The other day we took a look at some of the more reprehensible opinions of Tom Martin, one of the UK’s most prominent Men’s Rights Activists and a man who evidently believes that child prostitutes are taking the easy way out to avoid having to get real jobs. He returned with even worse stuff, which I highlighted in my previous post.
Happily for all of us, not all of Martin’s views are this reprehensible. Many are merely ridiculous. So, today, let’s look at the Lighter Side of Tom Martin, as evidenced by some of his recent comments here on Man Boobz.
Martin apparently spent last Sunday working on a video project which involved him buttonholing passers-by on the streets of London and asking them questions in order to “prove” his various crackpot theories about gender. Here’s how he explained one aspect of his video research:
After shooting my video experiment tomorrow to discover who is more sexist on the street, women or women, I will be shooting another short, investigating if there is a correlation between unfunny women and prostitution ethic. I believe women could be as funny as men on average if they tried, but instead, invest in whoring strategies. I have a reliable street experiment to investigate this hypothesis also …
If I can establish that women can be as funny as men (in a zero prostitution environment), then this video experiment will be released in a news piece, and used as a springboard to pre-sell the feature-length documentary it will form a part of, on a related topic.
Good luck with that!
Martin also took on the contentious (to him) subject of male baldness, a topic of intense interest to him, due to certain factors with regard to gender and misandry … er, long story short, he’s bald. Sorry, balding.
After one commenter here suggested that Martin’s ambition was to become a sort of “Ann Coulter … with less hair and more swearing,” he took umbrage – not at the comparison to Coulter but at the bit about hair.
Well Cassandra, there are five new baldness treatments in the pipeline, but no drugs for treating a receding personality, so what are you going to do?
In a followup comment, the man whose favorite word in the English language is “whore,” used as an insult, declared we were being a bunch of evil meanies for even mentioning the whole (lack of) hair thing:
Cassandra, thanks to your receding personality (for which there is already a cure – renunciation therapy), I have decided for my filmed experiment tomorrow to also measure the degree to which each sex is prepared to make physical insults about the other sex.
Even if you specifically were fat for instance, and it was all your own fault because you refuse to get a job, I would never mention it in a debate with you. I debated an obese woman once. She ordered a pizza whilst we were still on stage, but I did not refer to it at the time, because of the most basic standards of decorum.
This I believe was an attempt at a joke.
How many manboobzers are prepared now to concur that Cassandra was being a douche by picking on an involuntary physiological characteristic of a debating opponent? And then encouraging others to do the same?
Of course, in Martin’s mind, mocking women as fat whores is totally cool, because:
Fatness is a choice, ladies, and so is being a whore. Going bald (currently) is not, due to poor efficacy of available treatments, including transplants. That will change, if Aderans, Histogen, Replicel, Allergen and Tsuji-Lab among others have anything to do with it. All you need to do in the meantime is shut the fuck up until they sort it out. The apparent acceptability of attacking the bald though, is a great example of the lack of equality men have. People do not generally attack or humiliate women who are going bald – but when it’s a man…
Uh, yeah, that’s why virtually every bald or balding woman wears a hat or a wig, while bald or balding men just comb it over or shave it all off.
Evidently Martin feels that even a mention of his lack of hair is some kind of hate crime. Here, prominent Bald Rights Activist Larry David tries to convince authorities to investigate a similar hate crime against him.
Note to Martin: Larry David’s show, “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” is fictional.
(Note: Tom Martin has confirmed that this is indeed him posting comments here on Man Boobz by sending an email from the account associated with his website Sexismbusters.org. Also, he’s retweeted quotes from his comments here. Contact him via his web site if you are skeptical.)
*might not
They’re right about me Steele. Pay no attention to this hyperlinked 164 item A to Z list of anti-male discrimination issues I compiled. I am obsessed, as David rightly says with ONE single issue – bringing the men’s movement down, to the level of child prostitution. Oh wait a minute, that’s manboobz’s job.
http://sexismbusters.org/ref1.html
He’s not gonna learn a damn thing. He’s still clinging to the fiction of Tom being feminist double agent. It’s sad, really.
Aw, look, Tom is trying to reach out. Watch out, Steele, if you follow his links he’s probably going to ask you for money.
Torvus is brainwashed. He needs to be taken into the desert by Harvey Keitel and deprogrammed.
And Steele actually did turn out to be Buttpole? It’s always while I’m gone!
At least I’m here for the troll fight.
Cassandra said,
Aw, look, Tom is trying to reach out. Watch out, Steele, if you follow his links he’s probably going to ask you for money.
Yes Cassandra. I need £37,000, from each of you.
The big thing MRAs really get from debating with w-fems on the internet, is a sense of loss – all our ideas, sucked into the ether – plucked – with very few useful ideas coming back at us.
W-fems don’t argue ideas with ideas, they argue them with outrage, moral indignation, sanctimonious righteousness, feigned disgust, and puppy videos.
I did have a useful debate on the feminist philosophers website once, but it was still a net loss of ideas. W-fems aren’t really in to reciprocity. They don’t get it.
http://toysoldier.wordpress.com/2012/07/16/a-dose-of-stupid-v74/#more-7243
I dunno if anyone missed this but supposed antirape supporter toysolider agrees with tom martin.
Why am I not surprised that Toysoldier is a child rape advocate too?
*activist for men and boys who have been raped
(er antirape supporter just sounds wrong, sorry its late.)
Can’t bring myself to read yet another defense of child prostitution today. Anyone feel like summarizing TSs nonsense?
“One can argue whether they really have a choice given that most of them, particularly the boys, were initiated at a young age. This may be the only way they know of, besides selling drugs or committing some other crime, to take care of themselves. It is indeed exploitation, and the notion that it is not, which Martin argues, is moronic. However, it is not trafficking in any sense of the word. No one is making the children sell themselves. No one forces them to do this. No one threatens them, coerces them, bribes them, or defrauds them. They are indeed choosing to sell themselves, and while the choice is a terrible one, that does not make it any less a choice.”
A direct quote from Toysoldier. There is more decrying us for objecting to child rape and exploitation.
@Tom
“W-fems don’t argue ideas with ideas…”
Maybe you could read my past posts on this thread and respond to those ideas. But you conveniently ignore me, because you know you don’t have a decent response, and you’ll just make yourself look even more stupid if you try.
“This is very simple: some kids do choose to sell their bodies for sex. It is silly to think they are always forced into doing so, just as it is silly to think they have no idea what they are doing. Whether they have the mental capacity to understand the ramifications of their choices is debatable. I doubt they truly understand what they are getting themselves into, but that does not change that they are making a choice, and that choice is not the same as some person forcing themselves on a child.”
Toysoldier’s conclusion.
@Tom
WTF is up with calling all feminists Ws? I’m going to start calling MRAs “ballsonchinians.”
Tom has quite the hate-on for me, doesn’t he?
So, yet another MRA fully on board with child prostitution as a choice made by the child in question.
I will not be surprised if the others do not fall into line.
You know I was going to post some highlights or a summary but I can’t even get through it without feeling ill. How could anyone excuse that shit? Especially someone who is a victim? and is suppose to be supporting other victims?
I will just quote some stuff he said in the comment section:
I think TS is probably trying to aim for “they have agency”. The problem is a. not to any significant extent, when they’re desperately poor children, and b. even if it was the child’s choice, it doesn’t matter. It’s not like that would make it OK to have sex with them, or let the people who do so off the hook ethically speaking.
Er… the toysoldiers guy agrees with me, points out Duchetrelle is full of shit, but also calls me moronic for sinking to Douchetrelle’s level.
He appears to have been sexually assaulted when he was 10, and suggests that he took money for it – although it’s not clear whether he took the money up front, or as a keep quiet bribe after, or if this was at a later age.
So, if he was indeed a child prostitute, I’d say his opinion about whether it was child prostitution or child exploitation or both, might be tinged. Most child prostitutes seem to think it isn’t exploitation, according to the report from Mexico, but then they are not MRAs, so maybe have not learnt to be embarrassed about prostitution, as many gender politics people might have.
I don’t know. It’s a hard one to call. This blogger wrote a previous piece about my court case, and he seems like a reasonable guy.
He doesn’t like my jokey style – calls me out as moronic – but doesn’t really back those points
up, although is clear that he thinks I’m wasting my platform by sinking to your level.
I commented in his blog that I am not an elected official representative of the MRM, rather, just an enormous loser (£37,000), who instead of being earnest and raising £5,000, is instead going to continue telling the truth, but have fun with it, and see where it leads me, you *****s.
http://toysoldier.wordpress.com/2012/07/16/a-dose-of-stupid-v74/#comment-26888
lol some mra calls tom out for using his much beloved slur.
Steele and Tom Martin are whining at each other? Oh god, the only way this could get more perfect is if NWO showed up to join the fray.
Yes, because we all know how often blog posts explode into national news stories!
Also, you know the only reason MRAs think Manboobz is a hugely influential blog is because it’s the only website that pays any attention to you dunderheads, right?
I can’t decide what’s funnier: Steele thinking Martin is a feminist plant or Steele thinking “prominent figures” in the MRM give a shit what he thinks.
“Covert Mangina” would make a good name for a rock band. (Also, aren’t manginas supposed to be desperately craving validation from women? What would be the point of covert manginery?)
Someone reboot Steele, he’s started looping.
Incidental note, y’all are giving Steele way too much credit, considering the fucker minimizes discrimination against women while pretending every little thing that ever happened to a dude is totes mcgotes discrimination against dudes.
I mean ffs, he uses the term ‘mangina’. Because the worst thing a dude could be is… like a woman? Equality, he ain’t after.