainly that posting such information may put the physical safety of these women at risk from vigilante violence. As he puts it (emphasis mine):
Some individuals may criticize the intent to publish not only names, but also addresses, phone numbers, employers and other personal information – on the grounds that such exposure create a risk of retributive violence against individuals who openly advocate murder based on sex. It is the considered position of the editorial board of AVfM that any such risks are out-weighed by the ongoing hazard to the public of these individuals continuing to operate in anonymity.
The comments posted on the article at AVfM suggest that such “retributive” violence is a real possibility. Indeed, here’s the very first comment (which currently has 17 upvotes from readers of the site):
A commenter called Xnomolos, in another upvoted comment, adds:
i would love to hunt down these women myself.
JinnBottle responds to this comment by advising “all men to start carrying guns.”
The commenters on AVfM have already uncovered the identities of all of the women involved in the video. The blogger Fidelbogen has been the most active internet detective so far.
There is no question that the video itself is offensive, and designed to provoke. You can see it here; I’m not going to embed it on this site. If you don’t want to watch it: it depicts a young woman shooting a man in the head for no reason. Afterwards the woman and her gleeful, giggling accomplices do a victory dance, then lick the blood from the dead man’s head. A message at the end urges viewers to “Do Your Part.”
Every feminist I know who has seen the video has been appalled by it. I’m appalled by it. It’s hateful, and it’s wrong.
But John the Other, and the other commenters on AVfM, claim that it is more than this: that that the video of the staged murder, intended to provide publicity for a theater production based on Solanas’ notorious SCUM manifesto, is quite literally an open call for the murder of men. As John the Other puts it:
Open advocation of murder cannot be allowed in a civil society, without that society devolving into a culture of brutal violence.
Evidently he has no problem with, or has somehow not noticed, the comments on AVfM fantasizing about shooting and killing the women involved in the video.
Is the video a literal call to murder? Is it, as one AVfM commenter puts it, evidence of a “conspiracy to commit mass murder?” No. Violence and murder have been dramatized in the theater since its beginnings. No one accuses Sophocles of advocating fratricide and incest, though both are dealt with in his play Oedipus Rex. No one accuses Shakespeare of advocating mass murder, though many of his most famous plays have body counts that put many horror films to shame.
Does the tag line at the end of the video – “do your part” – transform the video from a depiction of murder into an open call for it? No. The “threat,” such as it is, is vague; it’s not aimed at any specific individuals. It might be seen as akin to someone wearing a t-shirt that says “kill ‘em all, let God sort them out” – tasteless and offensive, but not a literal threat. “Kill ‘Em All” is actually the name of Metallica’s first album. While a lot of people see James Hetfield, Lars Ulrich et al as pompous idiots, they have not been jailed for conspiracy to commit mass murder. That would be ridiculous.
Someone claiming to have been involved in the SCUM-inspired theatrical production in question has posted several detailed comments on AVfM, explaining that those involved in the production are “not out to get you” and that the video itself was “meant as a viral “wtf?!” to give attention to both the questions that it raises and the play itself.”
By contrast, AVfM is targeting specific individuals, and intends to offer information that would allow anyone intent on doing them harm to quite literally track them to their homes and workplaces. Those fantasizing about killing these woman are not simply making a joke along the lines of “women, can’t live with ‘em; can’t kill ‘em.” They are fantasizing about killing real people, and providing would-be evil-doers maps to their doors.
AVfM is an American site, in English; these specific women live in Sweden. While it is a real possibility, it seems unlikely that anyone reading the site will literally find and murder any of those involved in the SCUM production. At least I hope that this does not come to pass.
I don’t believe that either Paul Elam or John the Other literally wants any feminist to be killed. The real intent behind AVfM’s publishing people’s personal information, it seems clear, is to intimidate feminist writers and activists into shutting up, to make clear that if they post something that offends the internet vigilantes at AVfM they will face the possibility of some deranged individual quite literally showing up at their door intent on doing them harm.
Paul Elam and John the Other claim that they’re not advocating violence. But they are playing a dangerous game here. If some deranged individual, inspired by the hyperbolic anti-feminist rhetoric on AVfM, and armed with information provided by “Register-Her.com,” murders or otherwise harms a feminist blogger or activist or video maker, Elam and his enablers will have blood on their hands. As will those MRAs who continue to publicly support and/or link to AVfM and/or Register-Her.com.
This is not the way a legitimate rights group deals with those who disagree with them. This is what hate groups do.
@Polliwog ‘Also, how did you, personally, manage to be so ignorant as to be completely unaware that sex-based selection of male over female babies is a major issue worldwide?’
China and India are hardly the world and any imbalance created will naturally repair itself.
Even leaving out the fact that China and India are a pretty damn huge portion of the world, and make up something like a third or more of the world’s population between the two of them, even leaving out that you apparently didn’t do more than skim my post either, seeing as it explicitly refers to “similar gender discrimination and gendercide in Congo, Kenya, Pakistan, Iraq, Bahrain, Thailand and many other developing countries,” even leaving out the total silliness of claiming that an ongoing problem will somehow “naturally repair itself” without anything being done to stop it in the first place, your claim was that the preference for male children “isn’t really an issue.” Heck, forget all the other problems it causes – let’s just focus on the bit where hundreds of thousands of little girls are left to die because of bias against female children. Are you seriously going to maintain something which leads to the death of thousands of children “isn’t really an issue”? Or are you going to have the basic decency to back down and admit that maybe you kind of put your foot in it on this point?
Again I’m an ‘idiot’ who says ‘moronic’ things and ‘manage to be so ignorant as to be completely unaware that sex-based selection of male over female babies is a major issue worldwide?’, ad hominen attacks are hardly condussive to a discussion, someone asked for examples of misandry from this decade. I linked some and was insulted for my efforts, I’m sorry that nothing I found from casual joke websites, forced father hood, or indeed genocide was as interesting or outrageous to you as avfm posting personal details.
Sigh. An “ad hominem” argument is not “anything unflattering said about you.” It has a very specific meaning – one must be using an insult to you as an excuse to invalidate your argument, rather than addressing the argument itself. So, for example, “You’re wrong, because you’re a moron and everything morons say is wrong” is an ad hominem. “You’re a moron, because you don’t know basic facts about the topic you’re trying to discuss” is not. “Your argument is moronic, and here’s why, and also you really don’t know what you’re talking about” is very definitely not. You can object to being told that your argument is moronic if you like, but you’d be a lot better off responding to that by trying to make a better argument than by trying to throw around accusations of ad hominems.
@CassandraSays:
There needs to be an animated gif of a guy kicking a field goal square on, then the goal posts rising up into the air and the word “Nope!” flashing up. That would be excellent.
@Laura and Kirby: It’s called we can have our opinions and leave it at that. Some people love Massachusetts, I personally want to leave the state soon. Hence, there is no “correct” opinion. Both are valid because everyone has different values and priorities The same is true of our viewpoints of sweden.
@Xanthe: Really? Would it be crazy to think that a Mein Kampf play would bash jews?
So I don’t think it is outrageous to think SCUM probably doesn’t portray men in a good light. Solanas was also fucking crazy…not really a “quality person” that I want to expose myself too her thinking.
So if I create a play called “Women are fucking doucheclamps”, can I get you to go see it? I mean, as you can clearly see there is no such thing as a doucheclamp, so my play is clearly a satire on woman and you would be silly to see it as something hateful and bigoted.
@kirbywarp
This article discusses the assange case in reference to the laws, where women cannot decide themselves if they have been raped. It is still the Assange case and not codified law, but then I don’t speak swedish.
http://redroom.com/member/sunny-singh/blog/do-swedens-rape-laws-infantilise-women-regardless-of-julian-assange
the highlights
‘Swedish rape law apparently considers consensual (albeit regretful in the morning) sex without condom a “sex crime.” Not agreeing to be tested for sexually transmitted diseases – as far as I can make out from press reports – is also a “sex crime.” ‘
Oh hey I found the swedish penal code
http://www.sweden.gov.se/content/1/c6/02/77/77/cb79a8a3.pdf
Doesn’t really mean much without the regulatuion used for trial though.
I ask all those people who are thinking of buying an axe, to instead send their $20 to my legal fighting fund, as I am suing LSE’s Gender Institute for sex-discriminatory learning materials and teaching practices – and think this will be a much more effective way of silencing the haters.
@Brandon:
Of course your right. Whether or not Sweden is anti-male, it’s all opinion! None of it matters at all, everyone is correct!
… Idiot.
@Ullere:
I saw that same article, but it’s not what I’m looking for. The pdf looks like a much better source, with Chapter 6 dealing with sexual crimes. None of the sections seem to have anything to do with “consensual but regretful” sex. So yeah… Looks like the article is wrong.
Yeah it’s probably wrong, the author of the article implies she is basing her knowledge of the Swedish legal system on press releases. Maybe a swede legal expert will enlighten me one day.
There were a lot of crummy opinion pieces, the redroom article being similarly crummy, talking about how “Julian Assange was arrested for having sex without a condom OMG!!!1” in the wake of his arrest. Reading the incident described by one of the women makes it much clearer. Despite having made it very clear that she would not have sex without a condom, she woke up to find Assange having sex with her, and when she asked if he was wearing a condom he said he wasn’t. That’s pretty clearly rape in my book.
@ Brandon, your goalpost shifting and Godwinning is a nice tactic, but I am not defending the video or Solanas – I’m in agreement with David that the video is offensive, but the point of it was to provoke attention for the play. The play on the other hand may be an entirely different beast from the video – you’d have to actually see the play to find out. Reading a book by its cover is usually not helpful – a play referencing Mein Kampf might be attempting to whitewash the Third Reich, or it might be disparaging Hitler entirely. Without seeing it for yourself you’re bloviating from a position of complete ignorance. As I already said.
FYI-in regards to Metallica’s “Kill ‘Em All”-they were going to call the record “Metal Up Your Ass.” I think it was the late, great Clifford Burton who came up with “Kill ‘Em All.”
I don’t think they were worried about anyone tracking down their home address, anyone who wanted to find them could go to a show. I don’t think anyone was worried about crazy fans in metal until Dimebag Darrell’s assassination….
Using BrandonLogic, The Producers was a tribute to Hitler and should never have been given a theatrical release.
Brandon:
1) You don’t need to learn Swedish. Virtually everyone there speaks at least passable English, and the number of people who are fluent is both startling and humbling.
2) Stockholm is one of the nicest, cleanest, best-run capital cities I’ve ever been in, and it was an absolute pleasure to visit. I’d go back to Sweden in a heartbeat.
I know I’ve said this before, but there’s something hilarious about the idea that the true heart of the evil feminist conspiracy and the proof of how awful life is under feminism is Sweden. Really, can you think of a more benign place than Sweden? No offense to any Swedes who like to think of themselves as hardcore, but as a nation it’s about as scary as a hissing kitten.
The most terrifying place on earth, where men live in fear for their very lives – Sweden. After the ritual childhood un-gendering indoctrination session there will be tea and pastries in the lobby, and perhaps we will all knit a sweater together.
Having said that, a lot of Swedes do have a rather dry, biting sense of humor. I guess if you were the sort of person who thinks that “shaming language” is the worst thing that one person can do to another it might seem like a scary place.
Dolls? Really? that’s a crime against boys now?
@MRAL
Do Google searches for the following and you’ll clearly see where Paul talks about getting sexually excited about his “politics”;
paul elam a voice for men fucking your shit up gives me an erection
paul elam a voice for men borders on sexual excitement
These were MRAL’s exact words:
…and here is the requested example.
In fact, to save him trawling through the entire piece, this is the exact quote:
I believe a retraction may be in order.
The funniest thing about AVFM is the absolute nonchalance of the Swede who cvontacted them and was involved in the video. He’s still got his Facebook active, chatted merrily to some of the AVfM regulars and really doesn’t seem bothered. This despite threats from the AVfM faithful that he is surrounded by “wolves”.
They are beyond pathetic. What happened to these guys to make them so worthless? This is, literally, how they measure their own self-worth; their ability to stalk/harass artists in a different continent.
Incidentally, I wonder if AVfM will put themselves on their sad little register for the headline “Eight Dead, Isn’t It Delightful”. Which of course was attention grabbing parody. Oh…
Would anyone be interested in me translating a few of the reviews of the play from the largest Swedish newspapers? Might be enlightening.
@AndersH
Yes please.
I have a feeling the MRM might have really shot themselves in the foot with their latest debacle.
Sure, if you feel like it and you have time.
BTW, I agree with the sentiments of this blogger;
http://fortyshadesofgrey.blogspot.com/2011/11/in-defence-of-scum-having-fun.html
The video is tasteless but it is an artistic depiction of an infamous Manifesto – it is, transparently, not anything remotely resembling incitement to murder. Even the cretinous MRAs know this, as discussed, they are acting dumb for their own reasons.
I particularly enjoyed the reference to György Pálfi, because it reminded me of his debut film Hukkle – a film that’s guaranteed to get MRAs up in arms if they ever watch it.
SPOILERS BELOW
Essentially, it’s a dialogue-free study of village life, with every living creature given a similar level of attention – so there’s no real difference between ants, cats, dogs or humans: they all have their amusing little feeding and mating routines.
So far, so commendably egalitarian – but as the film progresses, you gradually realise that the women are Up To Something, namely poisoning their menfolk. I seem to remember that the body count was quite impressive by the end, and that all the women turn out to be gleefully complicit in this blatant mass murder.
It’s a terrific little film, and obviously satirical – but I suspect it might not appear that way to the terminally humorless.
From DN, a liberal (and thus right-centre, by Swedish reckoning) newspaper:
http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/scenrecensioner/scummanifestet-pa-turteatern
Hard words become brilliant theatre. Turteatern has been threatened because of its staging of “The SCUM Manifesto”. But it’s great art, Ingegerd Waaranperä writes. Those who are afraid of the play should have the guts to go and see it.
In this play there is no smoke, no blinking lights, no one gets dragged on stage, the programme tells us. Theatre often wants to provoke with such things. Turteatern shows, and proves, that words are enough.
The theatre has received death threats for Andrea Edwards portrayal of “The SCUM Manifesto” from 1967. The Taliban of male society would rather shoot from the hip than go and see the show.
That’s a pity, because it’s brilliant theatre, great art. If you are a woman (which is what it’s all about), nothing at all to be provoked by. Only rinsing your eyes, which should be done regularly. Total recognition, at the same time as it’s estranging, making the obvious visible again. You come home to a house that has stood empty over the winter, Andrea Edwards opens the curtains and removes the furniture covers and shows that a chair is a chair.
Valerie Solanas (1936-88) was a mean, abused and misused girl, educated scientist, prostitute, addict who hit back with a burning, genius attack on the entirety of history of the power of male society. The veil falls from your eyes: religion, morals, politics, economy, family, gardening. Solanas doesn’t spare the women, either: the daddy’s girls she met in the American feminist movement, especially the well-educated – always the most obedient, the best assistants of male power and sister oppressors.
Andrea Edwards lectures and portrays with an amazing power over the expressions and the audience, which has been split at the beginning. The theatre consists of two halves looking at each other over the stage. The women are on one side when the men are allowed in. We give them an applause “because they’re used to that” Edwards says.
Systems we are blind to are put under the light. Educational especially now, for those of us who have gotten Reinfeldt’s (Moderate Conservative Prime Minister of Sweden) dream dust in our eyes so that we’ve started seeing the privatized right-wing society as natural law, and guess which of the sexes profit from that?
The play, from the direction of Erik Holmström, literally opens a window to reality and claims the public space. In that moment you realise how seldomly theatre communicates directly with the world around it instead of just allowing itself to be observed. Educational!
What lifts Andrea Edwards’ one-woman-show high over regular rabble-rousing theatre is a total authority of the stage, her own intelligence and believability and, not least, a sublime trust in the text.
When Valerie Solanas goes over the line in her most murderous attacks on the male, Andrea Edwards doesn’t betray her, doesn’t distract from it, doesn’t tone it down or apologize for it, but follows her all the way to the blood-red fury.
That’s how she makes us empathize, see the madness, the vulnerability, despair and the human longing which naturally lies at the bottom of Valerie Solanas’ burning hatred. Far, far away a reconciliation can almost be imagined.
From SvD, a conservative newspaper:
Valerie Solanas who wrote SCUM is forever cursed to be associated with a man, Andy Warhol, whom she shot, though without killing him outright. Her manifesto from 1968 is still capable of causing offense, not least by describing men as critically as women have been described through the millennia.
http://www.svd.se/kultur/scen/vassa-pilar-kastas-med-full-kraft_6618748.svd
At Turteatern, Andrea Edwards presents the text as a monologue, directed by Erik Holmström. She doesn’t portray Valerie Solanas. Rather she portrays Solanas’ ideal woman, the smart, cool, free, awesome opposite to daddy’s girl, the appeasing sustainer of the patriarchy.
Solanas shot Warhol, and the title of the manifesto has been interpreted as a call to cut men to pieces, but otherwise it’s not that much about violence, at least not about the violence of women towards men. The point is the utter and complete inferiority and uselessness of men. The capitalist society is seen as a giant project to hide this fact: men are insecure and afraid, know that they’re worthless, but ascribe all their weaknesses to women. According to the manifestot, men are only good at one thing: PR. He has succeded in marketing his excellence in a brilliant manner, and thus hidden his true wish, to be a real woman.
Angela Edwards, whom I last saw as a maniac and a lot more insane doctor at Teater Giljotin, has decorated the theatre with a sort of textile post-it notes (her mother Inga did the embroidery) which remind us of all the evils caused by men. War is unsurprisingly on top of the list, but he is also held responsible for polite conversation, social codes, suburbs, and Great Art. Solanas hits hard at American Society and Man its apostle.
In the intimate theatre space we women get the best treatment. We have comfortable seats with golden cushions and are served grapes and candy. The men sit on bare chairs and have to make do with Edwards’ back or a bitter toss of her head in their direction. It doesn’t feel all that bad to be privileged, would be easy to get used to, as if receiving a nature-given benefit.
Edwards acts with great authority and a drastic sense of humour. She doesn’t joke away Solanas’ sharp arrows, however; she tosses them with full power. The play culminates in an egresse into real reality that I won’t describe here (it would be like revealing the murderer).
The energy that is created within the room could throws us out into protest and rebellic non-action. But this isn’t the end. The pissed off analysis of society changes into utopic thoughts. Then the air goes out of it all. Despite all the hard slogans the attack is reduced to something that resembles “feelgood”. And it feels like Daddy won the game. Again.