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.)
@Steele:
I can’t see a mole losing the kind of money he did in an unsuccessful lawsuit just to be a more successful plant. He is definitely trolling here though. He comes here to his jollies by pissing off feminists.
Steele, really? So devoted a troll that he brought a troll lawsuit to a real court and got stuck with a real bill for a real £37,000?
Speak of the devil, Tom said:
Just to make absolutely clear we understand each other: Whenever an adult has sex with a child — regardless of whether or not the child says “yes” or “no” or accepts money or a gift for it — it is rape. That is in fact the very definition of statutory rape.
By saying it isn’t rape if a child accepts money you are — by the very fact that you are saying this — condoning child rape.
I love when MRAs suggest that bad MRAs are feminist plants, then turn around and do something like, I dunno, spend 800 pages arguing about “misandry.”
Dude. We don’t need plants.
Go back and deliberate some more, Steele.
He is still pissy David caught him sockpuppeting. :p
After much deliberation, I have concluded that Tom Martin is a massive troll. He is simply too perfectly contemptible. I believe he may even be an active mole in service of feminists, to discredit the MRM. I would ask Boobzland to consider this likely possibility.
(considers possibility)
No dice. He’s yours and yours alone. But feel free to tell yourself whatever comforting lies help you sleep through the night.
Steele, really? So devoted a troll that he brought a troll lawsuit to a real court and got stuck with a real bill for a real £37,000?
Exactly- which movement has greater financial means, the feminists or the MRM? On the surface, he’s a bozo who put himself in the hole on a hopeless lawsuit. It’s admirable in its way- fighting misandry is always noble- but on a personal level, it’s irrational.
However, if we accept my theory- Martin could have been assured financial compensation by feminists, much moreso than he lost. And now that he’s got exposure, it’s possible he’s been ordered by his bosses to “reveal” himself as an unspeakably, almost comically, foul individual. His name is being dragged through the mud, but given the extent of the feminist coffers, I could see him playing along for the right price.
I love when MRAs suggest that bad MRAs are feminist plants, then turn around and do something like, I dunno, spend 800 pages arguing about “misandry.”
Firstly, I like the scare quotes around misandry.
Secondly, you were all right there arguing with me. The Internet is made for frivolous debates; sure, it’s a little ridiculous in hindsight. But I hardly think I was the one who came out of it looking the worse. It’s you who have a massive bugbear about misandry, and you who insist that the word can only conform to your very specific interpretation. It’s you who dismiss and ignore men’s pain and men’s issues, you vile jackass.
Steele, I think it’s time we need to start considering if you’re a feminist plant.
I mean, you do make MRAs look like incredibly obnoxious, disingenuous dirtbags. I bet you’re really Andrea Dworkin.
There’s not a fund somewhere in the name of “The Feminists.” A few major feminist organizations have serious funding, but they don’t fuck around with Internet trolls.
LOL!!! So then, according to Steele, Tom must be w***ing himself for the feminist cause.
Yeah, and there’s more than one of us. I’d go to sleep and wake up and see you’d argued all night; I’d go to class or out on a date and come back and see you were arguing the whole time.
Anyway don’t blame us if you have a pathologic compulsion to get the last word.
Y’know all that shit about ‘ZOMG the moon landing isn’t real’? Yeah, that was more believable than this.
(This might turn out to be a bad example.)
There’s not a fund somewhere in the name of “The Feminists.” A few major feminist organizations have serious funding, but they don’t fuck around with Internet trolls.
To be sure, I can’t say specifically which group would be responsible; I would have thought that went without saying. But there are many with deep coffers; the feminists as a collective have much, much more exposure than the MRM.
And I’m disingenuous? Excuse me while I chortle.
@Steele:
Really? You really wanna go full tin foil hat when you know that there are less than stellar people who will find reasons to latch onto every single ideology/movement and use it for their own personal gain? There is no reason to create a ridiculously silly hypothesis rather than going the route of occam’s razor.
“However, if we accept my theory- Martin could have been assured financial compensation by feminists, much moreso than he lost.”
The passion with which you’ve embraced magical thinking is impressive, but I’m afraid that Tom is indeed a member of your movement. Sorry about that.
Yeah, and there’s more than one of us. I’d go to sleep and wake up and see you’d argued all night; I’d go to class or out on a date and come back and see you were arguing the whole time.
Again, I pop on quickly once in a while to scan the latest Boobzland has to offer. Many of my comments were made on the clock, at work, in quick bursts, when I had some downtime.
I know most of you get on and stare slack-jawed at the screen for hours, but I’ve learned to be efficient; I’ve had to, in my line of work.
HAHAAH oh man, feminist conspiracy again?? You and NWO should go on a date.
And complaining about how mras work so hard while feminists are lazy? YOU TWO ARE MEANT TO BE!
His line of work being Executive Supermodel-Dater, but he moonlights as an Astronaut Professor.
And he thinks we’re lying about everything.
Projection and paranoia…
Wait, wasn’t he a student some time last week?
Steele.
Steele stop.
My sides.
Wheels within wheels! D:
Yeah, well, he also had two other names last week.
Executive Supermodel-Dater
Excuse me? I have to say, I’m amused as to how quickly this has spiraled into something of a trope. I mentioned that I had a date with my significant other, which was true, but I was also employing sarcasm because I know that most of you can’t imagine a member of the “misogynist” MRM in a relationship with a woman. At no point did I refer to my SO as a “supermodel”. She is indeed quite attractive in my own personal estimation, but no, she is not employed as a supermodel.
Steele – For Chrissakes, the “argue til everyone falls asleep, declare yourself the winner” method doesn’t work on a blog with readers in different time zones.
I know you think the last word is everything, but you’re one man racing against a relay here. Get some rest! It’s 11 at night! Your quite attractive significant other whom you totally have must be waiting for you to come to bed!