When you think they can’t get any creepier, they do. Here’s a disturbing new Men’s Rights meme-in-formation I’ve recently run across.
In a late-December rant about anti-porn feminist Gale Dines, the self-proclaimed “Male Renaissance Agitator” who calls himself Fidelbogen wrote:
In olden days of rough village justice she’d have gotten the scold’s bridle, or the the ducking stool, or the stocks. And quite right.
A couple of days later, regular A Voice for Men commenter DruidV, perhaps inspired by Fidebogen’s post, made a strikingly similar suggestion on that site:
I urge all Men here to have a look at wiki’s description of what was commonly known as a scold’s bridle, or the Branks. For whatever foolish reason, this item was done away with some time ago. This invention to end Men’s suffering, needs to be brought back into public acceptance and application, post haste, imo.
So let’s take a look at the Wikipedia page he linked to and see just what exactly this “Scold’s Bridle” was:
A scold’s bridle, sometimes called “the branks”, as well as “brank’s bridle” was a punishment device used primarily on women, as a form of torture and public humiliation.[1] It was an iron muzzle in an iron framework that enclosed the head. The bridle-bit (or curb-plate) was about 2 inches long and 1 inch broad, projected into the mouth and pressed down on top of the tongue[2]. The “curb-plate” was frequently studded with spikes, so that if the tongue moved, it inflicted pain and made speaking impossible.[3] Wives that were seen as witches, shrews and scolds, were forced to wear a brank’s bridle, which had been locked on the head of the woman and sometimes had a ring and chain attached to it so her husband could parade her around town and the town’s people could scold her and treat her with contempt; at times smearing excrement on her and beating her, sometimes to death.
Emphasis mine.
I will be charitable and assume that both Fidelbogen and DruidV were joking. That is, they don’t literally want to strap women’s heads into ghastly torture devices, smear them with shit and beat them to death. They just think that the very notion is hilarious.
Whether the suggestions were made seriously or not, they’re still pretty hateful. Given that Fidelbogen was recently taken aboard as a regular writer for A Voice for Men, and that DruidV’s comment on that site got mostly upvotes (and no criticism) from the regulars there, would it be fair to call A Voice for Men the “underbelly of a hate movement?”
I’m not sure why that particular phrase popped into my head, but somehow it seems all too appropriate.
Don’t be silly, Dracula. He’s a great authority on dolls and how to fragrance them too.
Oh right, I forgot about his imaginary friends.
Unlike you ham-handed modern women!!!!! Hands down one of the funniest retaliations I’ve ever read here!
They can have any personality that a man wants them to have, you know!
So, DKM, if a man abuse his wife, it’s bad so he gets the children’s custody? How does that make sense, even in dollotopia?
I have to say, Meller, this latest example of a SEE, ISN’T THIS COMPLETELY REASONABLE? WHY AREN’T YOU HARPIES HAPPY! rant is special for it’s inclusion of:
If the woman can’t create a happy and pleasing home for her mate, this should be considered ipso facto proof of unfit motherhood and she permanently forfeits any right to her children!
…
Nice!
So, a woman loses her children for quarrelsomeness, but for a a man, it takes physical violence?
Do you really think we should all be the ones declaring you reasonable and fairminded here?
XD
To DKM, the worst crime a woman can commit is to not be properly feminine, or his idea thereof. Therefore, no punishment–be it losing her kids or forced servitude in a brothel–is too severe.
@zhinxy
Actually, I don’t see any other way to read what he first wrote than “If she’s abused then she wasn’t pleasing enough and so she’s obviously a shitty mother”, and I don’t see any other way to read what he wrote after than “If she provokes him into abusing her (because deciding “Fuck it Ima get my ass beat so that I can humiliate him in court” is apparently some rampant problem with the current system) then she deserves to lose parental rights”.
Meller, you’ve said before you did not think I provoked my abuse. That was quite nice of you, (Even though in my wryer moments I suspect it may have had to do with my mentioning he was a Democrat, and Democrats abusing Libertarians is another fishkettle.). Of course, you also mentioned, without any obligation to link to or quote it, that my man-hating bitterness could drive any man, gentle as a lamb, to violence. Hmmm.
I told you I had a daughter I was busy trying to raise, largely with the help of my mother and other relatives on the maternal side, as her father has yet to pay a dime of child support, and only occasionally will buy a book or video or game that she might be interested in. Etc. No court involved. Really not worth it for a lot of reasons.
I don’t want the man thrown in Jail, Meller, I just want me and my daughter to be safe. But just be honest, Meller. Come on.
Did I provoke it by failure to happyfluffyhomemake, or not? Should I have had to sacrifice custody of my daughter, or not?
@zhinxy
Actually, I don’t see any other way to read what he first wrote than “If she’s abused then she wasn’t pleasing enough and so she’s obviously a shitty mother”, and I don’t see any other way to read what he wrote after than “If she provokes him into abusing her (because deciding “Fuck it Ima get my ass beat so that I can humiliate him in court” is apparently some rampant problem with the current system) then she deserves to lose parental rights”.
…
Yeah, pretty much.
Reading the comments on the Marcotte story at Pandagon, re: the Ball suicide, I now understand why so many reich-wing, Men’s Right’s types were whining about the Navy SEALS destroying the dignity and humanity of Osama Bin Ladin when they raided his compound and killed him.
No, I don’t like the direction the Bush/Obama Administration has taken the country in terms of foreign policy, and I think the fact that private citizens can be detained and jailed without a warrant or a fair and speedy trial is abhorrent, too. Unfortunately, that’s not the real issue for these guys, because if it were, they would be talking about where our policies are problematic, and linking to the instances in the news where American citizens of Muslim faith have been denied their Constitutional rights.
Besides the fact that it happened under the Democrats’ watch, many of them are angry because Bin Ladin represented a fantasy of theirs – a massive, violent public act from a community that treats women as property, that sent a big message in a big way – and he was killed in retaliation for orchestrating his fantasy in a fashion that took 3,000 American lives. I’m not sure the Obama Administration chose moral solution, and the way the CIA and US military handles terrorism and condones torture makes me sick – but so does nattering on about the inherent dignity and humanity of Osama Bin Ladin, especially coming from men who think it’s ok to beat a 4-year-old in the face for licking a grown-ass man’s hand.
@Ponkx:
I firmly believe in just letting go of lingering anger and bitterness in your life, because otherwise it just will make you ill. It’s definitely a philosophy I find useful.
Definitely. After all, pent-up anger has created the MRA movement, various acts of terrorism (homegrown and imported), and more. I’m not angry at anyone from my past, only annoyed by stupid people who demand tolerance for their own issues, but don’t give others the same respect, a characteristic the MRA movement embodies spectacularly. I also recognize that close friendships add value to many people’s lives.
However, experience has taught me that I don’t have the personality (or perhaps temperament) suited to deep, satisfactory friendships, and that close friendships have historically added more unhappiness and strife to my life than being more solitary. I’ve felt like this since pre-school, before my family situation went south, and my dad has been a similar sort of lone wolf, even in his youth. Moving on for me has consisted of re-focusing my attention on hobbies and passions, and engaging in social situations that suit my style. I have a great primary partner, have occasionally taken on great secondaries, enjoy socializing among a wide variety of acquaintances, and take pride in steadily mastering successive skill sets in my profession. Other than being unemployed, I’m doing pretty well, and it sounds like you are, too. We are fortunate!
Kyrie: He has made half-hearted condemnations of abuse/torture because it’s a second rate tool for gaining compliance/submission.
But he grants that it’s within the “understandable” responses of men when women are too uppity. He has, repeatedly said, that such abuses are to be expected.
In those cases, while undesirable, the blame falls squarely on the woman and we shouldn’t be too harsh in our judgement of the poor man she provoked into doing something so regrettable.
Meller: There are two small considerations that I would appreciate:
1) the normal Anglo-Saxon protection for the defendent regarding presumption of innocence and trial by a jury of one’s peers be preserved.
No problem. Some worm beats on his wife, and I’m empanneled on a jury, he will get the full credit of my suspened opinion on the legal status of his guilt until the facts as presented to me; in my role as the trier of fact are in.
But… if I’m not on the jury, I’ll look at the facts I have, and come to my conclusions and share them as I see fit.
As regards the apologist drivel you went on with… where a guy gets to beat his partner, and then use that as proof she’s an unfit parent… like I said, you don’t actually condemn abuse… even in your weaseling, wriggling, and writhing, with the statements of how horrid it is; bitter in your mouth, you still had to use that abuse as a tool to oppress women… You couldn’t hide your hatred and loathing for even one sentence, you had to qualify it.
2) Any mate who incites such rage or violence awards a de facto divorce to the injured partner, who may discard the disagreeable mate immediately and completely! The quarrelsomeness, bitterness, and rage inflicted upon the partner (in most cases, the husband or boyfriend) gives him the unilateral right to discontinue the relationship in full! If the woman can’t create a happy and pleasing home for her mate, this should be considered ipso facto proof of unfit motherhood and she permanently forfeits any right to her children!
He beats her, and she’s guilty. That’s what ou said is your sincere condemnation? Heaven help her if you thought beating was, “acceptable” if that’s your idea of finding it reprehensible.
That, my dear little shithead, is fucked up beyond recall. That’s your idea of, “holding someone accountable”? Fuck you with the horse you rode in on.
BUT PECUNIUM! He just hasn’t yet figured out whether or not those liberties can apply to women at ALL!
Also, his talk about women being so inherently statist and collectivist (to the point where he grudginly allowed my daughter reading libertarian books might be better than watching the view, which of course she does or the crap at school, but probably wouldn’t have any effect on her), might mean that we are so INHERENTLY dangerous to liberty itself, that our containment is REQUIRED for liberty to flourish. All things I want you to expound on, Meller, by the way. Please?
Nice blast from the past here (Also, I note that I also discussed the libertarian critique of egalitarianism as interpreted by modern left libertarianism earlier in that discussion, but hey, better late than never, eh Meller? ) –
http://manboobz.com/2011/11/04/johnny-appleseed-a-man-going-his-own-way/comment-page-10/#comment-82073
SO SEE! SEE! MELLER IS TOO A LIBERTARIAN! IF WE’RE LIKE DOGGIES OR KIDS! AND WE PROBABLY ARE! SEE! XD
Also, yeah… We’ve all just not given it enough thought.
…Yeah.
WHOOPS
wrong thread
But still kinda relevant
Meller, whatever. Just answer the question. Did I provoke abuse through non-happy homeing and deserve to lose my daughter, or not?
zhinxy: I don’t give a rat’s ass what nonsense he’s telling himself about women not being rational. He’s saying her being abused proves she’s unfit as a partner, and that she can be dumped into the street, and stripped of access to her children because he decided to whomp on her.
That’s Meller endorsing terrorism as state policy to keep women as domestic chattel.
So not acceptable. Moral people don’t argue for such things.
Meller is therefore not a moral person. We knew that already, but this is icing on the cake, painting the lily; he’s trying to gold-plate a turd and make us believe it’s worth something.
He’s a shit, which we knew, but the Gor-nonsense, and the fantasies of brothels for girls who decided to shag their boyfriends were inane. more than anything else. This crap… monstrous. I’ve met people who’ve done some truly appalling things. I don’t have the cleanest hands in the world, but there isn’t anything I’ve done to match this.
The actual torturers I’ve known would be disgusted with Meller. He’s not fit to clean latrines with his tongue, because who’d want to risk touching his spit?
“. This crap… monstrous. I’ve met people who’ve done some truly appalling things. I don’t have the cleanest hands in the world, but there isn’t anything I’ve done to match this.”
that. (And the post was for the other thread, I wasn’t bringing it into this argument to explain what he’s got going on here, insofar as it might be explicable)
so come on Meller, just be honest. Did I provoke it, and should I have lost custody or not?
yes or no?
Seriously Meller. Your other fantasies of how the world should work were amusing. This is just purely vile.
Got hit, can’t make a happy home, lose children?
You SAID that, Meller.
And you’re a gentle man, yes?
convo where that post above was supposed to go, for Meller and anybody else who got confused – http://manboobz.com/2011/12/29/man-boobz-troll-and-trollhunter-of-the-year-awards-send-in-your-nominations/comment-page-7/#comment-109255
What if the man beats his wife and his kids? Does he still get automatic custody?
What if the woman beats her husband, does that still apply?
In what universe is beating your spouse a valid and fair way to prove you’re a fit parent?
Kyrie – What if the woman beats her husband, does that still apply?
…
She’s made an unhappy home! So it’s not a double standard, is my guess.
Beaten husband, wife has not made a happy home – He gets kids.
Husband hits wife, and she doesn’t go to court and prove him a monster – Wife made unhappy home – He gets kids.
y/n, Meller?
…
And again – Just answer me. I didn’t want to go to court, I still don’t. Did I fail at happymaking, and should I have lost my daughter.
Yes, or no?
I’ve ran out of words to describe Meller. I think I have to go with the portmanteau of the words terrible, awful and vile: terribawfvile.
We need a portmanteau that rolls of the tongue a bit more easily. Creeptacular seems applicable here, since his delusions are so grandiose.
My favorite new portmanteau is myawn, though. It’s that thing cats do when they’re just launching into a dramatic meow and then they have to stop to yawn, which rather spoils the effect.