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.
Well, according to his own definition, he is a heaux, because he took money for doing things, has had sex with some people but not with others, and most likely accepted gifts from people.
Tom, you don’t get it. I wasn’t asking you to disprove my gender theory (which I have written pages and pages about over at my blog– you may start here). I was asking you to say what things would disprove YOUR theory, and giving an example by suggesting four things off the top of my head that would disprove mine. (Even if I got lost in one of my sentences a bit. >.>)
So. Question stands. What pieces of information that are (presumably) not currently true would, if true, disprove your theory?
Let me see if I can explain my reasoning further, Tom, because you may not understand it.
In general, in science, if you have a theory, it is because it has been shown over multiple trials to be the best explanation of the data. That means that it must be conceivable that the theory NOT be true. For instance, if God came down one afternoon and explained that he created the world in six days and the dinosaur bones thing was his idea of a practical joke, then the theory of evolution would be disproved. Please note that EVERY theory can be disproved: for instance, you can imagine a world where two plus two doesn’t equal four– for instance, if you had two apples and two apples, put them together, counted them, and there were three apples. You would be deeply confused, of course, but it is imaginable.
Now, if a person who has a theory has NO evidence that could disprove it, that’s called an “unfalsifiable” theory. Unfalsifiable theories are not scientific. For instance, if I said that there was a dragon in my garage, and you said “but I can’t see the dragon,” and then I said “well, it’s invisible,” and you said “but it isn’t leaving any footprints,” and I said “it’s also intangible,” and you said “but it doesn’t–” and I interrupted you and said “the dragon in my garage acts exactly like there isn’t a dragon in my garage.” Arguing with me wouldn’t be fair. Even if I had evidence for there being a garage-dragon– maybe there are burn marks on the garage roof– there would be no way to prove that the dragon DOESN’T exist.
Convince me your theory isn’t an invisible garage-dragon.
The only way Tom has told me to not be a whore is to “drop the price of sex to zero.”
Okay. Done. I have sex for free. I don’t have it with anyone, no, but the people I have it with, I don’t charge anything.
…Why am I still a whore? This is confusing.
He also wants money for not doing things – he wants rather a lot of money for not being able to finish his classes. XD
*not willing, although his posts here do suggest that he wouldn’t have been able to handle the coursework anyway.
There is a limit to just how un-whorey you need to get. Once you’ve hit zero, then you’re at your target whoring level, of not being a whore. Move on. File a patent. Write a joke. Find a cure for something. Not being a whore isn’t a vocation in and of itself. “And the Nobel Prize for not being a whore goes to… .”
9 out of 10 patents are awarded to men, and yet in factual media, men are portrayed positively only 1 time out of 10. Don’t be one of those media douches pretending men aren’t anything other than freaking awesome.
Feminism’s job should be to portray men’s achievements as something women should want to emulate and surpass, but at the moment, gender studies professors and most other professional feminists are paid to cry wolf about men holding women back.
Tom, you sound almost as ridiculous as NWO by now.
You’re also a whore.
I’m not going to give a fuck about not being a whore unless you explain to me why your theory isn’t an invisible garage-dragon.
Like most women, I have a job. It’s not like I sit around all day not-having-sex-for-money and that’s my life.
The things I have to explain.
But all the mammoths are already dead. 🙁
Getting Tom to actually answer questions is like playing Roulette. Or maybe it’s like shooting random holes through a book and then trying to read it.
So what was up with those feminist whore penguins? That’s what I really want to know.
I bet penguins have really big butts for their little bodies. Is that it?
Tom Martin, who hasn’t patented, built, or invented anything useful, just proved he’s a whore.
What exactly are we moving on from? Today I read a book on experimental design (for work), worked on debugging a professional database, repotted my rosemary and mint plants, and planted basil. Which of these activities is the whorey one?
And practiced trumpet and am now reading entries in a writing contest.
“File a patent. Write a joke. Find a cure for something. ”
Says the guy whose main contribution to humanity is an unsuccessful frivolous lawsuit which landed him with a very large legal bill I doubt he’ll be able to pay.
Patents and Gender: The Exclusion of Women Inventors from
Intellectual Property Rights:
http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/dcea/en/presentations/yanisky_ravid.pdf
Bloody women off whoring and not patenting
http://foundationcenter.org/pnd/news/story.jhtml?id=153300007
http://genet.csic.es/sites/default/files/documentos/biblioteca/STEVEN%20MCMILLAN_Gender%20differences%20in%20patenting%20activity.pdf
http://www.iposgoode.ca/2010/08/yes-patents-do-have-gender/
whores whoring not patenting, you say?
1. http://www.iposgoode.ca/2010/08/yes-patents-do-have-gender/
sorry for double posting, it took ages to appear so i thought it was lost
Whore-dinner (turkey meatloaf) made and consumed. Whore-kittens’ litterbox cleaned. Whore-thesis written. Well, not completely, but progress made. And Tom Martin is still proving he is an idiot on the internet! I’m moving on from videos, and instead I give you otters who look like Benedict Cumberbatch.
(Did he really say penguins are whores? Really?)
@cloudiah
some days you gotta love the internet. that was fabulous
Piggybacking on the success of others?
I was in the same class as x inventor therefore you should all bow before me!!
I am a man, men invented everything therefore you should bow before me!!
Its silly to base things off your own merit when you can base your success on the group you are a part of!
So, seriously, how the fuck can I be a whore if I sleep only with my husband, we do roughly equal amounts of housework (not enough), we contribute roughly equally to bills and shit, he keeps me from spiraling down into insomnia-induced paralyzing anxiety and I do the stuff involving actual communication with the outside world (he has Aperger’s, it’s hard for him to ‘get’ a lot of the cues that neurotypical people take for granted).
Please explain to me if I am a whore or not, because you’re confusing the fuck out of me right now.
Oh Tom have you told your mom about how you think she is a “whore” yet? Maybe showing her this thread will help her understand and come to terms with it.