Given the enmity towards women in general, and feminists in particular, that’s omnipresent in the manosphere, it seems logical to assume that most of the dudes lingering around MRA, PUA and MGTOW sites online would take a certain secret pleasure in seeing women suffer.
As regular readers of this blog know all too well, oftentimes the desire to see women suffer is not so secret: some MRAs and others of their ilk literally laugh at women getting cancer, declare that rapists should be given medals, openly fantasize about “beat[ing] the living shit” out of women, and tell feminists who complain about this sort of shit that they’re “so pernicious and repugnant that the idea of fucking your shit up gives me an erection.” (Those last two examples come from Paul Elam, one of the MRM’s most influential bloggers.) Still others send rape and death threats to outspoken women online.
But good news, folks! It turns out that not all manosphere misogynists want women to suffer. Why? Because suffering is an ineffective way to put women in their place. That, at least, is the argument of a fellow calling himself Höllenhund. In a comment on Susan Walsh’s Hooking Up Smart blog, he offered this argument:
Making women suffer wouldn’t achieve anything in itself – I’m pretty sure the overwhelming majority of the Manosphere would agree. Women are normally solipsistic and they fail to understand their own urges and don’t comprehend the connection between cause and effect. They’d never understand why they’re suffering in the first place.
So, basically, in his mind, women are dumber than dogs and thus harder to train. Even worse, the suffering women can sit down in the street and cry, and countless “white knights,” hoping to win their approval (and get in their pants) will rush to their aid:
Suffering only motivates them to fish for male sympathy (and thus investment) through crying and whining, to blame ‘ bad men’ for their ‘misfortune’ and thus play the game of ‘let’s you and him fight’. That’s how it has always been.
So making women suffer is largely pointless. I’d go further and say it’d actually be detrimental to men because it encourages white-knighting and intra-male competition. …
And some of the ladies even seem to sort of like it:
Not to mention the fact that many women actually seem to find some sort of twisted pleasure in suffering, that all this’d simply serve to justify more anti-male legislation and whatnot.
Poor Höllenhund doesn’t have much hope that women will ever see how totally terrible they really are
[T]he notion of making women ‘admit their faults’ is pie-in-the-sky as well. Again, I’m sure pretty much everyone in the Manosphere would agree. You have a bigger chance of seeing pigs fly.
If women are to recognize their faults in this SMP [Sexual Marketplace], they need to have a realistic picture of both their own sexuality and the SMP in the first place, plus they need to have empathy for beta males …
Er, you’re lecturing us about empathy?
Sorry, on with the rest of the sentence:
plus they need to be imbued with the sense of morality without which the very concept of ‘fault’ is meaningless.
And lecturing us about morality too?
I think we’ll sooner see Haiti become a dreaded military superpower.
I’d rather see that than live in a world in which women were so self-hating that they actually believed they were guilty of whatever unnamed sins Höllenhund attributes to them.
NOTE: I found Höllenhund’s comment because the blogger at Pro-Male/Anti-Feminist Technology cited it as a prime example of the sort of brave “truth telling” that will get you banned “on feminist sites that supposedly support men.” And yes, it apparently did get poor Höllenhund banned from Hooking Up Smart. I’m not quite sure how Susan Walsh, a traditionalist devoted to slut shaming in a thousand different flavors, counts as feminist, but that’s not the point. The point is: I’m regularly accused of “cherry picking” comments from MRAs. In this case, Mr. PMAFT picked the comment for me.
@cloudiah: “And why should we trust you to make either a services or needs assessment?”
Do you have a recommendation about who would be qualified? I’d like to know.
Big momma:
that is how we assess need. that is how we establish what needs to be done. By asking the people who use our service what they want, what they have experienced and then devising strategies. and i do this every working day.
Because you didnt pull the data from your ass or read it on an MRA approved website they won’t believe you. Sad 🙁
@BigMomma: “ok….so we’ll assess service provision based on……? that would be need, wouldn’t it? (in the real world)”
Yes, but you ask victims what they need first. Then you send a survey to the service providers asking, in as efficient and as clear a way as possible, how and whether they meet those needs. After that, you publish the results in a guide or on the Web, or somehow. But to me, you don’t ask service providers which victims don’t need them, as the prelude to exclude such victims from receiving services. To me, THAT is what’s biased.
eh?
i’m really unclear as to when i have asked service providers which victims don’t need them.
In fact, i have never asked that.
in fact, everything i have ever participated in has been about identifying gaps in service provision.
In fact, i’m all for service expansion.
the problem is that in the current financial climate, services are being cut…not expanded.
My sector has no control over funding issues. we can only ask and hope.
i had to read what you said several times to grasp your logic and see how hard you are trying to manipulate this to prove that men are being ignored as part of some dastardly scheme.
I love (hate?) how, even in Roscoe’s hypothetical, the woman was still the one who pushed the man into doing violence.
At least he’s explained what he means when he’s talking about male victims of domestic violence. If a man abuses his wife to “punish” her for talking back and beats up anyone who tries to intervene, he’s the victim. Where’s his help line, dammit?
…yeah, that was a weird little fantasy sequence, wasn’t it?
Do you have a recommendation about who would be qualified? I’d like to know.
I’m gonna say it should be someone like Big Momma who appears to have quite a lot of experience in this area.
aw shucks, thanks Captainbathrobe
*blushes*
can Ami help?
Hey Ideologue Review, got some facts for you. If you go to the top of any page on this website, you’ll find the words “Comment Policy” which go to this linked page. On it, you will find someone called “Fact Finder” wrote a comment on 15 July last year.
• David pointed out, without revealing the exact circumstances, that you are the same person who was pointing under the name of “Fact Finder”.
• David pointed out, without revealing the exact circumstances, that some of the earlier comments made under the name of “Fact Finder” were not hyperlinked to your then usual blog, but to a DeviantArt profile (peririck).
• The 15 July comment I noted above links to that DeviantArt profile.
• The Deviant Art profile hosts a misogynistic scenario for a game called Preggo Punchout.
Is it not reasonable to presume, given your woefully poor record at truthfulness, that your evasions about being Fact Finder, the DeviantArt profile being your own, and having authored the Preggo Punchout game, are actually testimony to those things being true? Why would you link to the DeviantArt profile if it was not your own, and what justification of the contrary would be in any way convincing?
@CassandraSays: Nope, you are not the only one. I never saw the original Pony show, have no interest in the reboot (somebody linked to a video and said this will suck you in no matter what, I got bored in the first few moments and clicked away).
No interest whatsoever. Though I did advise a grad student on his research project on bronies…….
@FactFucker I don’t expect an answer, since you didn’t answer my question about whether or not you condemned the white Christian terrorists who bomb, murder, and harass at women’s health clinics…..but now, seeing your rantings about your omg privacy being violated, I assume that you have publicly on his site called out Paul Elam for posting information about the feminists he deems criminal?
Since you’re all up in the air with your moral righteousness and shit, amirite?
*listens to crickets chirp*
Roscoe, your scenario has a shelter that sounds more Embassy Suites than many of the shelters in the real world. Not many shelters offer private bedrooms and private bathrooms. It would be wonderful if there were more shelters set up like that, but it’s very expensive. Many real world shelters have barracks style living arrangements in old converted warehouses, or they’re foreclosed houses that have been fixed up. Another problem with your scenario is that you describe it as operating under capacity. That would also be ideal, but in the real world a lot of shelters are always at full capacity and do not have enough space to take in everyone that needs help.
You said you’ve already formed support groups for battered men. Why doesn’t your group go out and talk to business owners and other rich people in your community to show there’s a need and raise funds for building a men’s shelter? You could also bring your cause to corporations that cater to a mostly male demographic. That’s how battered women got Avon to take on the cause of domestic violence against women. I think that would be more helpful than demanding that existing shelters build new wards for men with private suites, but not offering any ideas of how to pay for them.
It’s easy to talk about what would be ideal and then totally ignore the reality that the existing resources are spread thin and that our current shelters operate on shoestring budgets.
I love this hullabaloo about fart finder’s privacy being violated. FF, try to imagine being a feminist troll on AVFM. You post over and over, trying to gaslight and tick off the regulars. Do you think they would hesitate to dox the everliving fuck out of you? I don’t think they would. I don’t think they’d stop at revealing a deviant art page either, especially if they found out you wanted to create a game that fetishized violence against men.
You would end up on register-her, at the very least. Your job and safety would also be at risk.
What I’m sayin is, you should be grateful you’re trolling such an ethical site. 😉
Never mind about the collaboration on a survey of DV shelters… Woke up this morning and re-read the last few comments, and determined that there’s way too much suspicion. The massive amount of work involved should dispel any doubts about one’s ulterior motives, but I see that this still would not be enough to appease some people here. If any one of you put in that level of effort, I’d say it’s a solid bet that you genuinely care. It’s just too bad that suspicion, accusation and innuendo get so in the way of what would have been a very worthy project.
Shorter Roscoe: why aren’t the women doing the work? Whhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy???
Oops, I see ithiliana made a similar comment. It bears repeating, it’s just too fact-tastic.
Kirbywarp does not know how to handle the massive amounts of vaguery and third-personness that one may find in a person called Roscoe’s latest post. Kirbywarp might even suspect that, once again, we have somebody lying through their teeth, being asked to provide details of their point of view, and putting up a big wall of superfluous jibber-jabber to avoid answering straight while simultaneously attacking those who ask.
Kirbywarp smells a troll who couldn’t maintain a position even if it was stapled to the ground.
Oh FF.
In other news, the original My Little Pony was on when I was a little girl, and like many TV shows directed at girls at the time, it had almost nothing in terms of conflict or plot, so I didn’t watch it much. I’ve seen bits of the new one, though, and it seems way better. If I had kids at the right age for it, I would totally encourage them to watch. No interest in watching it myself, though.
@Viscaria:
That… describes modern day politics far too well to be fair. And so catchy. 🙂
There is a lack of services for men because of two reasons: one, lack of demand – not lack of need, lack of demand. For example, there (probably) are men who would benefit from a shelter but they don’t do anything about finding one. Two, why don’t they? Easy: the patriarchal attitude that men aren’t men if they aren’t strong, physically, emotionally and mentally.
Pop quiz? To what extent are feminists responsible for reasons one & two listed above? Answer: to no extent what-so-ever.
MRAs, to paraphrase, hate women/”feminists” more than they love their fellow man.
Why? Ask them. They are horrible, pathetic grubby people.
I guess politics have been like that for a while, kirby, because that’s from The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas, which first ran in 1978 (this is from the 1982 movie) :D.
I like the thing he does with his hat.
BTW, I read an article about a shelter for men once, somewhere in the UK. It wasn’t male victims of female abuse very statistically very few – though I am going from memory.
Whilst looking, though, I found this article:
http://www.theguardian.pe.ca/News/Local/2011-11-25/article-2815652/Desperate-measures-were-taken-to-keep-mens-shelter-open/1
It shows what can be achieved if people actually try and do some activism to change something. Look at the rather telling LACK of misandry from the men & women who want to keep this shelter open.
Presumably Marc (and other MRA trolls) would want to sue this shelter until one opens for women?
“It’s just too bad that suspicion, accusation, and innuedo get so in the way of what would have been a very worthy project.”
Nice to see you finally taking responsibility for your attitude. Also, nice flounce. Kindly stick it.
Uncivil?! Oh no, how could I be uncivil in the face of bigotry and hate! The horror! The horror!
And swearing! Oh no, not the swearing! It will break their fragile little ears!
@Hippodameia: “Nice to see you finally taking responsibility for your attitude. Also, nice flounce. Kindly stick it.”
What attitude of mine is that, exactly? Do you have any specific quotes? And do you apply the standard that you’re trying to apply to me only to me, or also to yourself and those whose statements you agree with?
Also, regarding “flouncing.” Do you think that I should invest time collaborating on a project with someone who has openly called my sincerity into question, and who has invited others as collaborators who have done the same? Would you collaborate on a labor-intensive project with a team that mistrusted your motives? It was not I who personally attacked others, but the reverse. And remember, when considering my motives, the primaru purpose of the project in question is to identify gender-neutral DV shelters in the U.S., so that underserved DV victims can get the help that they need without being rejected any number of times by service providers who couldn’t or wouldn’t meet their needs. Why should I mislead the people who I want to help?
Also, I find it perplexing that in continuing to go it alone on this project, I am now being accused of “making women do the work.” This project is my idea and I’m the only one who is and who has been working on it. Who is making anyone do anything?
Lastly, Kirbywarp: If you can be specific about how I have somehow changed positions on something in this thread, then please do tell. Specificity would help. Otherwise, consider yourself ignored.
Now commenting on a blog is a “labor intensive” project collaboration?
P.S. Fuck