Today, in the Men’s Rights subreddit, we find Demonspawn, a long-time fixture in Reddit’s MRA circles, getting dozens of upvotes for a comment in which he advocates murdering family court judges and other government officials:
Demonspawn is responding to a post from Robert Franklin on Fathers and Families about Dan Brewington, “[a]n Indiana man fac[ing] five years in prison because he criticized the judge and the custody evaluator in his divorce and custody case.”
Or at least that’s how Franklin wants to frame the issue. While conceding that Brewington “often used intemperate language” on his blog, Franklin downplays what seems to have been a relentless four-year harassment campaign from the troubled father. According to a report on the case on the Eagle Country Online website:
[P]rosecutors argued that Brewington took his postings beyond being critical of the court system. They became personal against anybody who became involved with his case.
“This was sick revenge dragging my wife and kids into the matter,” Humphrey said during his testimony. “I don’t know of many cases where a subject has more clearly expressed his intent to do harm.” …
Brewington … called [custody evaluator Edward] Connor a child molester and prostitute in his “Internet rampage,” contacted the Children’s Home of Northern Kentucky where Conner is involved as a board member, and sending mass e-mails to Connor’s colleagues and legal professional around the area. …
Connor’s wife, Dr. Sara Jones-Connor, reaffirmed what her husband shared with the judge.
“For over four years we have dealt with his attacks on a daily basis,” Jones-Conner said.
And Franklin leaves out the most serious of the accusations against Brewington: that he threatened to murder the judge.
Brewington’s cellmate at the Dearborn County Law Enforcement Center for two-and-a-half months, Joseph McCaleb, had sent a letter to jail officials on September 25 after being concerned with what he heard from Brewington.
“He talked about following (Judge Humphrey) home, shooting him, and dumping him in the river,” McCaleb said of Brewington’s alleged “detailed and thought out” plan.
I should note that after testifying that Brewington’s threats seemed serious, McCaleb later concluded that they weren’t; and Judge Brian Hill did not take his testimony into consideration when sentencing Brewington.
Was Brewington’s sentence fair? I don’t know. But Franklin’s posting was misleading, to say the least, if not dishonest. And while a few people raised questions about it, no one on the Men’s Rights subreddit bothered to spend the two minutes on Google that would have turned up the story I’ve been quoting from, instead relying entirely on Franklin’s, er, incomplete account.
Whether or not Brewington’s threats were sincere, Franklin’s post had Demonspawn and many others on the Men’s Rights subreddit thinking violent thoughts themselves. Here are some more selections from the discussion there. Note that every single violent comment I quote below got upvotes from the regulars.
Here, Boss_Money invokes the memory of Tom Ball, who killed himself in hopes that his dramatic suicide would encourage other MRAs to start firebombing courthouses and police stations:
Later in that same thread, coldacid suggests that suicide is a much less effective strategy than murder:
Anxdiety, meanwhile, shares his fantasies of violent “retribution.”
Boss_Monkey returns with a miniature manifesto for armed revolution:
And whats_up_doc suggests that violence may be the only solution:
The Men’s Rights subreddit is by and large the most “moderate” of all the major Men’s Rights forums online. But this is the language, and the thinking, of a hate movement. Anyone who really cares about improving life for men needs to call this kind of thing out, and make clear that it is completely unacceptable in any rights movement worthy of the name.
Well, I don’t think her comments are directed at the people here. I don’t think she’s lying about her opinions, or trying to ingratiate herself. I think she favors the blog, so it’s not about you.
And point taken with wanting the others banned. I don’t think it’s a good idea, but I can understand the sentiment.
What I see more is people wondering WHY Ruby posts here. I haven’t seen too many people call for her to be banned.
Anywhoo, in the brain bleach arena, I thought there should be equal time for pups:
http://www.ustream.tv/sfshiba
I personally would love to see NWO shown the door for good. As to Ruby, I think she’s every bit of a troll as the others.
If she isn’t, she’s impervious to constructive criticism (which no, she’s not getting now, but she used to), and really isn’t helping when she starts her crap. Prison rape was the last straw.
Cloudiah, I’d be ok with her being banned. She’s evil.
clairedammit:
Not sure if this is sarcasm, but they pretty much always thought this. That’s why there’re metal detectors in courthouses, and why my boyfriend’s mom had to run their remodeling plans past the Federal Marshals (it was determined that the proposed French doors were too big, so she had to change the plans).
You’re all wrong! The secret letters were O and S, as in Bing Crospy—
wait. Nevermind.
NWO and the others clearly aren’t trying to be on our side. Ruby seems to think that, I don’t know, we’ll forget about the prison rape thing and like her again, eventually? I’d understand more if there was a note of spite in her comments, then I’d believe she’s just trolling. But they’re so bland. Like she’s trying to undo her bad reputation one inoffensive comment at a time.
Then she forgets and starts defending rape again.
I just don’t get it.
I’m just sick of Ruby showing up and pretending like all the shit that went down never happened. I think it’s a kind of passive-aggressive manipulation.
Well, I didn’t say no one wanted her banned. Honestly, I can understand why you do. I would be very happy if she went away forever and ever, but I don’t know that she has violated the comments policy. Steele is way more persistently tedious than she is.
I’ve said the same, because most people seem relatively fine with Milkboy. I want them all gone, myself, because they are assholes.
NWO used to be kind of entertainingly horrible, but at this point he’s just repetitively horrible. He’s outstayed his usefulness.
(Personal opinions coming, not orders for what David should do or saying other people are wrong)
I don’t think people should be banned from this blog for horribleness, because this is kind of a blog about horribleness. If you banned everyone with the same standards you’d use for a regular feminist blog, you’d ban pretty much all the MRAs, and that would create a very different comment environment than there is now.
I think troll-baiting is kind of part of the game here. And maybe it’s sick, but I kinda like it? It’s fun taking apart logical fallacies and it’s downright revealing pushing someone who starts with superficially reasonable things like “gender studies is biased” until they start spitting out “penguins are whores.”
The only things that bother me are when trolls start getting vicious at specific commenters (which NWO does; I think it’s funny when he goes after me but I can’t extend that to other people) and when trolls are unresponsive and just want to monologue without playing the game (which Ruby does badly).
Ruby gets under my skin because she’s both unresponsive and disingenuous. Her two modes are “say something horrible, repeat it many times without answering any objections” and “say something that makes it sound like we’re all buddies here, ignore any commentary on her previous horribleness.” And it’s the second that makes me go AUGH. It’s so dishonest and creepy. It’s like having a friend punch you in the face, then show up to lunch the next day like “hey, how’s it going, can you believe this weather” like nothing happened. Somehow that’s worse than if they defend their actions.
Yeah, NWO peaked when he won Troll of the Year. But now? Totally jumped the shark.
I’m not seeing the commentariat as a whole asking for Ruby to be banned as much as telling her to fuck off. “I don’t like you, fuck off” is a perfect valid response, and we say it to other trolls all the time, so why not her? Are we supposed to cut her extra slack because she’s a woman? Because I’m not cool with that.
The responses she gets are most like the way people respond to, say, Eurosabra – not so much “David, please ban this person” as “you are despicable, and your continued insistence on trying to make people engage with you is creepy, so fuck off”. It’s a lot like the way people treated he who shall not be named before he finally was banned. It’s very specifically a thing that happens when someone kind of tried to weasel their way into a group, and the group just isn’t having it. Which is our call to make.
Also completely personal opinion:
Cliff said: I think troll-baiting is kind of part of the game here. And maybe it’s sick, but I kinda like it? It’s fun taking apart logical fallacies and it’s downright revealing pushing someone who starts with superficially reasonable things like “gender studies is biased” until they start spitting out “penguins are whores.”
I agree.
I was surprised to find out how much I enjoyed just that element about Manboobz (while I read/follow a number of feminist blogs, have unfollowed some too, sigh, I never felt impelled to become part of the commenariat).
I think the banning for personal attacks is a good choice (and really, here, isn’t that more David putting them on permanent moderation, and not letting some of the stuff through–he asked about NWO and his anti-semitic attacks, and got feedback that as far as recall was mostly let the shit storm flow, it’s not that important).
I think Ruby is ghastly–but she’s not gone over the line like certain Past Trolls who are now perma-modded no matter what. I doubt she will (she doesn’t seem to care enough to post regularly enough). She does seem an odd outlier for many reasons.
I like the pushback that people like Steele get on his ridiculous little crusade (and I’d really wish he’d understand that denotation (dictionary definition) and connotation (personal associations people have with terms) are not the same fucking things; that words can have different meanings, and because different contexts can contribute, trying to argue for one correct meaning is totally like trying to plug an active volcano). Yes, it went on 1300 comments or what–but I LIKED people standing against his incredibly clumsy and bad manipulations. I LIKED how Pecunium and Argenti wouldn’t get Swedish Troll get away with the rape apology. I LIKE the calling out of Tom Martin.
Most commentors, even the MRAs do not sink to the level of MIlkboy, Whores Whores Whores, Ruby, or Puppet Man. They’re trying to pretend they’re the good guys, and that makes it hard to be as obviously horrible.
It’s the pretending to be good guys and then saying disgusting things that provokes the GTFO responses, I think.
Quoting for truth. The comment section of Manboobz is where the superficial credibility of people like Martin comes to die. (Admittedly, he didn’t have much to begin with.) It’s very educational to see, even in the nobody trolls. The arguments marshaled against the trolls are very educational, too: I’ve learned a lot by reading the responses to them, probably more than I would have otherwise. Of course, this value is subject to diminishing returns, and eventually trolls like Owly wear out both their educational and entertainment value.
I agree about the educational aspect. I learn something new just about every time I come here. More than once, I’ve seen somebody that I respect say something that I think is utterly wrong, so I look it up, and find things out that I never knew, or that I had twisted up somehow.
A lot of people here are very eloquent, and reading their comments has clarified some murky subjects for me.
I also like when regular commenters disagree with each other. Sometimes they get really hot under the collar about it, but it always comes down to:
1) respect people’s differences
2) honour people’s lived experiences
3) don’t be cruel to people who appear to be genuinely suffering
4) back up what you say, and don’t be talking out your ass
I’ve hung out in places on line with really stringent commenting guidelines, where people get banned regularly for not following the rules. There aren’t a lot of rules here, but I find that people (where people =/= trolls) are welcoming, accepting, and willing to be educated and corrected when they eat their feet. In a lot of ways, it feels safer and more inclusive here than in more strictly moderated venues.
“I think troll-baiting is kind of part of the game here. And maybe it’s sick, but I kinda like it?”
I agree with Cliff Pervocracy and Ithiliana
words can have different meanings, and because different contexts can contribute, trying to argue for one correct meaning is totally like trying to plug an active volcano
This is exactly what I argued, for the record. It is you who claimed that “misandry” could only have one meaning.
No, Steele, we said that misandry is not a thing on par with misogyny. We agreed that it is indeed a word. It is not, however, a widespread social problem.
I love the troll baiting too, I just can’t help but think I’m hidously inept at it, I hope I’ll be able to get better with time, knowledge and experience.
Although I’ve ended up going the “ignore her” route because I have more than enough walls to talk to without adding her to the list, I do agree with everything cliff and ithiliana said. Also, there’s an important difference b/w Ruby and the rest of the trolls. Ruby is both anti-MRA and claims the mantle of feminist. So, although no one’s under obligation to continuously call her out, it has more value than responding to Owly or The Penguin over there
@Unimaginative: In a lot of ways, it feels safer and more inclusive here than in more strictly moderated venues.
I agree!