[TW for the comments to this post; discussions of rape and abuse.]
The Southern Poverty Law Center, an organization devoted to tracking and exposing hate groups, has just published a detailed report on the misogyny and violent rhetoric so pervasive in the Men’s Rights Movement — as well as the actual violence inspired by this sort of hatred of women. It’s a piece you all should read, even though few of the details will be new to long-time readers of this blog.
Arthur Goldwag, an expert on conspiracy-mongers and the far right, argues (I think correctly) that the Men’s Rights movement is largely a backlash against the many successes of feminism over the last several decades:
It’s not much of a surprise that significant numbers of men in Western societies feel threatened by dramatic changes in their roles and that of the family in recent decades. Similar backlashes, after all, came in response to the civil rights movement, the gay rights movement, and other major societal revolutions. What is something of a shock is the verbal and physical violence of that reaction.
[Thomas] Ball’s suicide brought attention to an underworld of misogynists, woman-haters whose fury goes well beyond criticism of the family court system, domestic violence laws, and false rape accusations.
The Men’s Rights Movement, as it exists today, is not a civil rights movement; it is a regressive, hateful reaction against a civil rights movement — that is, feminism.
Those who truly care about the rights of men, and who are not motivated by a hatred of women or feminism, need to repudiate the hate and the violent rhetoric of the Men’s Rights Movement as it exists today. Only then can there be a Men’s Rights Movement worthy of the name.
EDITED TO ADD: The SPLC has also put up a guide to some of the more hateful sites in the manosphere. Longtime readers will be familiar with most of them.
EDITED TO ADD AGAIN: And a piece debunking some Men’s Rights Myths.
EDITED TO ADD AGAIN, AGAIN: The discussion of the SPLC report on the Men’s Rights Subreddit is surprisingly reasonable, so far. (I mean, compared to what I expected. Meanwhile, over in this thread, the Men’s Rightsers are behaving as they usually do.)
Nice fucking divide-and-conquer, asshole.
The only difference between me and the women you’re calling liars is that I screamed. If the same things had happened and I hadn’t screamed, you’d be throwing me to the wolves. And hell, I only screamed after he’d started. Maybe before that he had no way of knowing I didn’t want it!
Thanks to people like you, people who make sure every judge and every jury hears “BUT WOMEN LIE WOMEN REGRET THINGS,” I wouldn’t have a chance of a conviction.
Have you met a woman? For fuck’s sake.
You know a lot of us here have sex with men, right? Men that we’re not accusing of rape, right?
Be careful around a man who tells you “your kind is terrible, but you’re one of the good ones.” It turns to “you’re just another one of them!” the instant they get angry.
Roberta: You completely discount the possibility of regret. Something that research shows us is extremely common. Especially among women.
That’s it… now I can call you a misogynist with a clear conscience.
Fact: Women like sex.
Fact: Women are people.
Fact: People get to decide whom they fuck, when they fuck, and how they fuck.
It’s really simple. I want to have sex with someone. I let her know. She says, “that sounds lovely, your condoms or mine?
She says, “nope. not interested.”
Those are the two main ways such a conversation goes. Sometimes someone will say, “I want to have sex with you”,and I’ll say, “What sort, because I’m not in the mood for PIV, or anal, but hands and mouths are ok.”
Sometimes she says, “Ok,’ and we have fun. Sometimes she says, “hands are ok, but I’m not into getting oral”. I’ll probably say ok to that too.
Sometimes she’ll say, “I was really in the mood for some pussy-pounding” and we’ll agree this isn’t the time for us to be fucking.
That’s how it works.
For thirty years that’s how it’s worked for me. No rape charges. A fair number of repeat partners.
Communication, how does it work?
What I see, actually, is you being pissed that women get to decide whom they fuck. You are demanding that only if a dude uses force (or a really credible threat of force/violence) that it’s not rape. That means men can be as pushy, and manipulative, as they like. Use a bit of weed, or booze, to get her loosened up, and then press on until they get a, “yes”. Once they have the magic word, it’s game on ’til they pop.
What I don’t understand is why you like this model better? What’s in it for you? What’s in it for society? I see what’s in it for jerks and assholes (male or female), but what about the rest of us?
PS. the buy a jaguar thing… not so much, purchases of more than $5,000 in Calif. have no “cooling off period”, but if what you bought is less than $5,000 and the seller refuses to take it back and give you a refund… that’s an actionable tort, and a crime.
Consent, even to purchase, is revocable. Refusal to accept that recovation is a crime.
I kind of think Roberta’s “BF” is like Antz FOREIGN BRIDE.
” I’m one of the few women who doesn’t think all sex is rape.”
Until I read this I was simply rolling my eyes at Roberta, but now she has lost all credibility as a person arguing in good faith. And while your repeated apologies for the rape stories being revealed seem sincere, I can’t honestly take her as a reliable person any further. I give most people the benefit of the doubt and simply assume they’re just wrong headed in their assumptions because of past experiences. But this comment is so over the top and vile that I simply cannot do anything but lump her in with the likes of the Backward Male and people who think pedophiles are okay as long as the child they rape didn’t say no.
Roberta: Whether or not you agreed to have sex is a matter of objective, empirical fact.
Really? Is there some record of my willing participation? A recording of the event? A barometer of my mens rea?
Where are the records kept? Who is the arbiter? How are close calls decided?
I think Roberta has just crossed the line into Poe territory. “All women think sex is rape” could just be sarcasm, but her BF “showing his gratitude in all kinds of ways” is just strange.
I’ll be back in a hour or so, I have to get chicken for supper. Have fun with the piñata while I’m gone. If there’s any candy left when I get back I’ll take my whacks too.
Blockquote>I’m so sorry for you. You were actually raped. Something only a tiny fraction of self-described “victims” were subjected to. That person legitimately deserves to be in prison. It’s a shame you didn’t report zir.
You are not all women, though. The fact that you would never report regretted sex doesn’t mean women don’t engage in such behavior on a regular basis. My BF is so lucky to be with me. I’m one of the few women who doesn’t think all sex is rape.
He knows that, and he shows me his gratitude in all kinds of ways.
Nice fauxpology. You’re not sorry at all.
I don’t believe a word you say. Up to and including your BF and how lucky he is.
Y’know, a lot of your MRA buddies would have words for you about the gratitude your BF shows you, and they aren’t nice words.
@pwxunium
Ok, I’ve been trolling the last few posts, but you seriously lack intelligence if you can’t see how that would make an enormous difference come trial.
No person can ever know with certainty whether or not you genuinely want to have sex with them. The question of “want” is entirely subjective. Perhaps you gave ever sign that you wanted to have sex, but this was only to avoid hurting your BF’s feelings. A recording of some sort would also be insufficient to prove innocence. Even if said recording showed what appears to be enthusiastic consent.
You could just argue that you were putting on for one reason or another, and no amount of video evidence could disprove that claim. Your desires are subjective and unfalsifiable. Your agreements are a matter of objective, empirical fact. The difference is pretty god damn clear.
Goddamn blockquotes.
You know, maybe I’m missing something here, but it seems to me if there were any significant number of women accusing man after man of rape, the people dealing with them in the judicial system just might fucking notice.
This is just sad.
Yeah, the men in your life are so lucky to have you…..
Holy fuck that statement was so surreal I thought I’d glimpsed another universe. Who the hell thanks a woman for that!
Scene in my head: roberta and partner post coitus having a smoke. Just before he rolls over “Thanks babe, for not calling it rape. I’m so grateful you can stay in my bed until I get up in the morning. But you better be gone before the coffee’s made”
Also Roberta, your refusal to answer my post about three beers, I’m just going to assume that you realized how stupid your thinking is on that. Its okay, you can thank me later for straightening that ouyt for you.
There is no appreciable difference between Roberta “trolling” and Roberta just being Roberta…
Nobinayamu, if it’s true, it’s only because she tells the man all the time how lucky he is.
What a great relationship. “You’re lucky to have me, I could be accusing you of rape, but I’m not! Tee hee.”
Wait, just a second ago you said that if Holly what lord of the world all mhet men would be in prison, now you wish that all women were good girls as Holly? Keep you BS straight.
If you don’t like Antz and things are not so well with your lucky BF, you could meet another of our (former in this case) residents, B____ (sorry, I can’t say his name, it’s bad luck)
Ok, one for the road:
You’re right, holly. But’s that’s only because your definition is not yet the legal definition. If it were, we’d see plenty of those cases.
“I screamed: oh god, fuck me! the whole time but deep down I didn’t really mean it. He should have known that and he didn’t. So send him to prison for 20 years for rape.”
If you were empress of the world. Every het man in existence would be in prison.
Roberta… I’d love to see you plead a case. I think I could contain my laughter enough to avoid being eject for disorder.
Roberta is the sum of all trolls. A little AntZ, a pinch of DKM, a soupcon of NWO, and a dash of B___.
Just in case you missed it the first time.
@pillow
you must have missed the part where I said:
“Nowhere in the world is 3 beers enough to make someone incapable of legal consent (unless you are incredibly tiny and a tremendous lightweight). A popular misconception is that any amount of drinking means that someone can’t consent legally.
It varies somewhat by jurisdiction, but standard is almost always incapacitation by alcohol, not just impairment by alcohol. Incapacitation means that you are so drunk that you are unable to properly understand the who, what, where, why, and when of what’s happening. Nearly, or actually, passed out.
Having a few drinks and somewhat impaired judgement is never legally rape. So long as you are awake, alert, and consciously aware of what’s happening, then you can consent.”
So Roberta, what the hell are you doing having sex? If women are these lying liars when it comes to sex, what makes you so special?
@Pecunium: I can’t find it on Youtube, but all I can think of after reading your comment is the Catch Me if You Can scene in which Frank impersonates a lawyer. The one where the judge ends up asking “What the hell is wrong with you?”
Well at least Roberta got brief-er, if not any more coherant, logical, sensible, realistic or entertaining.
Especially entertaining.
Still bored, back to work.
But Roberta, that’s exactly what happens to me after 3 beers. So now what? There’s no way to objectively prove what someones alcohol tolerance is while in court.
So essentially what you’re arguing is that men should just have to trust women not to call regretted sex rape. You know, just like women should just trust their male partners to not become abusive.
We don’t need anti Domestic Violence laws. Just trust us. We promise that we wont abuse our power. Anyone who disagrees plainly just hates men. How dare you stigmatize a whole gender as abusive? You don’t need VAWA. Just trust us.
A subjective felony that entirely dependent on the “victim’s” interpretation of his/her own feelings? That’s fine. Anyone demanding any kind of concrete due process specifity in our rape laws clearly just hates women. Just trust women not to abuse their power and label regretted sex “rape.” Anyone who demands any kind of due process protection or an objective definition of rape, plainly just hates women.