Categories
a voice for men alpha males chivalry evil women hypocrisy internal debate it's science! kitties manginas MGTOW misandry misogyny MRA

Quiz: What makes an MRA maddest? (Pussy-begging A Voice for Men edition.)

Pussy begging at its worst

Several days ago, angry-MRA-dude hub A Voice for Men ran a guest post from someone identified only as Phil in Utah entitled “How I became an MRA: Domestic violence advocacy.” After Phil’s post in question drew some criticism from some of the  AVfM regulars who didn’t see it as radical enough, site founder and head cheese Paul Elam felt it necessary to take Phil to task for one of the statements he made in the post.

So let’s have a quick quiz. Here are three quotes taken from Phil in Utah’s post. Which of them is the one that drew Elam’s ire?

  1. “[F]eminists only support the rights of women who agree with them, and have no qualms throwing disagreeing women under the bus.”
  2.  “[T]he idea that women are hurt more than men by being abused is a load of crap.”
  3. “I still believe that men who brutalize women are the scum of the Earth.”

ANSWER: Did you guess #1? Wrong. While this statement isn’t actually true, Elam didn’t object to it. How about #2? While this statement is also untrue – numerous studies show that women are far more likely to be seriously injured by domestic violence than men – Elam didn’t object to it either. Nope. He objected to statement #3. That is:

I still believe that men who brutalize women are the scum of the Earth.

How could any decent human being possibly object to this? Here’s Elam explanation:

I admit I flinched a little when I read this. Clearly these are words rooted in old world sexist notions about violence; that somehow men who brutalize women are worse than women who brutalize men. It is old programming that tends to swim around in the unconscious even after the first few rounds of red pills.

Now, I should note that Phil didn’t actually say, or imply, that “men who brutalize women are worse than women who brutalize men.” Indeed, he spent most of the essay arguing that DV against men needed to be taken more seriously. If anything, he minimized violence against women, by denying the fact that women are indeed more likely to be seriously injured by their male partners than male partners are to be seriously injured by women.

Evidently, for Elam and others on AVfM, straightforward expressions of enmity against men who brutalize women are a form of “latent misandry.”

But we’re only just getting started here. As it turns out, Elam was less troubled by Phil’s “misandry” than he was by some of the nastier attacks on Phil and other

new MRA’s who are ‘getting it’ but have not had the time or opportunity to fully refine their understanding of the modern zeitgeist.

Indeed, one commenter had even gone so far as to call poor Phil “pussy-footed.” And yet another called him a “mangina/white knight.” This, Elam announced, would not do!

MRA’s name calling and shaming other MRA’s is not constructive. It is petty alpha-gaming … .

In other words, it’s the sort of thing that guys do to try to impress the chicks. And that’s bad.

[A] significant part of the dynamics that hinder progress in the MRM is the innate friction between men which is driven by an undercurrent of sexual competition. Our unfortunate programming is to apply downward pressure on each other in order to vie for sexual selection.

On MRA blogs, this is often described with the scientific term “pussy begging.” Elam continued:

Feminism is an outgrowth of chivalry. It is dependent on male sexual competition to thrive. In short, misandry, feminism, the stinking lot of it, is a human problem rooted in men’s mindless competition for women.  We don’t get out of that competition by simply rejecting women or Going Our Own Way. We get out of it by identifying and respectfully challenging the elements of that competition when they prove dysfunctional, as in going after MRA’s for blood any time we imagine they are not 100% on message. This conduct, when distilled down to its essence, is just a tell-tale artifact of pussy-centric masculinity.

So, in other words, MRAs who call other MRAs pussy-begging manginas are themselves … pussy-begging manginas.

Such is MRA logic.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

316 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
katz
9 years ago

ozy: If only increased efficiency meant “pay workers the same wages for the same amount of production while they work half the hours” instead of “lay off half the workers and double your profit margin”.

PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth

(a) most adults are capable of understanding what’s going on with their own legal cases, if it’s explained to them in a language they actually understand

This is quite literally the vast majority of my job. Having to explain everything to the SRLs (self represented litigants, we are all being taught to stop calling them pro pers.)

PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth

Personally, I think one should not interfere with the actual crime being committed, but you should notify the authorities as long as doing so does not put you in harms way.

A simple “I just called the cops asshole” is enough to help someone else without putting yourself in any danger.

Of course it does require being less than 100% Brandon level selfish so there is that.

Ponkz
Ponkz
9 years ago

@Lauralot – OMG, I love Jam! That line about thick people being good at winning arguments because they’re too thick to realise when they’ve lost often comes to mind with certain folk on this site… *cough* NWO *cough*

Ponkz
Ponkz
9 years ago

Emphasis on the “too thick to realise when they’ve lost” part rather than the “good at winning arguments” bit, of course!

M Dubz
M Dubz
9 years ago

@darksidecat- My family on my mother’s side is of Pennsylvania Dutch extraction, and they grew up around State College. Their North Appalacian accent is faint, but listening to your video, it is definitely there, and I never noticed until right this minute. Helps to explain why I don’t have a traditional Philadelphia accent (which is where I’m from).

hellkell
hellkell
9 years ago

Eric, LOL at “sophists gonna obfuscate.”

We finally got rid of MRAL, can Lord Aboveitall be next? He’s fuckin’ dull.

Sharculese
9 years ago

sadly, mral’s meager powers of self-awareness place him light years ahead of brandon

hellkell
hellkell
9 years ago

I dunno, I’d say Brandon’s aware of himself to the utter exclusion of anyone else.

Ponkz
Ponkz
9 years ago

pillowinhell – it’s spelled ceilidh 😉

Also, CassandraSays, Polliwog – *Ahem* I AM Glaswegian! I speak with a softer west coast Scots accent though, more in line with Tennant ( a Paisley boy, after all),

To be fair, I spent most of my childhood in London and I’d spend visits home to Glasgow feeling really rude for having to constantly get my cousins, aunts and uncles etc. to repeat themselves because I didn’t understand their strong accents.

Lauralot
9 years ago

@Ponkz: I’ve never met another Jam fan before! Everyone I’ve tried to show it to either doesn’t get it or doesn’t like it.

Ponkz
Ponkz
9 years ago

@Lauralot – Oh, I’m a massive Chris Morris fan! There was a radio version of Jam called Blue Jam on BBC radio first, which is also really good. You can find all the episodes with a bit of googling in fact, if you’re interested in checking them out. I liked those even better – the music was always quite cool and trippy.

Lauralot
9 years ago

Thanks for the recommendation! I’m definitely going to look those up.

Pecunium
9 years ago

I like the way that Brandon, who claims that taking the essential meaning of his words isn’t valid, because he didn’t use precisely those (as with his derision of those who get married), but he’s willing to say that Fatman came to the conclusion that Fatman came to a conclusion about, “all people who hold that attitude”, which is not at all what Fatman said.

A paragon of consistency he is.

Brandon
Brandon
9 years ago

@ozy: Nice job missing the point. It isn’t about working 50+ hour work weeks…that is just one of the examples popinjay used to drive the main points home:

That indifference is not the same as hatred and/or bitterness.

That a lot of men are rethinking “working to the grave” as a life choice.

That chivalry and the notion of men running to the aid of women is dying.

That a lot of men don’t see the need to “support society” outside of their own survival and recreation.

That a lot of men are rethinking what truly is important to them and are opting for a simple, minimalist lifestyle.

That instead of fighting for change, they try to make their lives as comfortable as possible.

Pecunium
9 years ago

But because of these opinions, a lot of women, especially feminists, tend to assume that men of my generation hate women, or that we’re bitter about women forcing their way into every institution of power, every fountain of wealth without giving a shit about what that might do to society.

Not all men, just some men. Again with the overbroad generalisations, from the guy who gets pissed about people quoting him directly.

Brandon
Brandon
9 years ago

@Pecunium: Umm…I didn’t write what you copied and pasted. That came directly from the article I linked to earlier in the thread.

Bostonian
9 years ago

The thing about chivalry is that it never existed the way it is portrayed in movies. The poor, old, or brown women were never included in the protected class. The white women it was for were a very small fraction of white women indeed.

Chivalry was useless as an actual protection for most women, even when it was more common than today.

Pecunium
9 years ago

And you are repeating it, as a truism. If you don’t agree with it, what was your point in quoting it?

As with the imputation that Fatman said things Fatman didn’t say.

katz
9 years ago

That indifference is not the same as hatred and/or bitterness.

That a lot of men are rethinking “working to the grave” as a life choice.

That chivalry and the notion of men running to the aid of women is dying.

That a lot of men don’t see the need to “support society” outside of their own survival and recreation.

That a lot of men are rethinking what truly is important to them and are opting for a simple, minimalist lifestyle.

That instead of fighting for change, they try to make their lives as comfortable as possible.

First, you’re confusing “a lot of men” with “you.”

Second, you’re trying to make this something we should care about. It’s not.

Brandon
Brandon
9 years ago

@Pecunium: Mainly because the author’s paragraphs aren’t well formed. When trying to quote him, I noticed I was taking the end of one paragraph and the start of the next. At the end, I just decided to cut out most of the three paragraphs for continuity purposes.

@Bostonian: Fine, replace chivalry with the idea that men should rush to the aid of women when they are in trouble or when a woman is being attacked. In the end, western society doesn’t seem to like it to much when men value their own lives over women. (the most recent was being called cowards after the Costa Concordia sinking).

Bostonian
9 years ago

The thing is, in real life, the ones who rush to another’s aid tend to be those who are good people in general. They get praise for that because it is indeed praiseworthy behavior in both men and women.
People who shove others out of the way to get to safety are not praised, because shoving people out of the way in a disaster is not praiseworthy behavior.

Brandon
Brandon
9 years ago

@Katz: Really? I am the only one? Hardly. See MGTOW, PUA’s, Japan’s “Herbivores”, etc…

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=120696816

Are you saying there are NO other men that want to live a simple, minimal life and not having to work themselves to death to have an overpriced home, 2 cars, a wife and 2 1/2 kids, a dog…oh…and a white picket fence.

All I am saying is the phenomena of “Herbivores” are moving across the Pacific (at least some of it anyways). While the number of men might not be significant, it isn’t just 5 guys bitching about women in their parent’s basement.

Brandon
Brandon
9 years ago

@Bostonian: Really? Now in order to be a good person one has to place themselves in dangerous situations and risk their own lives.

I am not saying the people shoving people out of the way to save their own lives should get praised for it.

Bostonian
9 years ago

No, as usual, you move the goalposts.

Those who do risky things on behalf of others get praised. Those who do that have gone above and beyond the usual. They are doing something good.

Those who just stay out of the way do not get mentioned or praised or condemned. They are not doing good or evil.

Those who shove others out of the way and impede the safety of others do get condemned. They are doing evil.

The thing is, if you want praise for just existing, that is not going to happen.

People generally get praised when they do something more than is expected.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
9 years ago

I see that Brandon doesn’t understand the Herbivore phenomenon. Those men don’t hate women – they hate the salaryman role that’s been contructed for men in Japanese society (which btw is much harsher than the societal expectations placed on men here in many ways, thus the intensity of the reaction against it). The Herbivores don’t put the blame for that on random women, they put it where it belongs – on the culture as a whole*. They’re rejecting a social role that they don’t want, that’s for sure (and I don’t blame them – the traditional salaryman role sucks), but they’re not MRAs. We’ve been over this before. I’ve encountered herbivore men – they tend to be rather nice people, and they often have lots of female friends. Stop trying to appropriate a social movement that you don’t understand from a culture that you know nothing about.

(Also I wonder if he’s encountered their counterparts, the Carnivore Girls, who would probably scare the shit out of him. And again, it’s not about grr men we hate them, it’s about a reaction to societal roles overall.)

* Admittedly most articles in the Western press aren’t helping, since they’re trying to interpet the herbivore thing through a Western lens. It doesn’t really make any sense unless you understand just how rigid traditional social expectations for men are in Japan, or how the 20-year recession is playing into all of this.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
9 years ago

Watch thos goalposts dance! Altruism is praised by society because it’s admirable. Lack of altruism is just sort of neutral, neither praiseworthy or worthy of condemnation most of the time. Actively doing stuff that endangers the survival of others is condemned, as it should be. This is not a complicated concept.

Brandon
Brandon
9 years ago

@Bostonian: No, they are most likely doing something risky and dangerous. Rushing to someones aid does not inherently make you good or bad.

I don’t expect them to get praised nor should they be called things like cowards or “not real men”. It should have been looked at in a neutral perspective: That a group of people where scrambling to save their lives and nothing else.

They aren’t “doing evil”…they are trying to save themselves. Apparently “doing evil” now means to fighting to save yourself from dying.

@Cassandra: Regardless of why they are doing what they are doing…they still share certain attributes of MRA’s. Mainly not going out of their way to initiate conversation with women.

Also, I am not saying that “herbivores” are MRA’s, I am just saying they share a few behaviors. I was more concerned with the actual behavior and not the motive behind it.

Lastly, I spent some time in Tokyo and take an interest in the rigidity of Japanese culture (Honne and Tatemae, Uchi-Soto and Nihonrinjin just to name a few of the biggies). While I may have never fully experienced that rigidity as a gaijin, I was able to observe it.

ozymandias42
ozymandias42
9 years ago

I remain confused what bit of “a simple, minimalist life” Brandon thinks I’d be upset about. Good! As an anti-consumerist, as an environmentalist, as a person who has read the statistics on what makes people happy, that is EXACTLY what I want. I mean, I don’t even have any particular objections to people doing what makes them happy and not being all concerned with social change! Social change is important but it’s not for everyone. 🙂

Brandon
Brandon
9 years ago

@Cassandra: I can’t think of a time where I was “scared shitless” by a woman. Brash and aggressive women get ignored by me, but I am hardly scared of them. They just aren’t fun to be around and tend to be argumentative. Traits I do not admire in men or women.

Brandon
Brandon
9 years ago

@Ozy: I didn’t think you would be upset about anything. I just think you missed the main points of the article. The article wasn’t about working long hours.

Lauralot
9 years ago

Is he still talking? Is the new thing going to be just popping in every now and then and dragging old and finished conversations back up rather than constantly posting on everything as he did before?

How perfectly tedious.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
9 years ago

Yeah, he’s still at it, now with bonus appropriation.

Motivations are important, Brandon. If you want to be a slacker, that’s cool, but stop dragging the herbivores into it. They really don’t share your underlying feelings or thought processes at all.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
9 years ago

“Brash and aggressive women get ignored by me, but I am hardly scared of them. They just aren’t fun to be around and tend to be argumentative. Traits I do not admire in men or women.”

Except in yourself, of course, where being argumentative is your main personality characteristic. Even sock-Ashley said so!

Bostonian
9 years ago

So endangering others is good? I say no to that. Endangering others is still wrong, and yes, evil.

ithiliana
9 years ago

*yawns*

How many people give a flying fuck if Brandon goes his own way to a minimalist lifestyle?

*peers around*

I thought so.

None of us care–in fact, some of us are doing all sorts of things that are not expected of us by traditional social gender roles–so why keep arguing about this “omg men aren’t going to do what YOU FEMINISTS WIMMINZ expect, we’re so brave and radical.”

There are people who regularly post over here who are going much more against traditional heternormative patriarchal gender roles than you can even imagine.

I don’t need men for anything, and expect them to return the favor of the lack of attention.

You, however, can just fuck off.

ozymandias42
ozymandias42
9 years ago

Brandon: I didn’t read the article! I was talking about the bit you said right here where you were all “we’re not working fifty hour weeks to get girlfriends anymore” as if we would have objections to that. Great! Thank feminism for it. 🙂

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
9 years ago

Can he go super-minimalist and give away his computer? And not have a smartphone, since they’re not strictly necessary? That would be one way to get rid of him.

But seriously, it’s weird that he expects us to care and to oppose his decision. Why would we? He seems to be buying in to the MGTOW idea that by doing so he’s somehow wounding All Women.

ozymandias42
ozymandias42
9 years ago

Ithiliana: Like me! I’m a poly queer nonbinary person who keeps dating people who are broke! I am, like, super-defiant. 🙂

Right now my super-defiant ass is going to take itself over to gaming night to play some Betrayal at the House of the Hill. And yes, that is misandry.

Lauralot
9 years ago

So…I don’t have sex or interest in women (or men for that matter) and I focus more on friends and family than relationships. And I’m quite literally a herbivore (I haven’t eaten meat since August).

I guess that makes me an MRA, somehow.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
9 years ago

Well, this is BrandonWorld, in which there’s no need to use logic.

Also, the idea that those guys are like MRAs because they don’t pursue relationships with women is pretty funny. Most MRAs do seem to pursue relationships with women. Hell, even some MGTOW talk about dating (granted that this is completely illogical, but still, they do). Granted, they tend to pursue relationships with women while ranting about how evil women are (another way in which they’re not like the Herbivore Men at all), but still, they are in fact still pursuing women for the most part.

hellkell
hellkell
9 years ago

Brandon is selfish and doesn’t understand other cultures. In other news, water is wet.

Did you go to Japan for the anime, kind of like Thailand for the beaches? I bet you were there for about a week and now think you’re an expert.

For someone who doesn’t like being argumentative, you sure spend a lot of time arguing. Well, trying to, anyway.

Don’t you better things to do with sock-Ash than come here, toolshed?

Shadow
Shadow
9 years ago

I guess that makes me an MRA, somehow.

GET HER!!!

hellkell
hellkell
9 years ago

Lauralot, you can’t be an MRA because you’re not an illogical whiny asshole.

katz
9 years ago

ozy: Betrayal at House on the Hill is AWESOME! Where’d you score a copy? It’s hard to find.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
9 years ago

You know Brandon’s theory about how not pursuing women makes a man an MRA? In that context, please explain Roissy.

hellkell
hellkell
9 years ago

Doesn’t not pursuing women make one more of an MGTOW?

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
9 years ago

Not according to Brandon! Poor dear can’t even keep his own movement straight, no wonder he’s so lost when talking about feminism.

hellkell
hellkell
9 years ago

TBH, when I see his posts, my eyes start roll so hard, it makes them hard to read.

He’s got his head so far up his ass, not only about feminism, but life in general, it’s a wonder he can type stuff with which to bore the snot out of me.

Really though, if you don’t give a shit and want a simple life, that to me is more GYOW. Of course, you can always fire up the snitmobile and burn rubber all over the internet blaming women for why you’re GYOW. That strikes me as a complete waste of time when you can just go, but I’m weird that way.

Pecunium
9 years ago

So Brandon, why did you quote that paragraph?

If you have reservations about the conclusions you have the ability to explain them.

Not only did you not do that when you made the original comment, you have chosen to refrain from so doing in two subsequent comments.

One can only assume you do in fact agree with it, wholeheartedly.

And you’ve still not explained why you chose to misquote, and misrepresent Fatman.