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.
MRA skepticism. “I’m skeptical about your claims that there are NOT a pillar of turtles floating around in space somewhere like we say there are. Prove to me there is not.”
That’s not skepticism. It’s reasonable to assume there are not. We don’t have to prove to people that make things up that they are wrong. The burden of proof is on the one making the outrageous claim.
It is an outrageous claim that anything David has said is BS, so prove it. Citation needed.
And if you have never ever seen evidence of this, then no SKEPTIC would take that stand over something perfectly reasonable David asserts like “dood sent me an email from his website, etc”
Also. Tom is KNOWN for going to blogs that write about him, and the “real” Tom would very very likely run into this site, and see someone had been impersonating him and say something. So you are being completely unreasonable. That is not being a skeptic, that’s being unreasonable. Skeptics that don’t employ reason or accept reasonable evidence don’t exist because that would make them…not a skeptic.
RE: Pecunium
You just say that because you’re prejudiced against MEN! Joe is the only truly objective one.
Also, have fun in France! What’re you doing over there, if it’s okay to ask?
Ah, so Joe’s not so much a skeptic as a biased liar who assumes everyone else reports facts as inaccurately as he does.
Figures.
Oh, I’m sorry, I expected that rather than taking my word for anything that you would read the entire article:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1651234.stm
“The Prime Minister’s wife Cherie Booth, Spice Girl Mel B, presenter Melanie Sykes, comedienne Nina Wadia and several top Asian business and community leaders were expected to attend and present awards.
Ms Booth said: “The Asian women celebrated and honoured here were just a handful of the many women across the UK who are fighting battles for themselves and their families. ”
Re: sleeping
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiranjit_Ahluwalia#Deepak.27s_killing
“….Later that night while her husband lay sleeping, Ahluwalia fetched some petrol and caustic soda mixture from the garage. She poured it over the bed and set it alight, and ran into a garden with her three-year-old son.[3]….”
So, what a number of you are implying is that you are totally ok with a spouse burning their sleeping husband or wife to death in their sleep IF that spouse was violently abusive for ten years? And you are so ok with that, you think they should get a medal? Right?
So how abusive exactly must a spouse be before it’s A-OK, in your book, to kill them? If this poor bastard had killed his similarly violently abusive gf would you have called for his release and for him to get a medal? Serious questions.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2091650/Ian-McNicholl-beating-The-5ft-1in-girlfriend-beat-businessman-partner-badly-needed-cosmetic-surgery-years-horrific-abuse.html
My partner’s other partner is going to the IETF, and this trip his work started to have “partner” fares, or some such, so the three of us are going. It’s a vacation. Side trip to Amsterdam to see a friend. I’m basically packed, just need to make the salads for the trip (allergies, on top of Kosher, for my partner) and haul myself to the airport, at Idlylwild.
You’re never more than five comments away from “acknowledging that rape is a problem is MISANDRY” with MRAs, are you.
You know, there are men out there who haven’t even kinda raped anyone. Look out for their interests for once.
@boomboom –
No, skepticism means the burden of proof is on whoever is making the claim. Full stop, no qualification.
Further, skepticism means considering the source. Manboobz is a propaganda blog. Therfore inherently unreliable.
Also, wow! Why do you assume I should know so much about the habits of Tom Martin?? Also also, why do you know so much about Tom Martin’s habits? Obsessed much?
Joe
Se we’ve gotten to know Tom quoite well over the past few days. What’s more is that tommy boy here has been spreading the love to many other feminist blogs, in equally ludicrous and masochistic ways. Why he does this I don’t know. I’m sure he understands that going to feminist sites and calling everyone a whore(except his mom) is just begging for a metaphorical spanking. Maybe its his hobby.
Joe. I read the article. The PMs wife was a presenter, to five women.
She didn’t give, “a medal for bravery”. She handed the woman a trophy, which had been bought, and paid for, by the group that selected her… for her subsequent work on DV.
It wasn’t for killing her husband.
Which was what you implied, and expected us to take on faith.
You lied. You are reinforcing failure by 1: not noticing that I did read the article (protip, just because someone doesn’t agree with you, doesn’t mean they didn’t read all the material you provided. Given the brevity of the piece, it was trivial to read it all.
I could, I suppose, have added a quotation like this one, “Samina Saeed, editor of Asian Woman magazine, and founder of the awards said: “These awards were designed to recognise the fact that women go through many hardships, and come out fighting both community and family to survive.” which comes after the portion in which the presenters are named.
2: You lied. You got caught lying. That you disapprove of the award, perfectly acceptable. Lying about what the award was, and what it was for, and making the statement in a way which implied it was an a: an official award and b: for killing her husband, utter rubbish.
That impeaches your credibility. Doubling down, destroys it.
Creating strawmen (So, what a number of you are implying is that you are totally ok with a spouse burning their sleeping husband or wife to death in their sleep IF that spouse was violently abusive for ten years? And you are so ok with that, you think they should get a medal? Right? that you can then soak with petrol… damages the idea that you understand how to construct an argument.
I’ve not (nor has anyone else, really) opined on 1: the crime. 2: the sentence. 3: the merits of the award.
What I’ve been addressing is purely your (ongoing) dishonesty, which began when you said anything you couldn’t read an independent source on was presumed to be bullshit, and then spouted a bunch of unsourced stuff.
The only piece in that which you’ve tried to defend… you were lying about.
Which is all I’ve been discussing. Not her, you.
The liar. The liar who is backing one lie (the “medal for bravery from the Prime Minister’s wife), with another one (that people here have said burning people to death is laudatory)?
Lies on lies.
So why should we believe anything you say, esp. if it’s without source?
@Holly – wtf? I never said that.
I said that the UK court system convicts for rape with the same % as other crimes.
That refutes Creative’s claim that it’s biased against rape claimants (are you even following the conversation, here? wtf?).
That is NOT the same as the words you tried to stuff into my mouth. Don’t do that.
Jeez, you’re all about the unfounded rhetoric and hyperbole, eh? Shouting at traffic much?
Conversations with you must be weird as hell.
@Pecunium: Have a fun vacation in my time-zone! Need any hotel or restaurant tips for Paris?
Joe, you said you don’t believe you’ll change anyone’s mind here, and you don’t believe anything we say. So WHY ARE YOU HERE?
RE: Pecunium
That sounds like a blast! I hope you have a good time and get to see catacombs and Eiffel Towers and such.
Joe: No, skepticism means the burden of proof is on whoever is making the claim. Full stop, no qualification.
Right, and you are the one making the assertion that the things Dave says are presumptively false.
Based on… the links he gives? That he said, “I have been given information which convinces me Tom Martin in the comments is who he says he is,” ought to be assumed to be false because??? Esp. when you have admitted that on examination Dave was correct.
Compared to your ongoing lies about the only thing you have sourced?
Having an agenda doesn’t mean telling untruths to pursue it, esp. not when the proofs are so easy to collect.
So why are you lying to further your agenda? Could it be the proofs are hard to find?
@Joe
I live in the UK – Wessex, to be precise. I have lived here for nearly 21 years, which is coincidentally my age. Please don’t assume that I don’t know any bloody thing about my own country.
I’ll get back to you on the rest of it, I am currently reading related evidence and sources. Although the direct links seem to go to other newspapers which are not as reliable as offical reports and research papers.
So, Joe lied completely about the award? What a shock. I think I would be shocked if an MRA did not lie at this point. Thing is, they lie about things we can read for ourselves, and out themselves every time.
Lu: We’ll be in the 13th, so Kosher is easy to find. We have hotels, and shops (we are taking apartments, so we have a kitchen).
Now, if you know a decent cookware shop, so we can get a saute for an acceptable price, that would be nice. Metro and foot, no car.
I have to say, guys, that of all the obnoxious asswads I’ve gotten… I find guys like Joe worse than Roberta. Like, sure, Roberta pretty much said I was only abused because I was too weak-willed, but at least she didn’t pretend to be so logically above everything. The idea that anyone on this planet is truly scientifically objective has caused so much damage in the past, it sickens me.
Even Spock conceded to emotion. And Joe ain’t no Spock.
Not when I respect the person I’m talking to.
Sometimes I try and throw up logical arguments here, but y’know, when someone is a big believer in “misandry,” I gotta figure logical arguments aren’t really their strong suit to begin with. I’ll decide how seriously I want to take someone who thinks that men are the real oppressed class here.
@Pillowinhell – Lolz!
@Pecunium –
– The presence of the PM’s wife as an award giver = official endorsement.
– The use of “fighting” by PM’s wife in her speech, and the “come out fighting” that you quoted, while handing an award to a killer = strongly implicit (if not explicit) approval of that killing.
Summary:
Award for “fighting” was handed to killer with official approval. QED.
I stand by my original assertion, and I reject your charge of lying.
Does it ever hurt your hands, grasping at those straws?
I used to live in the 13th!! It’s beautiful there!
I’m a bit lost on cookware, being not a great cook myself, but I’d recommend the Monoprix supermarket at rue d’Italie or the mall at the place d’Italie for anything the modern housewife/man could want at an acceptable price.
Metro and foot is all you need in Paris! Dependent on where in the 13th you’ll be staying, you can walk down to the Seine in about 20 minutes’ time.
If you’re at a loss what to do in the evening, walk up to one of the newspaper stands and ask for a Pariscope. It’s a small booklet with theater plays, cinemas, expositions etc that is released every wednesday. Costs about one Euro.
Joe, seriously, we can read and it is clear that you lied to further your agenda. Interesting that you accuse David of running a propaganda site, because he quotes MRAs verbatim and links back to original sources.
@Holly –
Men and women may both suffer and experience oppression, similarly or differently. Oppression of one does not mean oppression of the other does not exist.
Oppression olympics doesn’t help anyone. e.g.
Rape (of women and men and children) is a problem.
False accusations are a problem.
These are two different problems. Addressing one doesn’t mean that the other should / must remain neglected. Ideally, efforts to address one should not make the other problem worse.
@Creative – feel free to dig down to the original Home Office stats. I remember finding the original tables and graphs online somewhere ages ago, before that article I linked was written, it’s just taking time to break through to the mainstream.
@LBT – yeah, I’m going to put my emotions on the line here, because this isn’t a hostile environment. /sarcasm
Stern Review of Rape Reporting, pg. 33-34 (http://sta.geo.useconnect.co.uk/pdf/Stern_Review_of_Rape_Reporting_accessible.pdf)
OK, fair enough. Once it gets into the CPS, the conviction rate is high.
(Will be continued. And I really should be writing an essay… blast.)
Oh how could I forget! Men don’t get awards once convicted of crimes like oh I don’t know, wife beating,rape or sexual assault. We don’t see them being nominated for things like the next president of a nation. We don’t hero worship them for playing baseball, hockey, football or make them popstars. Nope, mens lives are totally ruined and left to rot in jail forever.