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.
I remember a time in my childhood between ages 10 and 12, when my father would scream at me: “On the ground, NOW!!! Skirt over your head!” And then he would proceed to beat me with his belt, and finish off by kicking me several times with his feet. This “physical correction” was accompanied by him calling me a filthy animal, and screaming that my birth was a disappointment to him because he only wanted a son.
Wanna guess what he was correcting me for? A grade of 4 in math (the Russian equivalent of a B). Walking home with a scarf not wrapped tightly enough around my neck. One night, I was cooking a vegetable stew and let it burn slightly because I was doing homework at the same time and lost track of time. He went completely apeshit on me.
But oftentimes, merely making noise when I walked was enough. Coming home from school, I would try to open the door as quietly as I could, place my school bag on the floor as gently as if it were a bomb, and tiptoe around the vestibule. We had hardwood floors, and I had a mental map of all the little wood pieces that creaked when stepped on and thus had to be avoided. If I stepped on one and it did creak, that was it: a stream of verbal abuse at the very least, but often a beating, as well.
According to Some Guy’s logic, however, my father was merely defending himself from me, given that I was “abusing” him by, you know, existing. Interesting how these misogynists make the man in this situation the sole arbiter of what constitutes abuse. If a man is annoyed by the woman — for any reason whatsoever — then she deserves a beating, it’s merely self-defense.
Love it, also, the reliance on abusive men’s characterization of post-beating sex as “scorching”. Women’s opinion of this is obviously completely irrelevant, which is why no one thought to ask them whether they enjoyed having sex with a man who’s just administered “correction” to them. And no accounting for the fact that men who enjoy hitting women may also define “scorching” sex as the kind where the woman is unwilling and in pain.
MY ARGUMENTS
THEY ARE INVALID
Aaaand in that situation, I’m pretty sure everyone here would be saying the woman was an abuser and hoping for her to be dealt with appropriately. That’s not the situation GWW appears to be presenting.
Some guy…, read the entirety of David’s screen capture. In the first part, GGW provides the example you keep citing after which, another poster offers a fairly broad summary of her position:
To which GGW responds:
So help me out – how is David misrepresenting her position?
Roscoe, teaching people about what healthy, respectful relationships look like and how those relationships function would help. Teaching people about different types of abuse, how to spot them, how to avoid them helps. Making sure that friends, family, counselors and shelters are available to people who need to get out helps. Sadly, all of these things take longer to get running smoothly than “smack the bitch so she behaves” or “harrange the guy until all the joy in life is gone and he can barely stand upright”.
Most people only see abuse as a black eye or a broken rib. If bruises don’t exist than your situation isn’t that bad, its just a rough patch.
Nobinayamu – Ye gods. The argument isn’t even his own self-defense. The argument is that he should slap her so he doesn’t beat her to death.
Because clearly these are the only two options, so, see, he’s doing her a favor!
Well, I know you know nothing of legal theory with this. Hint: They are called defenses of excuse for a reason.
Today I learned that helpless men are forced by emotional manipulation into escalating to violence, that GirlWritesWhat’s ears can tell who initiated an extended domestic dispute, that Lawgirl has second-hand ESP, and that physical abuse is bad at generating order and harmony in a relationship.
It is only 3:49 p.m. and the world is really on a roll today.
@Nobinayamu,
I believe I did, right here: http://manboobz.com/2012/08/16/girlwriteswhat-on-the-necessity-of-domestic-violence-i-dont-really-find-too-much-thats-seriously-ethically-questionable/comment-page-2/#comment-193352
I also learned that escalation is self-defense. See, I am learning so many shitty things that I am forgetting them as I go. What a day! Shit’s just crawling out of the woodwork.
@Amused
I’m so sorry. That sounds horrible 🙁
@Amused: ALL THE HUGS
Jesus Christ that’s horrible.
But it may also have been the woman drowning innocent puppies while laughing maniacally, until the man was forced to have sex with her to stop her killing the puppies.
Thanks, Falconer! I have to say, as horrible as it was, at least my father never claimed self-defense.
Thanks, fembot!
Amused, so sorry, what your father did is so, so wrong.
All I can offer right now is a guinea pig rainbow:
http://cdn2.damnfunnypictures.com/GuineaPigLine001.jpg
Shorter Roscoe: you’re all so terrible for telling those couples to break up! We should totally encourage victims to stay with their abusers! They can change!
Yeah, there’s enough of that in our culture, thanks. I’m not interested in helping men who view women as “things to be corrected” heal their relationships. It isn’t the relationship that’s the problem, it’s their views on women. Until they can accept that, and change their views on women and abuse, the likelihood that they will remain abusers is very high. I have no interest in trying to keep a couple together if one member of the pair is routinely beating the crap out of the other. People who think hitting their partners solves problems have no business having partners.
Amused, I’m sorry, that is awful.
@jumbo-yes, I was not there and either were you so we don’t know all of the facts. But as a point of illustration let’s assume that what girl wrote is true. Now, is that real DV or just some sort of a way they interact with each other.
Okay, this thread is actually making me go ARGLE-BARGLE in real life.
@Amused: Did you say it was over by the time you were about 12? I’m glad you’re out of that situation.
No, Some Guy… what you’re doing is focusing strictly and specifically on the narrative, second-hand account presented by GGW and ignoring her telling and more specific follow-up. Now you’re either being deliberately obtuse or you’re disingenuously trying to pretend that her subsequent statement is negligible.
So which is it?
Oh my fucking christ can the abuser’s lobby go fuck off for once in your fucking lives?
Technically I think that’s a tonal gradation. /art nerd
In any case: Squeee!!!! Look at the cute guinea piggies!