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.
Psycho Dan said:
Just because no one else has mentioned it, that decree Tom’s pointing to as proof that the Taliban would love to educate girls, so long as they’re segregated from the boys? That was made 16 years ago. Women have missed their entire education under it.
That’s disastrous, Dan.
What could Western feminism have done better?
Don’t forget:
“Are you willing to have our every sexual encounter recorded on video and stored by the government in a massive database, so that I will always be able to prove I didn’t rape you?”
There’s another little-known video of Tom Martin in action:
Trying again (damn https):
What could the BBC have done better?
So…you do support the Taliban, right, Tom?
Or at least you think Western women and the BBC are worse?
That is not an interesting question to have on your application to date Tom Tom.
You should try harder.
I don’t get why there’s a humongous mortis carved in the center-front of that chair. Are they expecting someone to sit in that chair with a raging boner? If so, it looks like someone has a massive case of delusion about the size of their suspect.
Carlieblue said:
Shit, I just got a horrible shock. Tom Martin looks almost exactly like this guy I was seeing for a short time. Couldn’t have been him, though, since this guy insisted on paying for everything!
No, it wasn’t me, because as a rule, I go out with women who pay for their selves on dates.
Carlieblue goes on:
By the way, I will always say that I can pay for myself on dates (on the rare occassions on which they occur), but if the guy insists, what am I supposed to do?
You’re supposed to pay half Carlieblue. Feminism is very clear on this. If a man does not allow you to pay half, then this is the one time you’re allowed to use domestic violence as a woman. Smack him with a white feather. Not a real feather. a symbolic one. I’m sure you can come up with something.
Women say yes to men who say no.
Women, say yes to men who say no,
Oooooh I now have a wonderful image of what would happen if Tom sat on the Luggage … mwahahahah!
Sapient pearwood chair sounds like something Bloody Stupid Johnson would build. Now THERE’S an image to wrap your head around!
Hey, don’t give Bloody Stupid Martin any more ideas or he’s going to demand that feminists make that chair for him.
A chair by Bloody Stupid Johnson! Perfect!
I’d love to make Bloody Stupid Martin a sapient pearwood chair, as long as it acted like the Luggage.
I wonder why “bringing your own cushion” is a solution to the hard-chair problem that never seems to have occurred to this moron? I’ve sat on plenty of lousy chairs at colleges, libraries (remember those awful plastic things at school that you stuck to in summer?) and bringing a cushion never seemed like either a difficult idea or an imposition.
Huh? That chair is clearly more feminist misandry. It pretends to be a friendly chair, welcoming for men — BUT IT IS MADE OUT OF HARD WOOD! Feminist deception, plain and simple! Harumph.
I figure that if I’m stupid or careless enough to go to a place with hard chairs without bringing a cushion then my sore ass is my own fault. This way of thinking would never occur to Tom, since he isn’t capable of admitting that anything is ever his fault.
Bog-standard MRM behaviour, innit?
Oh, and I think I’ve just successfully invented something which make playing x much freer, easier, and sexier, for women, and men, whilst dancing.The first prototype cost
£100, took 1 hour to fit, works, and does not require batteries!
Since I’ve been on Manboobz I’ve had two inventions. One works, but stinks. One is on the nose. What have manboobzers tried to do for us lately?
– I’d like to see a few more stories about ambitious manboobzers, inventing exciting things and inspiring other people identifying as feminists, throughout the nation, to ask themselves, “can we, invent a thing, which make playing x much freer, easier, and sexier, for women, and men, whilst dancing?”
– and then show me the proof.
List of things women have invented…
The disposable nappy.
The windscreen wiper.
The er.. . the other windscreen wiper.
How many of you accept the argument that women are innately crap at inventing things?
What are you going to invent to change that perception?
Even if they could technically do anything they wanted to (which they quite obviously can’t), while they are forced to wear restrictive clothing rather than clothing appropriate to the activity, they are severely curtailed in what they are able to do. Having to have someone accompany them everywhere they go does too, because they have to rely on someone else’s willingness to go with them. Theoretical freedom is not the same as actual freedom.
And yet you wax lyrical about their amazing lifestyles. How they have it so much better than the men there. That they are the privileged class. That housework is better than a regular job (because having a regular job is akin to being a slave while housework is always pleasant and rewarding). The Tommy doth protest too much.
Not to mention that even the ‘symbolic’ requirement to get a man’s permission because he’s a man and you’re a woman is wrong (never mind that it’s far from merely symbolic). But of course Tommyrot wouldn’t admit that.
Kim,
All mod con kitchens these days.
In the 3rd world, it really annoys me to see the footage of women sat cross-legged at a bowl, pounding whatever they have into food with a small caber, up and down all day like it’s the wailing wall. You never see a man doing that shit. Can’t they just eat the whole grain?
The point is, even she loves her kitchen, because it’s quite nice, and doesn’t involve putting on shoes. Any job you can do in your dressing gown is not a difficult job (Burr, 2007).
I have mod cons in my kitchen too. Housework still sucks.
Also, get back to me when you successfully make a loaf of bread without flour.
I don’t mind housework, but I DO mind when other people make a mess of what I’ve just cleaned, or expect me to pick up after them.
(Adds cooking to the long list of things that Tom doesn’t understand.)
@pillowinhell
I mind when people complain about the mess I made. We can never be housemates 🙂
@CassandraSays
I’m guessing in TomWorld, Cooking = buying it from a shop.
Why can’t stupid 3rd world women just go buy bread from a shop like a real person, hey? amirite Tom?
Tom, why should we do anything to impress you or because you want us to? It’s cute you think we care what you think of us.