Many of those in the manosphere wear their misogyny like a badge of honor. Others like to present themselves as fierce opponents of bigotry, and angrily deny the charges of misogyny thrown their way. When the Southern Poverty Law Center ran an article noting the misogyny often found on A Voice for Men, for example, site founder Paul Elam responded with great indignation in an open letter to the group:
Yesterday I received the unfortunate news that your organization … listed my website, avoiceformen.com, among others, as misogynistic, or “woman-hating. … Contrary to what readers of your site may be led to believe, the goals of SPLC and AVfM are quite similar: We both work to identify groups who seek to oppress others, and inform the public of the inequities they would perpetuate.
This seems a strange argument for the man whose handle on YouTube is “The Happy Misogynist,” and who regularly writes posts filled with hair-curling hatred of women. It seems even stranger when you consider AVFM’s support of a site that frankly peddles hate – against women, “manginas,” gay men, lesbian, and trans folk.
I’m talking about the misleadingly named Artistry Against Misandry site. AAM and AVFM seem almost joined at the hip. AAM’s founder, musician Jade Michael, wrote and performed the theme song currently used on AVFM’s internet “radio show.” AVFM has returned the favor, promoting the site and helping raise money for it. Indeed, several days ago Elam himself proudly announced that he’d sent along $100 of his own money to help Michael fund an upcoming event.
The site describes itself as follows:
Welcome to the first pro-male artist activist network. Within these pages you will find music, poetry, prose, graphics, cartoons and additional links, all of which are here to bring attention to and counter misandry in Western society.
In practice, this means saying the worst shit about women you can possibly imagine. Oh, the “artists” also say terrible things about men who don’t hate women with fervor — you may recall the ridiculous caricature of me as a self-flagellating, woman-worshipping “mangina” at the end of this post from a couple of days ago.
But the “artists” whose work is featured on the site focus most of their venom on women. Let’s take a look at several graphics from Reality, one of the site’s most prolific contributors.
Yep, that’s right: “western women” are “the new tapeworm parasites.” Here are a couple more.
There are (literally) forty more where those came from, and they’re pretty much all as nasty and hateful as the ones I’ve featured here. I suggest you visit AAM’s graphic art page and scroll through the rest of Reality’s wares.
If you don’t have the patience for that, and since the app they use on AAM to display Reality’s artwork is a piece of crap, I’m just going to highlight some more of his clever anti-misandry slogans here in text form:
Women actually expect you to act like a traditional male. While they live like psychotic whores. Keep dreaming, bitch!
Guys, do you really want to know what she’s thinking? 100% pure shit.
[Picture of women pointing at the camera.] We get everything and do nothing for it. Now get back to work slave.. we can put you in jail or bankrupt you with just a pointed finger.
Remember, when a woman tells you she’s tired it’s the only time she’s actually telling you the truth because…being a raging petty psychotic bitch…while being virtually retarded…while having endless banal thoughts she considers “genius…” while making insane and constant ultimatums…IS absolutely EXHAUSTING!!
Meanwhile, an artist calling himself “Andy Man” declares in a graphic of his own:
This is the sort of “artistry” that A Voice for Men is actively supporting.
And they wonder why some might consider them part of a hate movement?
Artistry Against Misandry also features music, videos, and even poetry, all of it awful, in every sense of the word. I will take a look at some of this in future posts.
EDIT: I added one more Reality graphic and a bunch of his slogans in text form.
Neither of my grandfathers fought in WWII, but I suspect they were too old (born in 1903/4, so they’d both have been in their late thirties). On the other hand, one of their brothers was killed in WWI at the age of what I imagine was only 18-19.
Cassandra — both of my grandfather’s were in WWII, the one still living will be 84? this year, and while he’s an old republican (and proud of it) he’d also be appalled at these MRAs trying to take the vote from his granddaughters…I’m less sure on my ex-step-grandmother, and his first wife is deceased (and his daughter in moved to Israel) — but he’s got mostly granddaughters, and would probably give one vicious verbal lashing to the MRM. They kind of make me glad I can’t convince him to let me get his ancient computer online.
He only recently stopped working (he retired once and got bored, years ago) — he’d gone back to work as, get this, night security at a retirement home — when the old ladies weren’t hitting on him he’d walk the nurses to their cars, because the parking lot wasn’t guarded and “you never know who might be out there”. Complete opposite view as the MRM. (Yeah, the assumption that men can handle themselves is a bit BS, but in practice there are no male nurses there)
Probably blow the MRM’s collective brain to hear that old ladies flirt though! And that his lack of responding was partly professional, and partly he wasn’t getting married a third time (the ex-step-grandmother really was a gold digger, and everyone hates her…probably including her new husband, general agreement is they’re two gold diggers made for each other)
Actually that’s a good point – how do they account for couples who meet and fall in love and get married when they’re both elderly? It happens with a fair amount of regularity, and in most cases there’s neither great beauty nor great wealth to serve as an MRA-friendly explanation. If you don’t believe that men and women enjoy each other’s companionship, how would you explain elderly people who fall in love and want to get married?
I imagine it’s something on the lines of “well, men die before women…” (MISANDRY!) “…so she’s clearly after all his worldly goods for herself”.
Even if she’s the richer one? The retirement home in question is the high end expensive kind, those ladies definitely have more money than my grandfather!
Well, she only became the richer one after leeching off her first husband. They can work their way through loads of successors at that age.
I mean, I’m sorry for your grandfather and all, but facts must be faced. Or, in this case, made up.
Just look at this lazy Western woman, content with letting men die on the frontlines while she takes it easy!
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-women-combat-20120525,0,7119379.story
Wetherby — it’s okay, he’s quite capable of not wanting to remarry while not hating women, that alone would boggle the MRM.
Crumbelievable — I actually saw that the other day and was half expecting to come here and see the MRM exploding that they’re taking jobs from the men! MISANDRY!!
@David:
Speaking of Elam, have you seen that Youtube video some MRA made where he puts AVFM stickers on a subway car? It was titled something hilarious like “If we put up 1,000 of these, feminism will be through” (I kid you not).
MRAs have discovered our weakness-stickers!
I’d search for it again but I don’t feel like wading through the river of Youtube videos I’d find in doing so.
Crumbelievable — google-fu FTW! MRA activity…if we had 1000 guys in every city doing this it would be game over for feminism.
Oh goodness, three more hilarious ones (more for the comments)
I just can’t help myself — with description of solely “FTSU” (fuck their shit up? the library’s? Does. Not. Compute.)
Another day in the life of an MRA — with the comment — “Not a good idea to put these stickers on federal buildings. It just gives them an excuse to say AVFM is a terrorist group.” to which the video poster says “MRA’s have big balls.” (or tiny brains, either way I guess?)
Deakin FTSU final — apparently “fuck their shit up” means literally, and is in no way limited to anything that might make sense…idk if that makes it better or worse…
And that has the poster replying to a comment with “Ya better get used to it toots because we MRA’s have big brass balls, as Tom Leykis would say.” — didn’t we just have one citing Leykis? Who was that?
David this youtube MRA is a fun one.
No offense intended, but someone in this comment section used the phrase “given the vote”
*giggle* @ “given”. tee hee.
@Argenti Aertheri
“Did I not explain that yesterday? maybe the day before, but fairly recently. Studies, reliable ones with solid methodology, show that 1 in 4 women will be raped at some point while at college, not 1 in 4 will be raped in every year of college, but in their entire time at college.”
This is fun. Let’s try something, shall we? Here is a link for campus crime at berkeley, usually where these yum-yum solid methodology stats come from.
http://police.berkeley.edu/documents/safetycounts/2009-2010/09-10_StatisticsChapter.pdf
Now in 2006 there were 15 forcible sexual offenses reported, (not verified), both on and off campus. It doesn’t say man or woman, it doesn’t say it was rape, just 15. In 2007 there were 9, in 2008 there where 12. 15+9+12=36 over 3 years for an average of 36/3=12 a year.
Now here’s a link to the number of students at berkeley.
http://www.berkeley.edu/about/fact.shtml
36,142 students of which 53% are women. For ease of numbers we’ll say 18,000 are women. We’ll say all the reported incidents we’re by women, all of them are true cause women never lie, and all of them are rapes. 18,000/12=1,500. Which means 1 in 1,500 a year both on and off campus.
Since you can’t just say in 2 years it’s 1 in 750 because women leave school and enter at a steady rate that number really doesn’t change all that much. So we’ll freeze that number of 1 in 1,500 and have those women stay in college until we can hit the magic number of 1 in 4. Which would be 1,500/4=375 years.
In order to achieve the magic number of 1 in 4, berkeley would need to allow no more women in or out for 375 years.
Please show me the, “reliable methodology,” used to achieve the magic number of 1 in 4. You pride yourself at being so adept at math. Show me how you can do it? I’m giving you the links, (official). I’m giving you that women never lie and the reports are true. I’m giving you they were rapes and not just stolen kisses. I’m giving you it was all women doing the reporting and not men. That’s a lotta leeway. Now you give me the 1 in 4 stat.
@Argenti Aertheri
“Studies on false accusations, real ones with solid methodology, put the rate between 5% and 10%. And that’s not 1 in 10 men will be falsely accused, that’s 1 in 10 reports are false reports — something like 80% of false reports don’t name anyone, so of all rape reports, approximately 1% (using 5% false reporting rate) to 2% (using 10% false reporting rate) are false and name anyone. I think we can agree that a false report with no one named doesn’t ruin anyone’s life right?”
This is solid methodology on a case by case basis.
http://falserapearchives.blogspot.com/2009/06/archives-of-sexual-behavior-feb-1994.html
Most actual studies as opposed to fudging numbers in order to increase funding show the rate where women admit to false testimony at between 40 to 60%. And that’s just the ones that finally admit it. After that it’s a he said she said battle. The actual number of violent rapes is extremely low.
As far as sexual harrassment goes, if you take the monetary reward out of victimhood, you’d see that nonsense of accusations disappear.
I’m tempted to print out my own stickers to help this good sir spread the message
Women who get raped were stupid bitches who were begging for it
avoiceformen.com
or
We don’t value women. That’s the only reason why the streets aren’t littered with their bodies
avoiceformen.com
They’re a bit wordy, so I’d need to use a small font
Some dope named Mike. He claimed that he hated MRAs but spoke in the exact same language, calling feminist men “pussified” and then using (made up) anecdotal evidence to ‘prove’ that Western women were terrible. This was in the recent Spearhead write-up
Crumbelievable — ah yes, the non-MRA who sounded just like an MRA. Also, you can shorten “Women who get raped were stupid bitches who were begging for it” to “Raped? You were begging for it!” or “…begging for it, bitch!” depending on the space. For the other one…I got bored… (and yes, that means that’s now sitting in open view on TinyPic, no destruction of property needed!)
II also love that that guy calls feminists “cowards”
Why don’t you speak out publicly about how awful women are, instead of hiding on Youtube?
@Argenti:
Nice work
Crumbelievable — couldn’t have done it without your idea, you should get the credit for it
@Argenti Aertheri
Since I’m moderated, it make take a while for you to see this. The last entry on the previous page is my question on getting, what you called reliable studies with solid methodology.
By the way, thanks for answering my question on typo’s. Although your response once again seemed to paint me in a bad light while you retained an air of supremacy.
Such as, “I corrected your typo/grammar that one time because it was really annoying me — if I wanted to correct all your errors to prove my superiority I’d probably bore myself to death trying, I really don’t care that much (how can you care that much about a typo, or grammar error, in a comment online FFS?)”
Have I ever pointed out anyone’s typo’s or poor sentence structure unless they point out mine? Of course not, it’s childish and proves nothing.
—————
And this, “The point of “You can do better than just playing spot-the-typo though!” was that your comments lend themselves to being torn apart by various commenters here, mine occasionally have a typo, if I’m nearly as wrong as you are, then you can do better than merely spotting my typos (note that the post I corrected yours in was rather long, with one line about your grammar — reply to the rest of the comment if I’m so terribly wrong)”
I still seem to be at the losing end of things.
—————
And this, “I’m really curious how you make “you are correct on that” into “I’m better than you”. Had you replied to my note about your grammar with anything along the lines of “oops” or “thank you” or “you’re correct on that” — I’d have let it drop, because I really don’t care that much.”
If you really didn’t care that much, you’d have let it drop. Wouldn’t you? Another excuse it appears.
—————
And this, “Where did you ever get the impression I thought you spotting my typo was childish though? Pointless, sure, but so was mine really. Since you apparently take it as a serious blow to your ego to have made a simple mistake, I won’t point out your grammar anymore, unless in the form of “what does this mean? please explain”
A blow to me ego? Another dig at my inferiority? My ego needs to be stroked apparently.
—————
Your entire response was quite condescending. You of course initially corrected my sentence structure to prove what? You intelligence over mine. That could be the only reason. When I corrected your’s to show constant vigilance for the perfect grammar and sentence structure has no bearing on intelligence, you retaliated by condescending with, “You can do better than just playing spot-the-typo though!” Which could only be interpreted as me being childish.
—————
Your final response, as we can clearly see paints me in a bad light and you in a good light. You’ve manipulated the situation brilliantly from start to finish.
1st) I have poor sentence structure.
2nd) I point out your grammar mistake and I’m childish.
3rd) My mistakes are annoying and plentiful
4th) My comments lend themselves to being torn apart,
5th) I need thank you for correcting me while I’m supposed to do better than play spot-the-typo.
6th) My ego is frail and easily bruised.
These of course are just the highlights of your manipulation in portraying me as inferior. Please forgive if my response sounds like so much giberish, and I deeply apologize if my sentence structure/grammar lends itself to being torn apart.
No doubt my lenghty response will elicit the old, “shorter NWO.” Perhaps I should just stick with, man = bad, woman = good. Anything more seems to be beyond my feeble capabilities.
Oh goodness, I’m going through their “art” and found this mess — obvious issues aside, that’s a female wolf spider (warning, that’s a spider picture link). Kind of an excellent, if likely accidental, reference, female wolf spiders actually raise their spider young without the male wolf spider around. (and I’m a giant arachnophobe who is now going to flip out every time something moves, and I’ve finally got a breeze in my apt >.< )
‘society is damaged by moving away from the status quo’ isn’t exactly a sentiment its impossible to express through art. go read brideshead revisited and then tell me theres no great conservative art.
what there isn’t any of is good art by 20th century american conservatives, because theyve constructed a movement thats openly hostile to art. its more a matter of movement conservatism being the stupidest thing ever than anything else.
I am actually sitting here trying to think of conservative art (pictorial art counts, right?) and how about some early American art? Grandma Moses? Norman Rockwell?