[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.)
GWW:
What, we’re a hate group!!!??? Well, hem, your name is silly! So there.
At least GWW has a pleasant voice to listen, but gawd is she allergic to making sense?
Notable points:
I’d like to see the golden faucets of the SPLC’s palace, they must be nice. She say that the SPLC makes tons of money, but doesn’t care apparently to expand on how she knows it, how much they ‘make’ and where that money go.
And apparently it doesn’t matter what MRM do or say as long as RadFem Hub don’t like men. Which is half of the video (which is nice, because i could just skip that)
And to finish, just a little touch of ableism.
Money grubbing? But…but I comment on Manboobz FOR FREE! 🙁
RE: Chris
Protip: Men CANNOT out-talk women. Don’t even try. We don’t have the instinct for it and we are handicapped by a need to make sense.
Have you SEEN NWOslave type, dude? Seriously, you should go have a conversation with him. Talk about fluoride and Jews or something.
I personally totally believe that TS’s abuser identified as a feminist, because guess what? Feminists can be abusive too! That doesn’t make feminism WRONG.
TS’s abuser may have identified as a feminist, but that did not make her an abuser. She would have been an abuser no matter what her personal beliefs are/were.
And that was the issue. Whether she abused him BECAUSE of feminism. That’s what people challenged him on. And that’s what TS has been misrepresenting from the start in all his posts on this.
Or DKM. Though NWO would totally beat int term of quantity. It’s probably because DKM is too busy taking care of his dolls.
Nah, DKM has at least some facile resemblance to logic, while NWO is like timecube guy.
Also, what is WITH the trolls assuming everyone here is a woman and that’s the cause AND effect of us being stupid?
–Rogan
But he does speak a lot.
http://manboobz.com/2012/03/11/hey-ladies-the-mens-rights-movement-needs-you-like-really-really-needs-you/comment-page-4/#comment-134972
DSC: Now, it would be hypocritcal of me to engage in an discussion about aspects of your molestation so I won’t. I’ll just add that I certainly wouldn’t accuse you of lying about your molester being a Reublican.
David: “And that was the issue. Whether she abused him BECAUSE of feminism. That’s what people challenged him on. And that’s what TS has been misrepresenting from the start in all his posts on this.”
Bostonian original words accused TS of lying about whether his rapist identified as a feminist to him, not whether or to what extent her feminism was a factor in her decision to rape and abuse him. Two different things.
The consensus seem to have shifted ocer time from “call 1-800-BITEME”, “Which wasn’t saying TS was lying about being abused, but of padding it with details to make it more useful when beating feminists with it.” (Telling rape victims that you think they are exaggerating a bit is something I would do my best to avoid), “if I thought Bostonian was over the line, I’d say so” to Bostonian failed to express what he meant. Which I think is an markedly improvement.
This discourse clearly has run it’s course. I’ll just re-iterate to you David that allowing a continuation of a discussion about aspects of a rape (including assertions about the thruthfulness of aspects of the victim’s account of that rape) after the victim has been banned from commenting is in my view a moderation failure. But it is of-course is your perogative to do as you see fit on your blog.
And you are still happy to let TS off the hook for doing much worse to other people, I notice. Why are you so reluctant to even question TS for mocking other rape victims, when my statement, bothered you so much you needed other commenters to condemn it. Please do note that several people disagreed with my original statement, and said so. You agree with TS’s mockery and cruelty towards both Holly and LBT.
Tamen: I’ll just add that I certainly wouldn’t accuse you of lying about your molester being a Reublican.
Way to move the goalposts. No one said TS’ molester wasn’t a feminist. We said that feminism isn’t why she raped him.
That goes hand in hand with your continuing to ignore TS choice to be gleeful that Roberta was abusive, and derisive, to a male survivor of rape.
Why then should we take your criticism as anything other than apologia for TS?
Hi all. First comment and occasional, appreciative lurker. There’s a regular poster here, a man, who was raped by a woman when he was a child, and I believe him. So my comment is not in response to his horrible experience AT ALL, but more directed towards the amount of denial so many others here have expressed when discussing the general subject of women who rape adult-sized men.
I wouldn’t say that it never happens, but come on. The average man is bigger, stronger, more assertive, more conditioned to male entitlement, than the average women who is smaller, weaker, and most importantly — socially conditioned into some version of a caretaker role. Hell, most women are so freaking passive that they won’t even take themselves out of harm’s way (think elevator) even when their instincts are screaming “rapist alert” if removing themselves from the situation might insult the feelings of the dood. Women are conditioned to put their own safety at risk in order to protect the feelings of men.
Rape is all about putting a victim in her place, the dehumanized sex class. Or putting a young boy or effeminate man in HIS place, the dehumanized woman class. Rarely is rape merely about sexual gratification, it’s normally associated with resentment, entitlement, and “power over”. So it makes very little sense for someone to assume that a woman could somehow “put an adult man in his place” by turning the tables through rape, even if she were strong enough or intimidating enough. Unlike most women, a man is socially conditioned to physically resist if something is disgusting enough, not lay there and think of England. Sure there’s exceptions, but come on.
So the total number of adult women who have raped adult-sized men in the entire history of the world is probably so statistically small that the actual percentage makes the word “outlier” appear enormous by comparison. The comments which implied that society needs to start considering the average woman to be as dangerous to men as the average man actually is to women, is harmful. It’s a denialistic, naive attempt to pretend that everyone is equal in regards to oppression and privilege status, and that no victim class and no abuser class exists. Men and women aren’t equal yet, and aren’t socialized to react in identical ways to abuse or the wielding of physical/social power.
I really appreciate what David is doing with this site, but sheesh, there are some major pollyanna’s over here.
Cheryl, many men are also socially conditioned to not hit women. Many men have no aggressive tendencies whatsoever. Many men are drinking and or drunk when they are assaulted. Many men wake up to find a woman already on them. Many men are socially conditioned to not turn down attractive women even if they don’t want sex at that time. All men have nerves, which means it hurts when they are hit. All men have fears and vulnerabilities that can be exploited. All men can be roofied. Many men don’t know how to spot a potential rapist because our society doesn’t teach boys how to protect themselves.
Men can be raped. Men can be made fearful and men can be hurt. Please don’t spread the invulnerable men meme. It makes it so much harder for boys or men to get the help they need.
RE: Cheryl
My husband is built like a linebacker, athletic, and more than capable of winning a fight. He got sexually assaulted by a woman much, much smaller than him.
Stop making it even harder for men like him to ever admit something happened to him.
Chris: I think you’re in the wrong place if you want to ban feminists. Check the ‘Boob Roll’ on the right side of the page, I’m sure you’ll find something to your liking.
@Cheryl
Just on this site alone: zhinxy could probably easily overpower me (being ex-military), mags ditto, CassandraSays as a former athlete probably could, I think it’s KathleenB who does fencing and other training could also most likely overpower me and that’s just off the top of my head. I’m 6ft 170lbs and only slightly out of shape strength-wise. As people keep saying, all things equal a man could most likely overpower a woman, but any given situation the odds are different. Also, someone more knowledgeable please feel free to give official stats
Cheryl, I’m just going to quote from some posts on another thread:
Shadow:
And a little further down, Holly:
Shadow: Did fencing – I only have a third of a working leg on one side, which makes regular training hard. But I know what to do (and not to do) in a physical fight, and won’t hesitate to use my size and speed to fight really dirty. Oddly, very few people seem willing to mix it up with me once they see me – once had a guy who was totally ready to throw down because I was parking in the vicinity of his house. Until I actually got out of the car…
RE: Cheryl
Also add me to the list of men who’re pretty sure they could be physically overpowered by a good number of women. And that’s NOT including if drugs, terror, rope, accomplices, or any number of other things were involved. Also, I simply don’t know how to physically fight back; I completely shut down. I don’t know HOW to really hit someone.
@KathleenB
Yep, I thought I remembered right but sometimes the info from my lurking days gets all mishmashed up. And the thing is, I’m the quintessential “average guy”. I work out, I grew up learning how to throw a punch and brawling with my brothers and friends. Haven’t been in a fist fight but I’ve gotten in a couple of altercations. And I still have no doubt that you could drop me in a second because you have the training and are also probably in better shape than I am.
Also, now that Cloudiah reminded me of that thread, I want to quote Holly’s post because that summed up the issue brilliantly:
I mean, there’s a reason that there are more male rapists than female ones, which is what you’re talking about Cheryl, but you underestimate women.
Also Cheryl, you are forgetting that rapists already know what they want to do and have planned for it to some degree. Which means that they are already mentally prepared to rape, while their victim has yet to figure out that they are a target and what to do about it. That takes time the victim doesn’t have.
Honestly I’m starting to wonder if Cheryl is one of those false flag feminists that people were babbling about a while back.
@CassandraSays; my trolldar is pinging a bit now that I’ve seen all her comments today.