Categories
actual activism MRA MRA paradox

Men's Rights in the real world: "No one showed up to the event but organizers say the lack of attendance is not due to a lack of interest."

Come early to get a good seat!

Sometimes it’s worth reminding ourselves that despite all the noise they make online, the Men’s Rights movement has basically no presence in the real world. The picture above is an actual photo of a men’s rights symposium at Montana State University. Here’s how the local NBC affiliate described what went down – or, more accurately, what didn’t go down:

The MSU chapter of the National Coalition for Men organized a symposium to raise awareness of problems in men’s lives.

The group geared the event towards fraternity students at the college and invited speakers to talk about things like men’s rights when it comes to sexual misconduct investigations on-campus.

No one showed up to the event but organizers say the lack of attendance is not due to a lack of interest.

You just keep telling yourself that.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

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

438 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Ami Angelwings
9 years ago

Good night feminists. Maybe I’ll check again tomorrow if I feel it’s worth it, but at this point your arguments are ad homs, straw man attacks, innuendo, etc.

valid arguments, questions, facts… xD

Ami Angelwings
9 years ago

Why is it all the trolls always have to go to bed/eat/save the world/etc whenever I show up? xD You’d almost think this was the same Marc and he knows me…

Kelly
Kelly
9 years ago

@Ami I told him to “calm down (drink a glass of water)” after 5 + post monologues and he thinks of that as a ‘personal putdown’

Marc
9 years ago

Oh, hold on, I didn’t see a few.

“What personal attacks.”

Uh, like “asshole” coming from more than one person, or the silly nonsense focusing on me rather than on the issues.

“Great. So very few men are seeking help in the first place, but lets sue services that women need desperately rather than build support networks and build men’s DV shelters. Which would probably make more men a hell of a lot more comfortable coming forward too since they’d have a place that is totally their own.”

At least 10% of those seeking DV services at shelters are men. That’s straight from a state of CA report. And since the hotlines don’t refer men to the shelters that discriminate, it’s likely that number is higher. One shelter person told me it was more like 2 out of 5. But whatever the number, building a shelter will not cover the spread the existing shelters have. The existing ones take state taxpayer money, which men pay more than half of. I’ve said this again and again. If they get taxpayer money, they should not discriminate. So suing them and the state of CA is the best way to change that, all at once.

And as I said many times, if it was women being denied services, and women sued, you would not be criticizing the lawsuits. If a union was excluding women because there were only a few, or if women were denied equal services under a “Men’s Occupational Safety and Health Act,” you would not criticize women for suing to stop the discrimination.

“There are no words marc, you’re an asshole. Plain and simple.”

No, you are.

Marc
9 years ago

So good night feminists.

Quackers
Quackers
9 years ago

The difference between you and me is that I wouldn’t sue or see the benefit in suing a service that I know is used to help victims. Especially if I knew there was a group of people who are overwhelmingly in need of a particular service I wouldn’t try to harm that service because I’m not an asshole like that. Like I said, its different then suing a workplace or restaurant or whatever for discrimination because those places don’t house victims of abuse who often have no other place to go.

And no vouchers you say? again from your ABC article:

An agency, for example, could maintain a battered women’s shelter, but give hotel vouchers to men. The National Coalition for Free Men, which is leading the charge in this lawsuit, does not like that, but it is better than nothing.

It wasn’t good enough. You had to strike lower. You take the easy way out and sue rather than do the work that feminists did in the first place, when if can be argued effectively that women need DV shelters more than men.

And you can throw all the links you want at me, I’ve looked into most of them and while I believe that more women commit DV at a higher rate than I initially thought and agree that there should be shelters available for male victims of DV, I’m still not buying that DV is exactly 50/50 because I trust the facts I find on the CDC, NIJ and World Health Organization. They have no reason to lie. On top of that the CTS scale that Straus/Gelles use is flawed because it doesn’t take into account rape/sexual assault or violence that occurs during a divorce or separation which accounts for a large amount of DV and even those studies themselves admit that women still get injured at a higher rate than men.

If that’s true, it’s probably because you don’t work with MRAs, instead you criticize and attack and argue on the internet rather than organize with them.

Yeah right. I’m really going to work with people who have expressed that they wish that they see me dead because I’m a feminist and who think I’m evil incarnated. Also what the hell do you think you’re doing right now? arguing on the internet.

Whatever I think I’m done here. There were other options in my opinion and all I have left to say is I hope that NCFM actually gets men’s shelters BUILT and that the woman’s shelter you sued was indeed represented pro bono and no victims were screwed over in the process.

Quackers
Quackers
9 years ago

At least 10% of those seeking DV services at shelters are men. That’s straight from a state of CA report. And since the hotlines don’t refer men to the shelters that discriminate, it’s likely that number is higher. One shelter person told me it was more like 2 out of 5. But whatever the number, building a shelter will not cover the spread the existing shelters have. The existing ones take state taxpayer money, which men pay more than half of. I’ve said this again and again. If they get taxpayer money, they should not discriminate. So suing them and the state of CA is the best way to change that, all at once.

Sounds like an excuse to me. If these women’s shelters are state funded then there’s no reason that shelters specifically for male victims of DV wouldn’t be state funded as well. So why not lobby the government for them? They have to afterall. If men need DV shelters that badly do it. You also don’t take into consideration the problems that may arise if shelters are co-ed. Female abusers could try to get in as could male abusers. And I haven’t seen any hard evidence stating that men have an equal demand for DV shelter as women do and also no proof that hotlines don’t refer men to shelters. Either way if there’s enough need for it the state has to fund it.

Also you keep saying that men pay MORE than half of taxes, prove it. All I find when I googled was an MRA site and even then it says men will pay more in Europe http://menareangrynow.wordpress.com/2011/01/23/european-states-counseled-to-have-men-pay-more-taxes-than-women/

The US is not Europe.

Ami Angelwings
9 years ago

So you were upset that people here “make baseless generaliztions”

Kinda like:

“That is how feminists argue.”

“you just spewed the usual feminist myths.”

“But it suits the feminist purpose.”

“Just keep changing the subject. Feminist style.”

xD

I don’t think people here are the ones making baseless generalizations, or dismissing people based on those generalizations xD

Ami Angelwings
9 years ago

Honestly, the way he uses it, feminist might as well be an ad hom xD

Ami Angelwings
9 years ago

I thought he went to bed. Funny, how when he felt I went away, he returned xD

Ami Angelwings
9 years ago

And I haven’t seen any hard evidence stating that men have an equal demand for DV shelter as women do and also no proof that hotlines don’t refer men to shelters.

INTERESTINGLY, there’s a case going on in Sudbury, Ontario right now where a trans woman has lodged a Human Rights Commission complaint against YWCA Sudbury for not allowing her access to their shelter because she’s trans, and in the call, she was referred to a men’s shelter.

But apparently, if she was a cis man, they wouldn’t have done that. xD

Quackers
Quackers
9 years ago

@Ami

and then he says

If that’s true, it’s probably because you don’t work with MRAs, instead you criticize and attack and argue on the internet rather than organize with them.

If feminists lying, ad-hom using, myth-making subject-changing idiots why would MRAs want to work with us? Why would we want to work with MRAs who despise us and have said even WORSE than that?

and I still don’t get why the state cant fund and build independent men’s shelters since by law they HAVE TO. MRAs need to push for that and I’ll support and push for that too, but I still think its a really shitty thing to do to sue women’s shelters because it does harm the victims who need them and are using them. Not every case is going to be pro bono like the one he sued (or so he claims)

And that is an interesting though sad case. It could be dangerous for her but that’s an example of a men’s shelter at least.

It just seems like the best solution is to get more shelters built that include all people. Both feminists and MRAs need to lobby the government for these changes.

BigMomma
BigMomma
9 years ago

ah crap, another men’s shelters argument and nobody told me?

BigMomma
BigMomma
9 years ago

i’ve just been arguing with the Dukes of Hazard on the other thread about this

BlackBloc
BlackBloc
9 years ago

Whenever I see a MRA saying feminists are big meanies for not working with them, I’m reminded of when the National Vanguard (neo-nazis) complained that all of us socialists and anarchists were big meanies for not wanting to organize with them at anti-globalization demos.

I’ll work with MRAs when their basic position does not consist of anti-feminist backlash, collaboration with white supremacists (like @ In Malafide or Spearhead), death threats to feminist/socialist activists, rape and DV apologism.

Happy
Happy
9 years ago

@ Marc

You are deserving of a modicum of respect in that you are actually active. It stops there, though. If you stuck to your activism without blaming “feminists” (in italics because you, like all MRAs, are unable/unwilling to understand what one actually is) you would find a considerable degree of support amongst genuine feminists (not your MRA deluded fantasy of what a feminist is).

Instead, you seem stricken with that which is common to all MRAs: delusional anger, paranoia and ignorant self importance. Those who self identify with MRAs do so in full knowledge of the revolting system that accomponies it. You self identify as an MRA and you support Paul Elam. Elam is a man who wants any rapist found innocent. That is, if your wife/sister/aunt/niece/cousin/friend was violated by a man, Paul Elam would want that man to walk free. You must be aware of this?

AVfM has blamed and scorned women for being victims of abuse, men for being raped, “feminists” for 9/11 (as well as wars in general) and, as already mentioned, endorse domestic terrorism. Instead of being disgusted at the miserable, vindictive, paranoid and incorrect ramblings on that sad little blog, you praise the “publisher” and refuse to distance yourself from him.

Marc, you are an MRA – self identified. You had an opportunity to distance yourself from the scum that constitute the MRM and you didn’t. Therefore, in the eyes of any decent human, you are scum and should be treated as such.

Happy
Happy
9 years ago

Dear everyone,

I have, for a moment, adopted the methodology of Antz and I have a formal statement to make…

THE ANTI-MRA MOVEMENT HAS WON!! THOSE BIGOTS HAVE BEEN STOPPED!!

Look at the evidence – no-one at their meeting and we now have the attention of the only active men’s rights activists that anyone has ever heard of!!

Victory, brothers & sisters.

How does it taste?

red_locker
red_locker
9 years ago

The thing that aggrivates me most about this Marc is his actual obfusication of important, established things just to serve his agenda.

To see him get defensive and use “IF THERE WAS A WOMAN INVOLVED YOU WOULDN’T CARE” fallacies is one thing, but to hear that he has threatened a shelter and made things harder for abused people of multiple gender identities, thinking that he has won a victory for men, is…ugh.

We need to do something about that shit. It’s just not fair.

cloudiah
cloudiah
9 years ago

Kitten health update, for anyone who cares: swelling in mouth way down. She no longer looks like a lopsided chipmunk! Good appetite. Very purry. 🙂

cloudiah
cloudiah
9 years ago

The thing that bothered me about Marc was that any woman who ever said anything bad was suddenly “all feminists.” And his failure to acknowledge that there are some fucked up MRAs, like Paul Rapey Elam. And that his own ad hom attacks were okay, apparently. And his failure to read his own links. Off to work!

BlackBloc
BlackBloc
9 years ago

The reality is that the men who are actually active out there making things better for men all identify as *feminists*. The self-identified “men’s rights” people is almost entirely right-wing backlashers whose activism is entirely anti-feminism or ‘libertarian’ red-baiting (rather than pro men’s rights), and a few useful idiots who actually do care about men issues and have not yet figured that out (but will end up dropping out the MRM once they do).

M Dubz
M Dubz
9 years ago

@BlackBloc- I know right? I do think it’s important for there to be a male-led movement for issues like male birth control, male rape awareness, acceptance for male homemakers, etc. But it seems to me that most of that comes out of feminist theory and can be built upon, rather than hate-spewing MRAs.

Kendra, the bionic mommy
Kendra, the bionic mommy
9 years ago

Marc’s link also had a post about why the NCFM opposes this year’s reauthorization of the VAWA
The author claims it’s an MRA victory that eight Republican senators from the Senate Judiciary Committee voted against it. The real reason they voted against it was because they opposed the bill expanding more services to LGBT victims and undocumented immigrants. MRA’s are not the reason for the Republicans voting the way they did. They voted against it because Republicans are homophobic and racist.

By the way, this year’s draft of VAWA would help male victims of violence have access to more services. Why on earth would MRA’s oppose the expansion of services if they actually wanted to help male victims? I honestly wish the law would be changed to Violence against People Act just to reiterate the point that it not only helps women but all victims of IPV. If that was the case, the MRA’s couldn’t whine about the name anymore. They’d have to tell the truth about why they oppose it.

Finally, the NCFM links to SAVE, Stop Abusive and Violent Environments, so that shows even more of what their real agenda is. Two of SAVE’s stated core principles are

True Victims – The true victims of abuse deserve priority. False allegations must be stopped.

and

9. Family Preservation – Programs must be designed to preserve families and partner relationships whenever it is possible and safe to do so.

The first principle is flat out saying that there are many victims who lie about their abuse. This hurts all victims by casting doubt and suspicion about their experiences. The second principle is problematic, too. If a family member is abusive to hir partner or children, then the family should not be preserved. The victims need to be away from the abuser.

Thomas
Thomas
9 years ago

@BlackBloc 

The reality is that the men who are actually active out there making things better for men all identify as *feminists*.

Do you have any examples of male feminist making things better for men? Just a few names to back up your claim.

Dracula
Dracula
9 years ago

Kitten health update, for anyone who cares: swelling in mouth way down.

Hooray for improved kitten health! Keep gettin’ better kitty!

Pecunium
9 years ago

If you say anything negative about women you’ll lose your job which most men can’t afford, even mooks have to eat.

Which is why Larry Summers didn’t get a job after his being fired from Harvard. He’s not an advisor to the President, and not being considered for the head of the IMF.

Nope, he criticised women, and so he’s been living in a hovel under the Brooklyn Bridge ever since.

Or, yanno, not.

And billions? More than one billion? One-third of the world’s population killed since Hillary Clinton took over the UN (what happened to Ban Ki Moon)?

Pecunium
9 years ago

Israel, where men can refuse to allow a divorce to happen (in the case of religious marriages).

So the issue of custody is a bit more complicated than you posit.

Marc: The unmarried father in Germany has no responsibilities to the kid, ergo he has no rights to access. If he establishes legal paternity, he gets access, along with the legal responsibilities.

It’s a perfectly reasonable system.

IdeologueReview
9 years ago

RADAR’s rhetoric may seem overblown, but lately the group and its many partners have been racking up very real accomplishments. In 2008, the organization claimed to have blocked passage of four federal domestic-violence bills, among them an expansion of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) to international scope and a grant to support lawyers in pro bono domestic-violence work. Members of this coalition have gotten themselves onto drafting committees for VAWA’s 2011 reauthorization. Local groups in West Virginia and California have also had important successes, criminalizing false claims of domestic violence in custody cases, and winning rulings that women-only shelters are discriminatory.
“Men’s Rights” Groups Have Become Frighteningly Effective

Moving on, it is unfortunate some of you continue to believe the victims of the Duke Lacrosse scandal are rapists. I recommend Until Proven Innocent, a top rated book which is systematic and very thorough. It details some of the malicious lies that have thrown off the feeble-minded, such as the doctored investigations carried out by the lacrosse staff. I know, reading a book can be tedious. Hence, I have provided a concise link for your perusal.
I look forward to your constructive and insightful discussion.

IdeologueReview
9 years ago

*hospital staff

kirbywarp
kirbywarp
9 years ago

A three year old post on a blog, referencing a 2011 reauthorization that has already happened (or at least is overshadowed by the 2012 one), a random book about a 5-year old event, and… a wikipedia article?

All on a dead thread… Brilliant.

katz
9 years ago

I love how unironically FF uses “victims” to refer to people accused of crimes. It’s like he’s forgotten that it could have any other meaning.

How’s Pregno Punchit going, FF?

IdeologueReview
9 years ago

Thank you for your contribution. I know you tried your hardest, and that’s all that counts. It’s okay if your damage makes you lash out at me, unlike some people I can take that kind of abuse. I don’t blame you.
Back to the topic, the problem is that there was never a formal apology issued by the involved parties. So long as there is no admission of wrongdoing, it will remain relevant.

kirbywarp
kirbywarp
9 years ago

Wait, so who’s damaged now? Damn FF’s lack of an address…

@FF:

5 year old case. On a dead thread. Still irrelevant. 🙂 Though you could do to actually read through that second link of yours… and perhaps by miracle a small section of your brain will see the frustration behind the results of the case, where a great victory for white men everywhere is proof positive that black women are lying whores.

Yeah… And my guess is you’ll say its just feminist propaganda twisting a lost case to suit an agenda. 😐

kirbywarp
kirbywarp
9 years ago

Same thing with the Strauss-Kahn case as well actually… White man accused by a woman of color, big media attention, case falls through because the accuser’s credibility was impuned…

You don’t notice Feminists hooting and hollering over every successful rape charge as proof that all men are rapists…

Kyrie
Kyrie
9 years ago

I recommend Until Proven Innocent, a top rated book which is systematic

Bad at English person here. What on earth is a systematic book?

kirbywarp
kirbywarp
9 years ago

@Kyrie:

I guess its a supposed to be a book thats detailed-oriented or summat…

summary listed on the amazon page, first paragraph:

“In this American tragedy, Stuart Taylor, Jr., and KC Johnson argue, law enforcement, a campaigning prosecutor, biased journalists, and left-leaning academics repeatedly refused to pursue the truth while scapegoats were made of these young men, recklessly tarnishing their lives.”

Hoo boy… I see what Samhita was so frustrated with.

Also interesting, the three lacrosse players issued the following demands of the courts in Durham, mainly involving the appointment of a monitor through which all department activities would be approved. This includes the power to:
– Hire and fire all members, including Chief of Police, of the Police Department
– Veto any public communications related to an investigation
– “establish, review and enforce all policies applicable to the management of the Durham Police Department”

So, a single person would essentially run the entire department, having the final say in everything it does… It says the person should be independent, but really… who are the types of people that would be elected to such a position? Fucking awful idea, even if it would only last for 10 years…

kirbywarp
kirbywarp
9 years ago

You know what? Fuck the Duke Lacrosse Case. It happened five years ago, it was complicated enough then to have everyone spouting nonsense with no real idea of what was going on, and it’s just depressing to read up on it… -_-

I’m still inclined to side with Crystal, despite knowing very little about the details of the case, simply because rape is not something you just lie about. I’ve heard enough stories of rape victims to gather that. But it doesn’t really matter, because my opinion doesn’t affect anything that has already happened, and I don’t need to defend anybody who may share my opinion.

The whole thing is just depressing to read about, how the entire country took sides without letting the thing play out, how Nifong handled things so terribly, and how the fact that the case fell through is some sort of victory in favor of all possible rapists now.

Also the fact that people are still gloating over Crystal’s character assassination even now as she’s accused of murder, smugly asking “Where are Crystal Mangum’s liberal supporters now?”, as if you have to either defend someone for everything they do or completely denounce them. Reminds me of how MRAs ask feminists to defend everything that Dworkin and Marcotte and others say and do because we have to, because we must surely worship them rather than appreciate their ideas. -_-

Lotta things to rant about, but probably better to sleep instead.

IdeologueReview
9 years ago

Okay, most of what you wrote, Kirby, was a political sermon. You didn’t really make any citations, you just wrote about how you feel this and that and you don’t need to look into false rape accusations because nobody lies about rape or something.

I’m still inclined to side with Crystal, despite knowing very little about the details of the case, simply because rape is not something you just lie about.

Yeah. It’s a shame you were too prudish to read the Wikipedia article, it might have taught you something.

kirbywarp
kirbywarp
9 years ago

@FactFinder:

Just for clarification, I not only read the wiki article, but read opinion blogs, news articles, wikis on other aspects of the case, and excerpts from a book on Crystal’s point of view. I even linked to one of the opinion pieces I read. I say that I know very little about the case because, despite all that research, the real world is always much more complicated and messy than the simple summaries will give you.

“You didn’t really make any citations, you just wrote about how you feel this and that”

Well.. yeah. I was giving my opinion on the matter. So… I did what I planned to do. Woo. It is fun that you thought I was responding to you or something… 😉

IdeologueReview
9 years ago

Well.. yeah. I was giving my opinion on the matter. So… I did what I planned to do. Woo. It is fun that you thought I was responding to you or something…
Oh, it was fun. Your tantrum was very revealing. Thank you, and I hope you expose yourself again in the future.

kirbywarp
kirbywarp
9 years ago

… tantrum?

kirbywarp
kirbywarp
9 years ago

Ok, yeah… I’m confused now. FF, what exactly do you think I said? Paraphrase is good, direct quoting is cheating. 😛

Pecunium
9 years ago

Kirby: FF (the proud creator of Preggo Punchtit) is trying to score points with tangential insults. I have to give him credit for spotting the form (if being a bit unclear on the substance) of the sort of thing which might make a serious person actually feel a tad offended. So two points for style, but a whiff for execution.

After all, he’s claiming the the topic on a post tallking about the failure of MRAs to getr jocks to come learn how to get away with rape was really about how no one apologised to those poor jocks from Duke, who might have gotten away with rape.

And it’s not as if FF hasn’t revealed some serious problems with women. His idea of what makes for a good role for women in a video game being exhibit number one.

Kendra, the bionic mommy
Kendra, the bionic mommy
9 years ago

Ideologue Review, good for you for linking to an article by Kathryn Joyce. I’m one of her fans, too. I hoped you also read these quotes from her article.

The great majority of custody cases, in which shared parenting is a legitimate option, are settled or resolved privately. But of the 15 percent that go to family court—the cases that fathers’ rights groups target—at least half include alleged domestic abuse.

and

In this, critics like Australian sociologist Michael Flood say that men’s rights movements reflect the tactics of domestic abusers themselves, minimizing existing violence, calling it mutual, and discrediting victims. MRA groups downplay national abuse rates, just as abusers downplay their personal battery; they wage campaigns dismissing most allegations as false, as abusers claim partners are lying about being hit; and they depict the violence as mutual—part of an epidemic of wife-on-husband abuse—as individual batterers rationalize their behavior by saying that the violence was reciprocal.

It’s no wonder the MRM is known as the Abuser’s Lobby.

As far as the Duke Lacrosse case, why do you care if some people think the players were guilty? People are allowed to hold whatever opinions they want about a court case. I still think OJ Simpson was guilty even though he was acquitted in court. Just because the jurors believed he was innocent, doesn’t make it a law that I have to agree with their verdict.

Pecunium
9 years ago

Heck, I think Lizzie Borden did it (and I think that OJ didn’t, or that if he did there was an accomplice).

And, I think the Duke Boys did something (the same way I am sure the Foothill College baseball team had players who engaged in rape, both forcible and statutory; even though no charges were filed).

A bundle of contradictions I am.

Rutee Katreya
9 years ago

Minor point of order:
I don’t think the jurors thought OJ was innocent. They most likely had reasonable doubt after the removal of critical evidence due to police mishandling. Yeah, he did it, but a “Not Guilty” verdict was the only correct response to blatant mishandling of evidence.

darksidecat
9 years ago

We aren’t a jury. The general public when not specifically serving as a criminal juror or court officers are perfectly entitled to form opinions on less than a beyond a reasonable doubt. They are even expected to make judgements on less than a beyond a reasonable doubt standard when serving as civil jurors and officers. The vast majority of people do not expect everything they personally believe to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, quite the contrary in fact. The standard of proof for criminal trials is supposed to be atypically high because of the harshness of the consequences, they don’t apply to life in general.

Also, if you presume everyone has to have a conviction before believing a person is guilty, you also run into a serious catch 22 where no one can ever be prosecuted, because no police officers or prosecutors are ever permitted to believe in their guilt.

Gillian
Gillian
9 years ago

Marc,

The UN had to chastise Israel for discriminating against fathers by automatically denying them equal custody upon separation.

Oh, shut up. The Tender Years Clause has been cancelled just now.

And you also forgot to mention that the only place Jewish Israeli men and women can get divorced is in a Rabbinical court, presided over only by men, and the most patriarchal and traditional of men, where the man automatically has more power just because he’s a man.

How about, if you’re talking about Israel, you mention the thousands and thousands of “agunot” – women whose husbands won’t give them a divorce (in Jewish law, the man has to give the divorce to the woman willingly), who are strung along for years and decades because their husbands want to torment them, unable to start a new relationship because that would make them adulterers in the eyes of the Rabbinical court and mean they’ll be kicked out with nothing, while the men go on to have wonderful relationships (because men are allowed) and even get married sometimes to a SECOND WIFE by getting a special dispensation from 100 (or 1000, don’t remember the number) rabbis?

As for retirement age – it wasn’t cut-and-dried: men HAD to retire at 64 (I think), while women COULD retire at 60 and HAD to retire at 64 (not sure about the exact ages, but it was something along those lines). Also, Israel actually inherited that from Great Britain (remember, we used to have a British mandate here), and that law has also changed, bringing retirement ages closer together, with an eye towards equalizing them.

Hmmph. Stop bringing irrelevant examples without knowing the context and the latest updates. It makes you look silly.

Mike
Mike
9 years ago

[NOTE FROM DF: TRIGGER WARNING FOR THIS COMMENT: GRAPHIC VIOLENCE, TRANSPHOBIA]

David,

Let me ask you this, if the mens rights movement is so insignificant, then why do you spend so much time posting about it. I follow many MRA blogs, and you have more posts than all of them combined. It is clear to me that you have no job, otherwise there is no way you could continuously blog like you do and have time to scour all the MRA posts every single day. My guess about you is that either:

a) You are a typical run of the mill mangina, with better than average writing ability, who is getting paid by the feminist left to spread more male shaming tactics.

or

b) You hate men, and you hate yourself for being a man. Whats the matter, did your mommy make you wear a dress growing up because she really wanted a little girl, and you never quite got over it. Well, since you hate yourself and men so much, why don’t you take care of the problem.. Yes, I know the surgery is expensive and you cannot afford it since you dont have a job, but there is an easy solution.. Why dont you just go to your kitchen, get a sharp knife, and cut off your balls and while you are at it, cut a nice big bloddy slit in their place, problem solved.. I am sure that you could even get an appearance on “The Talk”. They will gladly compensate you for any and all ER fees incurred. You would be a national feminist hero.. A man who hated men and himself so much that he cut off his own penis and did not even need a wife to do it for him, I can see the cheering of the feminists now.

So, can’t you just consider that there is just an inkling of truth that the MRA statements might be umm true, considering that many of those speaking out have advanced degrees, hold jobs that pay them more money in one year than you will make in your entire life, and that they are all basically commenting on the same observations over and over again. Hmm, just food for though. Your whole blog just proves to me that the feminists are shaking in their boots as more and more men become awakened to the truth of feminism.

Viscaria
Viscaria
9 years ago

a) You are a typical run of the mill mangina, with better than average writing ability,

Aww, he thinks you write well! Of course, he’s a hateful transphobic asshole, so I suppose that doesn’t mean much. But hey, he knows what he’s talking about! He has advanced degrees!