Yesterday, we took a look at Ferdinand Bardamu’s manosphere manifesto “The Necessity of Domestic Violence,” a thoroughly despicable piece of writing that concludes:
Women should be terrorized by their men; it’s the only thing that makes them behave better than chimps.
I decided to take a look at Bardamu’s post yesterday after running across a discussion of it in Reddit’s new FeMRA subreddit, a forum ostensibly devoted to what “women can do to advance men’s rights as women.” It’s a strange little subreddit, started by a man and dominated by some of Reddit’s most unsavory MaleMRAs, some of them banned in the regular Men’s Rights subreddit.
Recently one of the most unsavory of the bunch, calling himself JeremiahGuy this time, posted a link to Bardamu’s domestic violence manifesto, which he hosts on his website. Jeremiah naturally used the discussion as an excuse to post more apologias for domestic “discipline” along the lines of the quote from him I featured yesterday.
But I was a little surprised to see GirlWritesWhat, the blabby FeMRA video blogger who’s captured the hearts of Reddit’s Men’s Rights crowd, step into the conversation with something of a defense of Bardamu’s noxious views. After reading Bardamu’s manifesto – the one advocating that men “terrorize” their women to make them behave – GWW blithely concluded:
I don’t really find too much in the article that strikes me as seriously ethically questionable.
Have I taken that remark out of context? Yes. In context, it’s worse. Here’s the entire quote from her, and a further clarification of her position.
She wasn’t the only one in the discussion to get upvotes for suggesting that men slapping women around from time to time isn’t really such a big deal. MaunaLoona (a MaleMRA) wrote:
Lots of MRAs like to pretend that they care about male victims of domestic violence. But the Men’s Rights movement hasn’t done shit for them. And here, I think, is why: too many MRAs are less interested in helping male victims of domestic violence than they are in providing excuses and justifications for male abusers.
Thank you for revealing that the group “men” in your mind doesn’t include any black people.
Well, it’s only right that Necro-troll should go for as many bigotries as possible.
And your solution to “most serious gender issue” is longer prison sentences for women, I see.
“And your solution to “most serious gender issue” is longer prison sentences for women, I see.”
Or shorter sentences for men. Come on, juridical fairness is in fact something that should be aspired to.
@Octo I wasn’t posting against judicial fairness, I was noting that Hibernia86’s solution appeared to be “punish women more” rather than “ease up on men”.
I love it when necroers walk into an old comment thread and completely misunderstand the comment they’re responding to. It’s so clear that kitteh wasn’t advocating murder that I have a hard time believing that Hibernia isn’t deliberately misreading what she’s saying.
You are a simple-minded jerkoff.
Poor Hibernia86 – so convinced he’d performed a major gotcha and proved a commenter here sexist that his response to being called a necro-troll is:
@Katz can you explain what it means then so I can tell if you are guilty of it?
Ni/snigger
Ok, where the fuck did that “Ni” come from? I did not write that! Sorry to everyone, that looks like I was using the n-word as an insult. I wasn’t and I never would.
Anti-intersectionality-bot does not understand these complicated ideas. Anti-intersectionality-bot also does not understand the concept that treating people who aren’t equals in the eyes of society “equally” isn’t actually particularly “fair”. Anti-intersectionality-bot thinks that you can make social inequality vanish by pretending it doesn’t exist, like a toddler playing hide and seek who thinks that if they cover their own eyes nobody can see them.
As usual, I see our little necromancer doesn’t bother to understand the issues or discussion, throws around a bunch of half-facts and even more statements that assume facts not in evidence, and then accuses us all of hating men.
We need better quality trolls!
If there’s a gender gap in sentencing it’s because patriarchy treats women as the weaker, fairer sex. I don’t know why necrotroll thinks this is some sort of gotcha to be used against feminism. Critical thinking fail.
Necrotroll still hasn’t proven zir first assertion, that women claim to be abused as a defense for murder, and that this defense works.
I notice it’s now been several hours since the necrotroll pooped here. Meanwhile, here’s a little light reading on the battered woman defence, and how easily it doesn’t work:
And that’s just under British law.
I defy our troll to prove that the patterns of prior spousal abuse in these cases are the equivalent of a woman merely slapping a man, or beaning him with a frying-pan.
I am blown away by the extreme sexism here against men. Are you all really advocating that its ok for a woman to hit a man no matter what? Wow, no wonder the MRA and Humanism movements are growing so fast and more and more people are starting to hate Feminism. All I can say is keep your damn hands to yourself no matter who you are! If a woman wants to be treated as a self-empowered individual then she needs to act like one. Running around hitting men is childish, aggressive and should be punished by the law. A man should try to get away from a violent woman but if he cannot then self-defense should be used and not punished by law just because he is a man. This system is so sexist against men that I just cant believe that feminists dont see it!
Damn necrotrolls.
No. No on here has advocated that, at all. Please cite where you think someone is saying that it’s a-ok for a woman to hit a man. Because no one here has said that.
Robin: if you bothered to read instead of being in such a hurry to leave your brain vomit on our carpet, you might have picked up that, no, no one here thinks hitting men (or anyone) is OK.
… The dead threads! They LIVE!
::facepalms::
Funny thing, I actually totally agree that women should not hit men, and that if a man can’t get away from a violent woman, he should be allowed to use self defense. However, self defense by definition has to be the minimum amount of force necessary to escape, so beating someone half to death is kind of out of the question.
Wait, no. That isn’t funny. That’s kind of part of being a feminist.
Try again? Wait, don’t. To this thread, I humbly request of necrotrolls,
Let it be; let it be! Let it be; let it be. Whisper words of wisdom, let it be!
Wow, I’m really disappointed in Karen.
Just goes to show that both Feminists and MRAs have their fair share of crazy assholes.
It’s the same with any group, really.
There’s always going to be that loud crazy minority no matter what side you join.
As for the idea of abuse making things better, it certainly does not.
I was both emotionally and physically abused by my own father.
For anyone who’s well educated in child development, it’s well known that children who grow up being abused, tend to develop abnormal stress responses.
I ended up with anxiety disorder, OCD, and was even agoraphobic for 7 years.
As for my mother, she was abused by my dad as well.
So when we finally left him, she had to go through intense counselling, me included.
Last point I have to make is, I don’t like how these pro-abuse idiots think that we’re automatically weak.
I always stood up to my father and defended myself. I refused to let him get me down.
However, you never really realise how much abuse affects you in a subconscious level.
It’s not something you can control when you’ve been suffered years of abuse.