So I’ve been mostly avoiding writing about the whole Men’s Rights postering controversy in Vancouver, because it’s such a tempest in a teapot. The tl;dr: Some posters got torn down, and some of the people tearing them down yelled at the blabby MRA videoblogger and A Voice for Men second fiddle known as JohnTheOther.
MRAs: Given that virtually none of you have any experience as actual real world activists, you may not be aware of this, but POSTERS GET TORN DOWN. It’s annoying, and I don’t support it myself, but it happens all the time. Sometimes, you may actually run across people tearing down your posters, at which point there is usually some sort of awkward confrontation that may include yelling.
You know what you do when this happens? You put your posters up again. You know what you don’t do? Compare the experience to rape. Because, on the list of the grand injustices of the world, having posters torn down is pretty far down the list, somewhere around “stubbing your toe” and “kitten farts on you.”
That said, here are a few new “developments” in this ongoing epic.
1) Jezebel has posted a piece about the controversy. The most interesting thing about it is the following quote from, you guessed it, JohnTheOther, who apparently had this to say to someone from a local “community-driven news” website. The topic? False accusations of rape.
Maybe it’s a mistaken accusation, she doesn’t remember who she had sex with because she was drunk at the party or whatever. Some make accusations that have nothing to do with being raped; they’re angry, or they got stood up, they wanted to have sex with a guy but he said no. The fact that our society doesn’t have a balance for this is a major problem. I’m not suggesting every woman you meet is a loose cannon, but every woman you meet has the potential to be one, because for those few who are nutty, there’s no disincentive for them to go, oh, I was late for work. I know, I’ll just say I got raped.
Now, if the Men’s Rights movement were an actual civil rights movement trying to better the lives of men, this quote would be a public relations disaster. What real civil rights movement would want to have itself associated with someone who seems to think that women make up rape accusations willy nilly, when a date stands them up or when they need an excuse for being late to work?
Of course, the Men’s Rights “movement” isn’t an actual civil rights movement at all; it’s more like a collective tantrum. While MRAs are eager to “spread the word,” the more spreading they do, the more damage they do to themselves. No one is better at making MRAs look bad than MRAs themselves, which is why on this blog I spend so much of the time letting these (mostly) dudes make themselves look ridiculous with their own words. So, JtO, thanks?
2) And speaking of Mr. TheOther, we can now see video footage of the supposed dramatic confrontation that JohnTheOther had with what his AVFM boss Paul Elam called “a gang of 20-30 assholes on the street, some wielding box cutters.”
GirlWritesWhat, one of the Men’s Rights movement’s few non-dudes, has put up selections of video footage from Mr. TheOther in her video below.
As you’ll see – unless for some reason GWW has decided not to post the most incriminating parts of the video — there was no gang; it was a small group of people. No one was “wielding box cutters” in a threatening manner. The whole thing took place in broad daylight on a busy street.
Some posters were taken down. There were some raised voices. That’s it. That’s the sort of shit activists deal with every fucking day of their life.
Here’s the video:
Am I missing something here? This non-event is the alleged confrontation that AVFM has been hyperventilating about all this time? This is the evil anti-MRA harassment that Elam says “makes getting bestially raped by Richard Dawkins sound kinda funny.”
Leave it to Mr. Elam to add a rape-joke cherry to this bullshit sundae. Once again, MRAs are their own worst enemies.
Yes, “collective tantrum” is the most apt description on MRA’s that I’ve heard yet.
I have to admit, I’ve been curious for a while now about John’s tragic assault by a gang of 20 boxcutter-weilding thugs and his heroic battle for his very life, as described by John himself and many other passing MRAs.
I can’t believe he actually posted the video, revealing that what actually happened was pretty much what I figured it was: getting into an incoherent argument about feminism with two angry hipsters.
@Dvärghundspossen: Yeah, that is one more piece of wood for the fire. The one where we’re burning the idea that the MRM has every done anything to actually help men. See also: totally a hate movement.
I’ve had more dramatic confrontations while waiting in line to go to the bathroom. Jesus wept.
Late to the party.
That was the epic confrontation between JtO and the box-cutter-wielding mob of feminist activists who menaced his very life?
Really?
Um, I am less than awestricken. Nice choice of kitten to illustrate the drama.
Sheesh. Angry mobs just aren’t what they used to be.
OFCOURSE it was a couple pissed hipsters. I didn’t believe for a second that JtO was met by a box-cutter wielding mob. HA.
There must be some way to watch that without GWW’s stupid smirk showing up. I love how she’s all “AH HA! I caught you in the imputation of malice, evul feminist” because omg what a surprise that people contradict themselves in emotional situations. Anyway, I didn’t watch the whole thing, but without a doubt the very best part is when John the Other has Chuck Norris paradropped in to break that alien’s leg, and then they all escape Los Angeles while the whole city and the earth beneath it somehow fall into a vast abyss.
Here’s the Jezebel story and the debate organizer’s description of what happened:
You know how superheroes and supervillains have epic clashes that shatter entire cities, nations, worlds and even universes?
This is not one of those times. This is more like one guy trying to document their Totally Awesome Skateboarding Trick, only to fall into a pile of manure.
God damnit, I wanted a bloody fucking boxcutter fight. Ripped off!
Oops, I forgot to include the link.
And here is JtO claiming that the debate was cancelled because of “feminist harassment. The lying douchecanoe.
And now he is saying that the debate is back on. Format: 3 speakers, two of whom are the two original MRA speakers talked about in the Jezebel article. Well, that certainly seems fair! MRAs pick the venue, the format, and get to be the majority (if not the totality) of the speakers.
Gee, I wonder who GWW will declare the winner of that “debate?” The suspense is killing me.
Angry mob: This is more like it.
For “angry mob,” I would also have accepted something like this.
@cloudiah — The venue is at the car dealership owned by one of the speakers. Oh yeah, this event is going to be about as fair and balanced as Fox News is.
@ cloudiah and blitzgal: Wow, that is fucked. MRAs digging their own hole by the day, it seems.
Feel sorry for the organizer.
Oh no, red_locker. This will give the MRAs a chance to show off their mad debating skillz, y’see. They’ll fuck up the shit of the feminazi opponents who dare defy the mighty MRM!
Yah, right. I hope somebody tapes it for posterity.
What a bunch of losers. I’m sorry, but I feel a bout of shaming language coming on. What a bunch of neck bearded basement dwelling tin foil hat wearing drama queen LOSERS!!!!
I hope somebody tapes it for posterity. – Freitag
I misread that as “I hope somebody tapes it for posterior”.
Is it just me, or does this debate format make no sense:
So… every speaker is going to argue against the proposition?
Or each speaker is going to argue both for and against the proposition?
I think what he means is that it’s going to be a 2-on-1 debate, which still makes little sense–giving one side twice the people and twice the time is going to make the organizers’ bias pretty damn obvious.
The only question now is whether they get an MRA to present a deliberately strawmanny and weaksauce “pro-feminist” viewpoint, or if they cancel the event again when they realize no feminist speaker is going to take that bait.
IF, and I emphasize IF, it’s going to be a proper debate, then each side needs to cite their sources. I would dearly love to see/hear/read one defend the “90% of rape allegations are false” bullshit.
Yeah, I think they would run their debate like how Bill O’ Reilly does his show, shout down anyone who disagrees and then declare themselves the winner. Not to mention I think it’s very dangerous to interact with MRA’s in person.
Oh somebody please post the name of the dealership where this farce will be held. I’ll bet it could use some yelp reviews.
The MRA blitz attack on the original debate organizer remind me a bit of the conservative response to that guy who bear-hugged Obama: flooding his restaurant’s Yelp page with fake negative reviews. Because there’s no better way to show your side supports freedom and small businesses than destroying the business of someone who disagrees with you!
I want to know how an MRA has enough money to own a car dealership. I thought they all had to pay 95% of their income to child support, according to all of the tales they tell at reddit: men’s rights.
Their poster feels sort of like a thinly veiled threat. “Do you hate and fear men? DO YOU?” feels like a Dirty Harry rip off of “Well? Do ya punk?”