Over on The Counter-Feminist, the self-proclaimed Counter-Feminist Agent of Change (CFAC) known as Fidelbogen has written a very strange fan letter to Justin Bieber. The teen heartthrob and lesbian-doppleganger, you see, has written a song about the woman who falsely accused him of fathering a child, which makes Bieber practically an MRA.
Poor Fidelbogen is clearly having a hard time dealing with his conflicted feelings about Bieber. He’s overjoyed that Bieber is taking on an evil paternity fraudress, but he’s clearly afraid that expressing too much enthusiasm about the Beebs will make him look, I don’t know, sort of girly? What else could explain all the hemming and hawing in his account of the Beebs’ new song?
Mind you, not that I give two spits about the young pop singer Justin Bieber, but the significance of certain events does not escape me. The lad is quite popular among people of a certain generational subculture, and he was recently the target of attempted paternity fraud. The attempt failed, and Justin memorialized the experience in a song … .
The Fides goes on to deliver a standard-issue anti-feminist minirant:
What’s this got to do with feminism, you ask? Well, feminism has empowered women to do many, many things — especially things that would hurt or exploit males. Likewise, feminist propaganda and legal activism has generated a cultural climate in which the “deadbeat dad” trope has risen to special prominence — aye, to a point of moral hysteria! Finally, feminist complicity with the paternity fraud industry is written in blazing letters by anybody who cares to look.
And then it’s back to the glory of Bieber:
Justin Bieber’s song might just hammer home, in the minds of certain male youngsters, some of the cruel facts of male existence in today’s world. And that can only be to the political benefit of the non-feminist revolution. So, on with it!
I don’t know. When I feel the urge to listen to music about paternity fraud, I tend to go with the classics:
Try this one, too, if you like Ukes:
Antz, in addition to what everyone else is saying, this line “He wasn’t abused by an older woman was he? D:” seems intended to mean:
“He wasn’t abused by an older woman was he? D:” *because that would be terrible (please at least learn to ID your internet faces as D: generally means “oh no!”)
Also, seriously Antz, find a therapist, contra what MRAs seem to think their are male ones. I realize RAINN is probably the devil’s work to MRAs, but it’s a toll free call and you can get info here.
In Antz’ world, EVERY man who says he has NOT been raped by a woman is a LIAR. Antz lives in a terrible, terrible world, which is pretty much the world-turned-upside-down from the world the rest of humanity lives in. Antz, really, please get a therapist.
(Confidential to everyone else: I am so curious about where he and the other MRAs purchase that fact- and logic-resistant coating they slather themselves in. I wonder what the SPF is?)
Also, Antsy’s reference to “feminist double standards” is undoubtedly to some or other case in which a boy who was statutorily raped by an adult woman was legally required to pay child support.
But if this is an example of the GynoTerrocracy, what about the case of the female cheerleader who refused to cheer for her alleged rapist during a basketball game and was disciplined by the school for doing so? You know, the one that went to the Supreme Court? Because she lost that case, BTW. She, or her family at least, was also required to pay all the legal fees.
How do you explain this, Antsy? Where are the feminist double standards in effect? I thought we ruled the world with an iron mangina.
This is a great MRA no-win Antz is trying to set up here:
-If the woman did have sex with Bieber, then the evil feminists are minimizing statutory rape.
-If the woman didn’t have sex with him, then the evil feminists are minimizing paternity fraud.
-If the woman didn’t have sex with him and he suffered no ill consequences while she became a national laughingstock… LA LA LA I CAN’T HEAR YOU
Antz, just to repeat what has already been said: THERE WAS NO RAPE. THERE WAS NO NOTHING. THE WOMAN NEVER MET HIM.
@Argenti Good catch of Antz’ emoticon fail! I didn’t even see that.
Antz, you may want to verify, so here’s a link showing that EVERYONE ELSE KNOWS that the D: emoticon signifies “Horror, disgust, sadness, great dismay.” Or are emoticons a feminist conspiracy too?
BTW, I just wanted to remind everyone that Antz is willing to lie about what we say here even if those lies hurt boys or men. Antz, did you ever tell your friends over at AVfM that the HPV vaccine does in fact protect boys too, and they should all have their sons vaccinated? Seriously, get therapy.
“I wonder what the SPF is?” — One Bieber-zillion?
I don’t think TS will post Justin Bieber conspiracies but who knows…
@cloudiah — I told my male best-friend a short summary of wtf the “Men’s Rights” Movement is about, he asked, basically, “so like how the HPV vaccine shouldn’t just be for girls?” — and then got rather dismayed when I told him that no, more like saying the vaccine only protects against cervical cancer, to which he went all >.<
That'd be an annoyed cross eyed face AntZ — the MRMs lies are pushing thinking men to feminism, so thank you for that I guess.
TS already wrote about Bieber and Yeater in his post from Nov. 8, 2011. At this point, now that everyone knows Bieber and Yeater have never met, I doubt he’ll write any more on them. AntZ is the only MRA I’ve seen that still believes Bieber is the baby’s dad.
@Argenti, To be completely fair, I’ve only seen Antz trying to mislead MRAs into thinking that the HPV vaccine only protects against cervical cancer. There are lots of posts on reddit/mr about the HPV vaccine and how it can protect men against oral/anal cancers and genital warts.
Antz is just a terrible human being all around.
(Since I’m procrastinating on studying for my cell bio final) I see no reason why HPV shouldn’t be implicated in certain kinds of cancer in men as well. The way HPV causes cancer is that some of the strains code for a protein that binds to and deactivates p53, a protein responsible for keeping cells from dividing. With other mutations, the down-regulation of p53 can lead to cancer–mutations in p53 are found in 50% of human cancers (according to my cell textbook) and HPV likely downregulates p53 in the other tissues it invades. I think the science in here is not nearly as well established as in the case for HPV causing cervical cancer, but a vaccine has such a small rate of complications, plus the benefits of reduced genital warts + reduced changes of passing HPV on to your partner, and so I think it is worth getting boys vaccinated even without the cancer risk.
I mean, I can’t help but think that for most men and boys, “take these shots and you’ll be less likely to get genital warts and less likely to give one of your girlfriends cancer” would be a winning argument.
@WordSpinner It is my understanding that HPV has been implicated in both oral and anal cancers in men, as well as genital warts, but there are fewer studies as yet. There was some pushback on r/mr about getting the HPV vaccine in order to be “less likely to give one of your girlfriends cancer” as being white knighting, but more people seemed to be arguing in favor of getting it. At least in the threads that hadn’t been taken over by anti-vaxxers.
@cloudiah, fair enough, but the MRM still seems more about being anti-feminism than actually supporting men. “But oral cancer!” was said friend’s outrage though, so maybe not all of the MRM is completely hopeless?
@AntZ — are you religious? (no need to actually answer that) — Seek counseling with your priest/pastor/rabbi whatever then if you’re afraid all psychologists are feminists, but for your own sake, talk to someone. At least google “re-victimization” and read some. I’m not sure what sort of sources I should provide to attempt to prove that concept though, as I assume all citations will get me a USE BRAIN FACTS! type answer >.<
Not giving your partner cancer is white knighting? o.O? What. The. Fuck?
And omgs the anti-vaxxers — vaccines don’t cause autism, the researchers behind that “study” have been so thoroughly defrocked it’s funny. (I’ll let you all use your google-fu in an attempt not to derail this though)
Re: Antz
Antz, you disingenous douchebag, I was ALARMED for him. Because I’m a male rape victim who didn’t want to think he got raped.
Jesus fucking Christ. The fuck is wrong with you?
@ Antz
The law isn’t going after the woman in this case because the whole thing never happened. She and the Biebs never met. Why don’t you believe the nice young man when he says so?
In other news, yes, young female music fans can be creepy as hell. This is yet another reason why we laugh at MRAs when they call “creep” a gendered insult.
“In other news, yes, young female music fans can be creepy as hell. This is yet another reason why we laugh at MRAs when they call “creep” a gendered insult.”
Fixed that for you (well, hopefully, I’m only mostly sure I can do that)
Carp! I was trying to strike “female” and failed, and I was using the fancy CSS style method too no less, that really should’ve worked. (
testing)but pre doesn’t, well nevermind then, I’ll stop cluttering this up now, my apologies for the fail-clutter >.<
Shouldn’t the law still go after her for extortion?
@ Cloudiah–that’s what I thought about the cancer risk, too, but I’m just surprised whenever the manosphere acts like men in general don’t care about the women they sleep with, whether as girlfriends or wives or one night stands, because I don’t think that’s true. Men might not love their exes or the women they had quickies with in college, but I don’t think most men want them getting cancer.
Except for Meller, but there’s a reason he isn’t getting any.
I should say that I know two men who lost wives to breast cancer, and it was awful for both of them–I could see how lonely one of them was without his wife, and I hadn’t even known him beforehand. But seriously–men, in general, love at least a few women. If not their lovers, then probably sisters or mothers or daughters, and the MRM keeps forgetting this.
I kinda find it funny that there are CONFIRMED CASES of men impregnating tons of women through deception (see: http://www.cracked.com/article_19791_the-6-craziest-people-who-are-overpopulating-world.html ) and yet few if any confirmed cases of women doing this on any meaningful mass scale.
Perhaps it has a lot more to do with the fact that jacking off into a cup or ejaculating in general is pretty easy to do, while getting pregnant takes at least 9 months (plus a couple more if you breastfeed exclusively and don’t ovulate) before you can try again (and even then, most doctors say it will fuck your body up pretty badly to do it). One man could impregnate a thousand women, while one woman could have sex with a thousand men and only get pregnant once.
I also don’t find it very convincing that babies are the best way to get money out of men. One full time job at McDonalds pays more per month than child support minus child expenses. And if you slave away at McDonald’s instead, at least you get to go home and have time to yourself. The second I come home from working all day, my daughter wants to climb into my lap, play games, and go running around the neighborhood with me. If I want to hear myself think for one second, I have to lock myself in the bathroom with her howling and crying because I won’t let her in.
Yeah, that sounds like a TOTAL SWEET DEAL, bro.