The other day we met an MRA named Tom Martin, who filed an “anti-male discrimination” suit against the London School of Economics, only to have his case thrown out of court by a deeply unimpressed judge.
After I blogged about this, Mr. Martin showed up here to offer some commentary on his case, and on matters of wider import. As a public service of sorts, I would like to present to you all some selected highlights from his comments here, in case you didn’t have the time to read through the entire 1000+ comment thread that ensued. And even those who did make it through the comments will no doubt be pleased to be reminded of some of their favorite Tom Martin bon mots.
In case anyone suffers from the delusion that Mr. Martin actually is some sort of egalitarian, these comments should clarify matters for you.
And yes, it has been confirmed via email that this is the real Tom Martin commenting. Accept no substitutes!
The word of the day is: whore.
Are you sitting comfortably? Then let’s begin. These are in chronological order; each title links to the full comment in context.
The Misandrist Chair Conspiracy:
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.
The Misandrist Chair Conspiracy 2: Misandrist Boogaloo
The EHRC actually agreed with me, that hard chairs are inappropriate for a library, as they impact men more. When we consider that only 2 out of 5 degrees go to men, the gender gap widening, then anything we can do to make men more comfortable taking the academic route, the better.
Given that higher educational attainment increases life expectancy for men, and given that increased educational attainment in men also decreases their violence against women among other things.
Anti-male shaming tactics are always used at the point of losing an argument, Hellkell.
When someone asks me “What sort of woman would go out with a men’s rights activist?” I reply “the sort of woman who isn’t a whore.”
Tom Martin’s 14 Point Anti-Prostitute Program:
Some of you want to know why I think prostitution is bad.
1. Sex is only ever any good when it is based on mutual attraction.
2. Charging for sex excludes men who cannot afford it, thus heightening male-on-male competition for money, which generates the conditions for war.
3. Prostitutes spend so long being pounded on, without orgasm, that it causes a condition akin to ‘blue balls’ in men – I think it’s referred to as ‘pelvic block’ in women, but has other names too, where veins in the female pelvic region become over-pressurized, causing pain and swelling. In some cases, an operation is required to release the pressure. You will see it in some porn stars. Their rectum will look swollen, and the tissue either side of the vaginal area too.
4. Prostitutes spend so long on the job, it stops them making better use of their lives. It hinders their emotional and intellectual development.
5. Prostitutes express more misandry than the average woman. Being a prostitute is misandry-inducing, or perhaps misandrists are more likely to choose prostitution, but either way, prostitution correlates with misandry – and misandry is bad, as it perpetuates fear or mistrust of men, which perpetuates sex segregation, which perpetuates male-on-male competition, which increases brain capacity for aggression (in both sexes), whilst decreasing brain capacity for empathy and higher thought.
6. Prostitution is an aggregate sex segregation, as prostitutes take themselves out of the free association and free sex zone, and wait for paying customers – and though paying customers and prostitutes are not sex-segregating whilst having sex, she quickly has to get him out to do the next customer, so there is less organic natural association between the sexes throughout the course of the day – and the association which does take place is fake or bought, rather than free association.
7. Prostitutes are boring.
8. There is no Nobel Prize for services to prostitution for a reason.
9. Gold-diggers are more stupid than average women.
10. Housewives are more fascistic than average women.
11. Economically inactive female model societies are more fascistic than normal societies.
12. Men associating with prostitutes or economically inactive gold-digger housewhores etc are more fascistic than average men.
13. Prostitution was the historic norm, and civilizations have less prostitution as they advance, so less prostitution probably related to advancement.
14. Less prostitutional sex-segregated societies produce better more balanced ratio of women to men (more women), causing men to make more sensible, less rash or flashy spending decisions.
I’m sure there are many more related reasons I could go into, about why prostitution is bad.
I think it should be fully legalized, but that these women should pay the highest rate of tax, and be first draft in any military conscription.
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.
Fems: It’s time to renounce your whoredom!
I’m asking feminists in particular to renounce prostitution in all its forms. …
It is my estimation, that as little as 3% of women have actually made a conscious decision to treat men as equals, never expect any money from men, and actively promote more egalitarian gender roles (rather than begrudgingly suffer them), by celebrating the less worky roles afforded men. …
From a straight male perspective, the potential mate pool is quite full of hypergamous gold-diggers and prostitutes, the stand up egalitarian women few and far between, so yes, not only should women renounce prostitution in all its forms, but they should buy the T shirt or get the tattoo as well or something.
Just like it being polite to inform someone first if you have a social disease, you should inform someone first if you are a gold-digger/whore/housewife wannabe etc.
But then, there are a lot of women who swear blind they’re not whores who are – so some kind of renouncement on their part, where they’re putting a bit of heart into it, might be in order. Maybe an fMRI lie detecting brain scan certificate to show you’ve passed the test.
But if fems just want to go with “I can’t believe you think women are whores. How misogynistic” then its really falling well short of the mark – given women’s woeful track record in this department so far.
So come on then, who is going to be the first to renounce prostitution in all its forms?
At least Rosa Parks got a seat:
Be honest, you’re not sitting on a hard seat right now, so why should you when you’re in a library?
My position was vindicated by the authorities taking it seriously at the time. …
They also put a three piece couch and seats into the library after my successful complaint,
so I am actually very pleased about that, and you suck….
[I]n Saudi Arabia, two men have to vacate a bus seat for one woman. …
So, we all know who Rosa Parks was. The black person who didn’t want to sit at the back of the bus – and quite right too, but at least she got a seat.
But when it is men being forced out of their seats, and by economically inactive Saudi whores – professional whore feminists just laugh it off or make BS excuses.
Scum.
Saudi Arabia: A Whorish Matriarchy
In many ways, Saudi Arabian men are probably the most discriminated against men in the world.
Firstly, it costs more for a Saudi Arabian men to marry than for any for other men in the world on average (in relative to national average earnings).
Secondly, Saudi Arabian women are the laziest whores in the world, with just 22% of them in even a part-time job (and that 22% figure bolstered by the foreign women shipped in to do certain work).
Thirdly, Islamic law says what a man earns, he must share, but what his wife earns, she can keep. …
[O]n balance, given Saudi men are doing all the hard work, not only should Saudi women be giving up their seats to Saudi men if anything, victim-feminists should be ashamed of themselves for portraying Saudi women as the uniquely oppressed class. Far from it.
Saudi Arabia is an advanced country, where the female population is highly educated. Saudi scientists are among the best in the world. Saudi doctors successfully separated conjoined twins at the head – both twins living – but that same scientific community has so far been unable to separate Saudi Arabian women’s enormous asses from their couches. There is a way though. When Saudi men learn to stop giving women money and gifts, the women will have no choice but to rise up, get a job, demand driving licenses, etc.
Saudi women just laugh at patriarchy theory. They know they’re lazy whores pulling all strings. Saudi men on the other hand, have never had their issues addressed, and are very receptive to change.
Islamic states are whoriarchies – which neither men or women would want to be associated with, once they’ve had it properly explained.
Did I explain already that Muslim women are whores?
Muslim women are quids in the whores.
Their civilizations are down the pan, but as long as they’ve got one over on the men, they don’t seem to give a shit.
I would totally take my anti-Muslim-whore crusade to the streets, but Muslim women are too scary:
[I]f Muslim women want Muslim men to change the laws, then they can simply order their husbands or suitors to do this.
Similarly, they could order their husbands to vote for full female voting rights. …
I would be standing on a street corner in some Muslim land explaining it, but that would be too risky for my personal safety, or any man’s personal safety. It is easier for women to rise up without getting shot than for men, on gender politics issues.
Nevertheless, I will be translating my experiments’ findings and book into Arabic.
All those people who say I’m “whoring” by asking for donations to my legal fighting fund, are missing the point
“Whoriarchy” is not a perfect term, but a more accurate description of the state of affairs on gender relations everywhere than “patriarchy” – and a lot less glamorous. …
Professional feminists are whores. This includes David Futrelle. His job is not to reflect accurately, but mock, so he is a delaying gatekeeper, attempting to exclude men’s equality debates, by making misleading representations about the men’s rights movement’s core values and goals.
We need a word for women who aren’t whores:
[C]urrently, to my knowledge, there is no word in the English language, for a woman who is not a whore. For a woman who has rejected all forms of prostitution.
“Independent” – okay, could mean “has a job”, but not specific enough. I mean Beyonce claims to be an “Independent” woman, but then she also wants men to pay her telephone bills, and put a ring on it – so, no. If Beyonce has a job, it’s as a prostitute.
“Egalitarian” – too general. Sounds like she’s weighing up whoring options equally.
“Feminist” – too much gold-digging of government resources, and sucking cocks for money, so no.
Women who have chosen to have nothing to do with prostitution in any of its forms should not even have to mention the word when describing their awesome credentials, and credo. Most women are prostitutes to some extent, so ‘woman’ doesn’t do it either for the time being.
We need a new word…
Ladies, you have had expensive educations, surpassing men’s in duration. Your parents assisted you more with university fees than they did their sons. The jobs market is set up to positively discriminate in your favour if you’ll only put the effort in. Men are willing to do more childcare if you will only stop complaining about them not doing it right etc, and actually transfer the parental leave to them. Men have put men on the moon. All you need to do, is express some breast milk and get it into the fridge so you can return to your glorious careers and create or invent us all something useful. Please don’t invent us any more cupcakes though. …
The human race needs you to put down the crockery, and make a proper contribution to the advancement of civilization. Feminism’s “glass ceiling” story is the metaphorical glass ball and chain excuse for defeatism and inertia required for you never to have to leave the kitchen. We have microwave meals now – go and make yourselves a tad more useful.
Female penguins are whores
For the record, I would never claim all women are whores. I’d put it at around the 97% mark in my estimation – so back off, haters.
What do we want! To inconvenience whores! When do we want it? Now!
Liberating men involves mildly inconveniencing whores. It’s a win/win.
Ladies! Stop being whores and invent something.
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.
I have invented something, and am working on prototypes.
I have previously sought a patent application for another invention.
And I’ve built lots of things too.
I’ve also made daisy chains.
My cat made a hairball, but you don’t see her bragging about that.
Joe: Have you ever made a cross-country move? Like, thousands of miles with all your worldly possessions in the back of your car? I’ve done it four times (and six shorter moves from college to home and back), and it is a pain in the ass of monumental proportions. It’s not something you just up and do because you can – it’s expensive, you have to line up housing and jobs beforehand if you can, you have to clean up your old place, and on and on and on. Unless they have another reason (a job, family in need, health, whatever), very few people can move to a state just because it has laws more to their liking.
I should add that moving is stressful – SisterB just moved across the state with her partner and NephewB, and I really thought that one of them was going to crack and run screaming into the night. Two adults, three dogs (a pure german shepherd, a trained rescue/drug iterdiction shepherd/malnoix mix, and a beagle mutt), a 1.5yo who is endlessly curious and LOVES to get into things, and an entire household. Including a couple of appliances. I’m about ready to do a full-bore linear panic just thinking about it.
Speaking of states’ rights…do other countries leave certain areas of lawmaking to individual provinces? I don’t know a thing about law so I’m ignorant on the subject.
I know I shouldn’t be taking the bait from another lying MRAL sock, but I am sick and fucking tired of erasure of civilians in discussions of war deaths. How many fucking US soldiers have died in Iraq and Afganistan? Less than 5,000. And the most recent numbers coming out on death tolls in Iraq give numbers of over one MILLION civilian deaths. Even when it comes to juts measuring death, a lot of fucking wars having higher death numbers or just as high of death numbers for women as for men, in addition to rape and forced pregnancy as a tool of war. Disease and post-war deprivations lead to deaths in droves as well, like the half of a million children under the age of five estimated to have been killed by sanctions against Iraq in the 90s (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/072100-03.htm). But, why should I forget that in the minds of fucking racist imperialist misogynists, it’s the imperialist soldiers who count (and, even then, white soldiers deaths are far more publicized and sympathized than deaths of soldiers of color), but the deaths of brown babies don’t mean shit. One of the latest reported multiple murders of unarmed civilians had children as a substantial portion, a number of whom were girl children. Go fucking tell their families that only men die in war.
Ron Paul has made it totally fucking clear he supports government oppression. Why the fuck should it matter in the slightest whether the “state” or the “federal government” brutalizes and murders you? It doesn’t if you actually give a fuck about oppression. “State’s Rights” is code for fucking reactionism against the abolition of slavery, the Civil Rights Acts, and other non-discrimination law. Fuckheads like Paul just want the few anti-oppression bits of federal law out of the way so they can engage in even more and even more brutal oppression with even less restraints.
Crumbelievable. : canada (I’m not sure where you hail from)
Canada has no abortion laws. Instead we follow the British law, a human is given full rights under the law once born. Individual provinces set the guidelines on abortion based on best medical practice.
To MRAs war is like the movie 300, or an Xbox game. They have no interest in reality. Reality is too ambiguous and icky for them. Real men aren’t manly enough and real women aren’t supermodels and porn stars by default.
I’m a USian.
@princessbonbon
YEEEAAAAHHHH!!!! WE ARE “LIBERTARIANS” AND WE GIVE YOU THE TRUTH!!!!! RON PAUL REVOLUTION!!!! RON PAUL REVOLUTION!!!!!!
So what I’m getting here from Tom, especially in regards to the section on his wanting a new term for women who aren’t whores, is that any woman who works, enjoys what she does, and is independent is still a whore.
So, for example, Hannah Ford, a fantastic young woman drummer, who inspires many young women and girls to take up an instrument dominated by men? Whore.
A friend of mine, very devoted to the EMS field, just made Paramedic. I offered her my heartfelt congratulations because I know how hard she’s worked for this, and how important her field is to her, but I guess I should have just told her how much of a whore she is, amirite Tom?
Riiiiiggghhtt, gotcha. Thanks for the clarification.
From the story I linked earlier about Paul’s racist/anti-semitic/homophobic newsletters:
And
So he was willing to PROFIT off of racism/anti-semitism/homophobia, but didn’t actually believe in it? Gee, I’m not sure that makes me like the guy any more. /sarcasm
@Sharculese – disagreeing with pretty much everything you posted here.
The US constitution really isn’t that subtle a document. It doesn’t require a priestly caste of interpreters. It’s great for tyrannical oligarchs to claim it does though, that’s what has allowed the Executive to accrue effectively dictatorial powers over the last 11years.
With the combo of the Patriot Act, NDAA (esp. sections 1022 and 1023), the trashing of 5th Amendment in the name of War on Drugs / War on Terror and the passing of NDRP :http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/03/16/executive-order-national-defense-resources-preparedness
– your rights to: life, liberty and property are GONE. You only live and you only stay out of custody and you only own anything until such time as the Executive decides – they want you dead, locked-up and all your property.
And by the time the NSA’s giant communications monitoring project “Stellar Wind” comes online (projected in Sept 2013, see Wired magazine) your 1st Amendment will finally be in the toilet too.
So unless you elect Ron Paul, the Bill of Rights might as well be toilet paper.
You assert that Ron Paul voted for partial birth abortions? really? that’s interesting, I’d like to see a source for that assertion.
Not that it’s an issue for me, per se, I’m a humanitarian* liberterian, I work from the POV of “do least harm” when looking at any given issue.
So, I put the sovereignty of my (and your) individual body above that of any law by any gov’t, therefore I’m not in favour of gov’t trying to stop (or enforce – see China) abortion or ANY medical procedure at all on or in your own body… any more than I would be in favour of a gov’t forcing me to keep an ectopic twin alive inside my body. I personally feel that aborting a child after a certain point of gestation is = to killing someone, but because I acknowledge your absolute right over your own body and what’s in it, I would not attempt to stop you doing so, nor support laws that did.
So I disagree with Paul’s attitude to abortion, but I think his “leave it to the States” poilitics is correct, the UK makes it’s own laws (or not) on abortion, so do other EU states, why shouldn’t US states??
(*In contrast, Ron Paul is a Xtian libertarian who puts the doctrine of right to life above absolutely above everything else, on account of his belief in the soul and )
@Sharculese:
Sure you can, just like you can just up and quit your job if you are sexually harassed or discriminated against. It’s easy! Labor moves freely, just like capital, because money and people are just exactly the fuck alike. /sarcasm
Quick show of hands here, how many people here think I should a) ban all discussion of Ron Paul from the blog entirely or b) only allow it when people are pointing out what a racist dick he is?
@princessbonbon @darkside- wait, so you think that the ONLY thing keeping entire States of the US from reverting to segregation / apartheid / slavery is Federal law?? Really, for serious? Do you truly believe that people in general in the US are THAT fucking backward??
@darkside – The USA has been bombing the shit out of far away brown people – including yes, women and children as well as men, since the Korean War. Clinton bombed Libya, Bush Jnr. and Obama are extraordinary bloody warmongers.
Ron Paul proposes to stop all foreign wars, and bring the troops home from 900 bases around the world. I’m sure all those women, men and children who have suffered under US Imperialism will be bloody glad for that stopping. Paul is the only candidate who will do that. So how in the name of fuck, do you manage simultaneously to be mad about civilian casualties and against the only candidate who will stop US forces killing civilians!?? Not to mention the only candidate who won’t invade Iran!!
hmmm a quick google on Ron Paul and partila birth abortion gave me a lovely selection on his edifying pro-life views….but here is the most concise from
http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/Votes/house/2003/530
@David Oh probably (a) to avoid falling into the Paul-abyss, but I’d be okay with (b) if it included “what a racist/homophobic/sexist dick he is” [she says noncommittally].
David, I’m in favor of banning the Paul talk. His fanboys are tedious.
@KathleenB – why yes, I have moved entirely out-of-region inside the UK three times, and I have lived in two other countries besides my birth nation, countries where I have to speak my second language (which I learned as an adult). I had to go through various residency / permit hassles to live and work in those countries too… Oh, and I had to find work once I arrived, I didn’t have a job waiting for me…
So yes, I know it’s a hassle, but I’ve done it. Certainly if I could find a nation with laws / culture that suited me better than here I would strongly consider a permanent move. And millions of people across the world (have) emigrate(d), many for reasons that include seeking more liberty and/or economic opportunity.
And moving from one State to another in the USA is waaaaaay easier than moving between different countries. I drove across a half a dozen US States in a three month trip, the homogenous language and culture, the quality of the roads – US cits are super-lucky in regard to ease of swapping States.
Well, we could talk about the Canada Party instead!!! They are very concerned about the leadership you have down there and want to help.
What is Tom? Talking point central for MRA bullshit. And aparrently just as much a rape apologist as the rest.
What is it, four days of listening to him drone on? Ad nauseum?
Why that’s brilliant David!
Ban all mention of the ONLY candidate that DOES NOT stand for continued MASS MURDER of BROWN PEOPLE, the ONLY candidate who will PARDON and SET FREE thousands of BLACK MEN held on non-violent drug charges in Federal prisons…
Because…. YOU claim he’s RACIST.
GENIUS. / !!SARCASM!!
Oh, and let’s not forget that Paul wants to audit the Federal Reserve and put us back on the gold standard because the price of gold never varies, you know, and fiat money is basically worthless and there’s just something about the governmental regulation of the money supply that makes certain person start muttering darkly about conspiracies.
Hey, there are plenty of people over here who make a fetish out of the history of law in England and the UK. New Hampshire recently rejected a measure to require that all new law in NH be grounded in the Magna Carta, which includes passages such as:
And I’m sure it does not address the subject of firearms ownership.
Democracy has prevailed!
R*n P*ul talk is now banned. Except maybe once in a while if someone has something really bad to say about the guy.
Everyone persisting in RP talk will go on moderation.
FREE SPEECH FOR ALL (except RP fanboys/girls)
It is and it is not.
One can read it and go “oh yeah, that is obvious.” At least until you get a real situation.
Priests are not allowed to do that anyway. I think you mean lawyers. And yes, you need people trained in the law because this stuff gets complicated.
Actually that has to do with a theory called the unitary presidency developed during the Nixon Administration.
http://www.users.muohio.edu/kelleycs/paper.pdf
It was in reaction to another branch saying “behave asshole” to Nixon.
how would you know? you’ve already proven you don’t know what it says. i can’t argue with someone who literally doesn’t even know what the words he uses mean.
@joe
try doing that with 2 kids. i moved about a fair a bit as a young adult (in the 18 -21 bracket). i lived in the US, France and in several places in the UK. it was fun! it was new and exciting. But i only ever had to take care of myself, find a floor to crash on, pick up a minimum wage job. then i got with my partner and we moved a few times within the UK…we were getting older, had certain ideas about how we wanted to live, we had more things, we had each other’s comfort to consider…you know, it got more of a hassle. The we moved, with children, to Australia….the expense, the visas, the needing to have a house with enough room for all of us, the needing to food on the table for the kids that was adequate, being able to clothe them for school, buy their books for school…just generally give them beyond a basic subsistence level life.
so yeah, it’s easy to tell people to move when they have no roots and/or dependents. but life is way more complicated than that.