Categories
a voice for men antifeminism evil women hypocrisy johntheother lying liars misogyny MRA

A Voice for Men has 99 problems, and the word “bitch” is one.

Here’s JohnTheOther on A Voice for Men, complaining that Australian journalist Tory Shepard has unfairly accused “men’s rights extremists” associated with AVFM of using the term “lying bitches.”

“[L]ying bitches” might have [been] pulled from from a reader’s comment on one of more than 1200 articles on AVfM. But that phrase forms no part of this human rights movement’s standard rhetoric, which if Shepherd were a journalist, she would know.

Huh. Yeah, it’s probably just some sort of incredible fluke. Just one reader’s comment on one of more than 1200 articles!

Oops, I guess it was used more than once.

But it’s not like this sort of language is encouraged by JtO or his boss Paul Elam.

No, not at all!

To be fair, they don’t always refer to women as bitches. Sometimes they refer to women by the much more genteel “cunt.”

Like the time Elam described the CEO of the Good Men Project as “a disingenuous cunt that makes her living off trying to turn men into lap dogs.” And the time he referred to comedic actress Katherine Heigl as a “misandric cunt.” Oh, and that time he referred to a commenter on his site as “Ms. Cuntforbrains, or if you are male, Mr. Cuntforbrains.” And the time he referred to the feminist blogosphere as the “cunt-o-sphere.” Very witty!

I know, it’s unfair to cherry-pick comments from the guy who actually started and runs A Voice for Men. Clearly he isn’t representative of the site at all.

(Note: Yes, I did say yesterday that I wasn’t going to read that JtO post on general principle. And yes, I did read a little bit more of it. But I have not read the whole thing, and I never will!)

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

111 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Cliff Pervocracy
8 years ago

doot doo doo doo doo dooooo
doot doo doo doo doo dooooo
doot doo doo doo dear Argenti
doot doo doo doo doo dooooooooo

Argenti Aertheri
Argenti Aertheri
8 years ago

“That’s it… it’s the Russians’ fault.”

Sure, why not! Simple version of how Latin handles the to be verb — usually it doesn’t exist, but when it does, it isn’t optional (helpful, I know). Est disputandum is a participle though, disputandum on its own would be some weird noun-verb-thing, it need the est to be a verb. So the actual simple version would be — were there’s an est, or a sum, you can’t drop it (that de though is medieval Latin, dropping that is fine by me…idfk why that’s even there, the -ibus ending covers of…)

Cliff — lol, avoiding royalties on Happy Birthday? 🙂

pecunium
pecunium
8 years ago

And in russian… participles are different; the verb to be is implicit, even in future/past conditions.

pecunium
pecunium
8 years ago

The real reason (of course) is I forgot the proper form of the aphorism. As to the intrusion of the “de”, it’s because medieval latin was spoken by people whose languages had stopped being declined (well, in the Romance language portions of the world) and so didn’t have the feel for the way “de”, etc. were redundant. Not wrong,per se, but not needed in all cases (save for emphasis, etc.).

Argenti Aertheri
Argenti Aertheri
8 years ago

You want weird? I’ve always thought of the two word participles as a single word, because the to be verb part is that much a part of the verb…but there is a space there, making it two words in English. As for the “de” yeah, but gustibus is declined, I mean, the redundancy makes sense in that context, but it’s silly (then again, I think all medieval Latin is silly).

“The real reason (of course) is I forgot the proper form of the aphorism.”

Google is your friend, wiki has a good list of Latin terms in common usage (which is nice for legal Latin, since few of those mean what they say)

pecunium
pecunium
8 years ago

Yeah… but I am so familiar with it that I forget. Esp. as I recall it as, Non disputandum est; and I don’t know how the shift in position affects the subtleties of meaning.

Argenti Aertheri
Argenti Aertheri
8 years ago

disputandum est sounds more correct to my ear, but wiki says est disputandum — idk, maybe medieval Latin reversed it? Participles are one of the rare cases I thought word order actually mattered though.

Kakanian
Kakanian
8 years ago

>Always the excuses abound. Little miss, crys-and-gets-160K gets a few insults directed soley at her

I think it would take about… well at least a day to read out all the insults little miss 160K has recieved online just for that project. That seems like a lot of insulting directed towards a single person to me.

whataboutthemoonz
8 years ago

Did you or did you not intentionally post the version of Time For Tea with the “I’m totally considering this my birthday party” line from the cameraperson in the intro?

Argenti Aertheri
Argenti Aertheri
8 years ago

whataboutthemoonz — that was accidental, I’ve got a playlist of the FLAG songs since the album isn’t out yet, that’s just the best version I could find the day after I saw that concert. Thank you though for reminding me that that album is coming out the 24th. *is a happy plague rat*

Fembot
Fembot
8 years ago

@Kakanian

That would be some great performance art. A woman stands and repeats every insult and threat Sarkeesian received online. How long would that show be?