Tom Martin, a former gender studies student at the London School of Economics, recently became a minor celebrity amongst Men’s Rights activists and other angry men when he sued his alma mater for alleged sexism against men.
He’s now had his case thrown out of court. Let’s go to the Camden New Journal for details:
Tom Martin, 39, who lives in Covent Garden, claimed he suffered “anti-male discrimination” while studying for a master’s degree in gender, media and culture at the world-famous university in Holborn.
Representing himself at his application for a trial at the Central London County Court on Tuesday, Mr Martin complained of a lack of men-only sessions in the university’s gym and the preponderance of posters in the corridors advertising services for women without the presence of similar materials geared towards men.
Mr Martin, who describes himself as a feminist, said “hard” chairs in the library were uncomfortable for men and that a “male blaming culture” was evident in course materials, which “ignored men’s issues” and focused on wrongs done by them.
Damn those misandrist chairs and their man-hating hardness!
The judge didn’t buy it, saying Martin’s case had essentially no chance of success. He threw out the case and ordered Martin to pay LSE’s legal costs.
Martin, welcome to reality.
On Twitter, Martin responded to the news by calling his critics “whores.” One of many examples:
But I was really discriminated against, you whores!
And, yes, his Twitter handle is indeed Sexismbusters.org.
EDITED TO ADD: Actual headline today on What Men are Saying About Women:
EDITED AGAIN TO ADD: Tom Martin has replied to this post in the comments. Some highlights:
My legal complaint did NOT involve a complaint about the seating. You have been misled by the press – The Times and the West End Extra/Camden New Journal both mysteriously got it wrong.
One year prior to joining the university, when visiting its library, I did complain, that the seating being hard created a greater disadvantage for men than for women, as men have considerably smaller weight-bearing buttock pads than women, and men are heavier too – so for men, on average heavier than women, have more weight bearing down onto a pad which is approximately four times smaller than women’s on average – according to a BBC documentary on the subject.
He then details his attempts to fight this grave injustice. Also, there’s this:
[S]everal comments here are confusing ‘whore’ with ‘slut’. A slut has sex freely, which I am all for. Freedom of association is the ultimate in humanity. A whore charges for sex. Even if a woman is a virgin, but is waiting for Mr Right to buy her something, she’s a whore.
It’s counter-intuitive, but a lot of professional feminists are whores. They expect the government and men to do them special favours. They make up stories to convince men and government to believe that we all owe women something.
But really, if someone were keeping a tab, then…
Women owe men five years pension.
Women owe men some National Service.
Women owe men some inventions.
Women owe men positive discrimination in university curricula.
Women owe men some child access.
It’s women’s round at the bar too.
For the whole thing, see here.
For more charming quotes from Tom, see this post on the blog Butterflies and Wheels.
The sex ticket thing actually comes from Zamyatin’s “We.” Probably the most unknown of the most publicly ripped off novels ever (though Orwell, unlike Huxley, gives Zamyatin credit for the inspiration, if anything, 1984 was his response novel).
I’m still going to call it the Brave New World school because if I called it the Zamyatin’s We school the joke becomes too obscure. Although We is a better book.
Camile is a perfect example of how bad women have had it. One woman comes out writes, and does something strong and intellectual and she’s mistaken for feminist. The woman is entirely full of shit, and I don’t want to hear how “some” of her ideas are good, because that would be mighty hard for her to be wrong every time she opened her mouth. Where she was right, I’m sure better people have said it. That’s why I say, “entirely” full of shit.
She’s classist and could care less about the exploitation that women suffer, she’s like a Rand libertarian thumbing her nose at the masses while stealing their money.
Several of you are arguing that putting the price down to zero would be rape, by falsely claiming or assuming that I’m arguing or suggesting you would be obliged to continue servicing Johns for free, when I have clearly stated that you get to choose your sex partners.
more freely when you’re not a whore.
It is beyond pathetic that so many of you have chosen to manufacture a rape scenario instead of address the core arguments.
And no one else here has picked you up on it.
Twits.
@aunthortense
Paglia is one of those juvenile idiots who thinks being Politically Incorrect makes her rebellious and edgy. In reality, she just caters to ancient prejudices, which is about as opposite to rebelliousness as you can get.
Her quotes are pseudoscientific babble and could have been written by the usual pretentious MRA.
P.S. Comparing Paglia to Nietzsche is an insult to Nietzsche, who was against gender essentialism and was as relativistic as you could get by the way.
The core argument that prostitutes are boring??
Gee and here I thought I had chosen my sex partner quite freely!
No no Jumbofish! His core argument is that prostitutes get blue balls!
Perhaps Paglia should take her own advice, become a prostitute and stop writing since that’s a talent that’s only the menz are bestowed with. What a bunch of pseudo-intellectual, purple prose BS. Nothing but a regurgitation of the same old sexist and misogynistic tropes that have been ingrained in us since we were born. I’m surprised she didn’t throw anything in there about the moon and menses parties.
Speaking as a woman who has never used sex to get anything, hell as a woman who is barely sexual in the first place, who has never given a thought to nature and who creates art (yeah, real art, not period blood smeared on a canvas which is what you dumb MRA types think of when you think female artist) for a living, Paglia can go fuck herself.
Yet another female misogynist so filled with self-loathing that she feels fulfilled by asserting her entire sex’s inferiority while most likely pretending she herself is not like those “other” women. Pathetic. Every single man on the planet is soooooo creative and creates culture. Why look at the culture MRAs have created! harassing, stalking and threatening feminists on the internet. Trolling news articles on gender. Putting bounties on college students for making plays they don’t like.
Some culture.
Oh, thanks for clearing that up Tom. So again, why should sex workers put themselves out of a job? Because they’d be able to choose their sex partners? I know this might seem strange to you but sex workers are actually just as capable of choosing their sex partners as non-sex workers. You also still haven’t addressed the question of whether or not male sex workers exist.
I do have a book, on the way, based on some experimental psychology I’m conducting. As soon as I put this gender studies industry out of its misery, I’ll let you know.
OH MY GOD YES PLEASE
Paglia is a really pretentious version of magdelyn, essentially. But without the occasional moments of decency.
“I do have a book, on the way, based on some experimental psychology I’m conducting. As soon as I put this gender studies industry out of its misery, I’ll let you know.”
No really, *how* did you get into LSE? Certainly they have standards as to actual research standards.
And please, please, tell us, in lots of detail, what the core argument is.
Tom, honey, you know you don’t have to hire prostitutes, right? It’s a totally optional thing.
Hey Tom maybe if you’d back up your core arguments with actual facts and studies, people would take you more seriously.
Twit.
I know, as a woman, that none of Paglia’s stupid quotes apply to me in the slightest. As a female, I cannot relate to one thing she says about females. It’s as bad as having my horoscope read.
@Tom
You’re “arguments” have been thoroughly debunked. Go away, you twit.
Wow CassandraSays, what an enthralling endorsment you’ve given this book. I must race out and buy it, I’m sure it will make excellent bedding for my rabbits to shit on.
Anyways all…I’m going to go out and dance naked under the moonlight, whilst praying to the goddess and menstruating all over the garden to ensure a fertile growth this summer….that’s what being a natural woman is all about yes?
Your core argument has no substance whatsoever. You said that feminists are whores (and whores are not ‘real women’, because Mr. Tom Martin gets to decide who and who is not a real woman) and then conjured some contrived metaphor to justify your misogyny.That’s why we mock you rather than bother in engaging in your pathetic troll logic. You are the one who is beyond pathetic. Now fuck off.
Tom, men that are the lowest of incomes afford drugs and hookers, excuse my French. They get blow jobs, hand jobs, half and half, whatever. That gives MORE men access to sex than if the women were “choosing” their partners. Without the money that would not be happening. I think you’re under the weird impression that prostitutes are like “I want to have a lot of sex” this is not most of their stories, and the services they perform often do nothing for them.
Also, you act like they all wake up and say, well, should I go to my CEO job, and do this on the side for free? Or should I just keep getting money for this? NO. It’s their income. The way most people that work at wal mart can’t make a conscious choice to do the right sociological thing by not contributing to that (if that’s the right thing, not my point here). Only elites or intellectuals can make employment choices based on something other that need and availability and sociology.
And that’s just off the top of my head, you are all turned around in your britches. The others are doing fine in their refutations, so that’s good.
Martin, so far as I can tell, your “core argument” is either: 1) your an alien being who’s only contact with humanity so far has been you tube porn. 2) you’ve been raised and educated on an unknown island where no actual living women have had contact with you 3) your education strangely overlooked the value of a dictionary and its abillity to narrow down the meaning of whore 4) you smoke some pretty cheap shit.
Did I miss anything?
I thought the core argument was that prostitution is causing a pandemic of boring blue balls that crosses all gender lines. Which is the first step on the short journey to fascism
* I meant and NOT on sociology in my second to last sentence. Choices are based on personal psychology and whatever hole that is in, but mostly availability and need.
Please note that “prostitution” in Tom’s world includes any relationship in which a man has ever given a woman flowers.