What a year!
The Men’s Rights movement, the most important human rights movement of the 21st century, got 2012 off to a flying start in February with an event in Bozeman, Montana that was quite literally attended by no one. After that, the year was a whirlwind of activity. Let’s go to the timeline:
January: The Men’s Rights movement rests up to prepare itself for the year.
February: The Montana State University chapter of the National Coalition for Men holds a lively and well-attended Men’s Rights event in Bozeman, Montana. Sorry. When I said “well-attended” I meant to say “not attended at all.” As the local NBC affiliate reports, in what may be my favorite sentence ever written about the Men’s Rights movement: “No one showed up to the event but organizers say the lack of attendance is not due to a lack of interest.” You can read more here at Man Boobz, or watch the NBC affiliate’s report here.
March: The Southern Poverty Law Center, an important and influential watchdog of hate groups in the United States, profiles the Men’s Rights movement, describing it as “an underworld of misogynists, woman-haters whose fury goes well beyond criticism of the family court system, domestic violence laws, and false rape accusations. … Women are routinely maligned as sluts, gold-diggers, temptresses and worse; overly sympathetic men are dubbed “manginas”; and police and other officials are called their armed enablers.”
March: British Men’s Rights activist Tom Martin has his “anti-male discrimination” lawsuit against the London School of Economics thrown out of court as a “hopeless claim.” Martin responds on Twitter by calling his critics “whores.” He then comes to Man Boobz and calls people here whores. Eventually he announces that female penguins are also whores. No, really. Read more about Tom’s visits to Man Boobz here: 1, 2, 3, 4. (TRIGGER WARNING for links 2 and 3, which deal with Martin’s reprehensible views on child prostitution.)
April: Thousands of Men’s Rights Activists converge on the National Mall in Washington DC for “Sink Misandry,” apparently some sort of protest against the lifeboat-boarding policies of the RMS Titanic, which sank in the North Atlantic one hundred years ago. (There was a movie about it.)
Sorry, correction: When I said “thousands of MRAs” I meant to say “none.” While the Sink Misandry protest was announced with great fanfare in December of 2011 on A Voice for Men, it was later called off due to unspecified logistical problems. Understandable, given how difficult it is to get to our nation’s capital, inconveniently located on the sparsely populated East Coast and served by a mere three airports.
May – June: The Men’s Rights movement has lunch and takes a little nap.
July: Seven Men’s Rights activists make it to the steps of the Capitol in Washington DC, evidently for some sort of anti-circumcision protest. On Reddit, one MRA blames the poor attendance on the machinations of the “Government and the Fem lobby.”
August: In order to more effectively harness the activist energies of MRAs on Reddit, Paul Elam of A Voice for Men sets up a Men’s Rights Activism subreddit alongside the longstanding Men’s Rights Subreddit. Only a handful of MRAs subscribe, possibly because Elam seems more interested in banning people he doesn’t like than in organizing anything, and the subreddit is abandoned by its founder and everyone else within a month.
September: In Vancouver, Men’s Rights activists hold a lively, well-attended debate with feminists on the question “Has Feminism Gone Too Far?” at a local used car dealership.
Oh, sorry. Another correction: After being announced, and cancelled, then resurrected and reannounced, the event is ultimately cancelled after the organizers lose the venue for the event due to a weird turn events that involves an MRA car salesman being removed from his place of business by police after some sort of dispute with his business partner. Also, the MRAs never bothered to round up any feminists to take part in the debate with them. You can read the whole complex and confusing saga of the Great Vancouver All-MRA Debate That Wasn’t in these three Man Boobz posts: 1, 2, 3.
October: Recess
November: Artistry Against Misandry holds a lively and well-attended concert and fundraiser in Nashville to celebrate International Men’s Day.
Whoops! One more correction: The event never happened. Apparently the organizers lost their venue, and were unable to book another one, as Nashville isn’t really much of a music town and musical venues there are as scarce as … wait, no, it’s fucking Nashville. NASHVILLE. Music City. The home of the Grand Ole Opry. I’m pretty sure that every building that isn’t a house or a restaurant there is a musical venue.
Also, the Artistry Against Misandry website seems to have vanished from the face of the earth. Might I suggest a visit to Artistry For Feminism and Kittens instead?
December: Christmas shopping.
I should note that when not organizing, then cancelling, events many MRAs have been busily harassing individual women online and posting many very angry comments. A few have also been putting up some very badly designed posters. So there’s that.
With a year of such triumphs behind them, how will the Men’s Rights movement manage to keep up such a blistering pace in 2013?
Wow. That’s just. EXACTLY. I feel like you know my ex-husband personally.
I can look back *now* and see the signs, but he loved me so much! Really! He swears!
Judging by the last rant you posted about divorce I’m guessing that the plan is to expect their moms to do the actual activist work for them, then complain about misandry when that doesn’t happen.
*sighs* I get very sick of the tropes that abusers are easy to see and avoid. Mostly because I was abused as a teen, SPECIFICALLY because even though nowadays, I would recognize the type, the only way I gained the knowledge was through surviving that year. (And I STILL had a couple near misses afterward, because shock of all shocks, HUMANS ARE FALLIBLE, and abusers don’t wear neon signs.)
And I still get people saying I should have known better. Because a naive sixteen-year-old totally has the same working knowledge as an adult about predatory behavior, right?
And yet, these people never seem to say HE should have known better than to try and rape a crying sixteen-year-old. Because that’s so VAGUE and CONFUSING. Not like me recognizing him!
Jesus.
Melissa is just charming, isn’t she?
>blockquote>Honestly though, a lot of women are subconsciously attracted to the aggressive and dominant types; I suspect you know it evwn if you have difficulty admitting it.
First of all, if you want to make generalizations you need to back them up with data. Secondly, nice projection you have there. Thirdly, people can be aggressive or dominant without having ASPD. Fourthly, troll smarter, dummy.
@Melitroll: I bet you’d agree with the kind of advice often women on how to avoid being raped, right? It’s just the kind of thing you’re saying here–women should make good decisions, and should not put themselves in situations where rape is inevitable, and should take the well meaning advice of caring people on how to avoid rape, right?
If that’s so, and I bet it is, then I want you to read the feminist deconstruction of those helpful, caring, not at all blaming the victim on my heavens no (despite the subtext of “you get raped, you’re to blame, slut”) advice lists and think about how this might apply to abusers:
To avoid you having to click a link which would take so much of your valuable time, I’ve reproduced them and given the link at the end:
http://canyourelate.org/2011/05/24/rape-prevention-tips/
BTW, CassandraSays and titianblue get their first posts on my parasitic blog:
http://artistryforfeminismandkittens.wordpress.com/2012/12/28/paul-elam-interviews-a-prospective-editor/
In case anyone needs a laugh. XD
Is any of it any smarter or more interesting than what you’ve said so far? Because if not, don’t bother.
BUT, I would say (if it needed saying) that they could reduce the risk of future burglaries by locking their door. Surely the same principles apply to any crime, do they not? If not, please explain some are different.
Should I note here that all the times I’ve been robbed (and ditto my mother), the house was locked?
Anyway, you claim you don’t blame the victim: I drew a clear distinction between blame/guilt/deserving and avoidable consequense of choices. I think I made it clear that blame and wrong doing lie entirely with the abuser.
You might THINK you did because you have a few sentences saying that abusers are to blame.
But look at these quotes culled from a series of your post, several of which have been identified by others. I think the full roll call is rather damning in terms of blaming—as shown by the syntax, given how “women” are the grammatical subjects of so many of these clauses.
I do think though that some women make very bad decisions about who to get involved with however, and this may be part of the reason why domestic violence is such a major problem. this=women’s bad decisions
I’m not suggesting people like her *deserve* abuse and murder, but they are putting themselves in situations where it is inevitable. “people like her”=if they weren’t like her, they wouldn’t be in situations where they are (inevitably) abused.
When you know someone has violent and aggressive tendencies (and let’s be honest it’s pretty obvious a lot of the time) then choosing not to get involved with them doesn’t require great genius. I just a bit of basic sanity. Honestly though, a lot of women are subconsciously attracted to the aggressive and dominant types; “bit of basic sanity” is all that’s required to avoid abusers—but that nasty old SUBCONSCIOUS attraction to thugs, tsk (MRA playbook).
But, the shock would be an avoidable consequence of my own actions, and a caring friend would gently and sympathically advise me on how to avoid shocks in the future. Agreeing with others about how this analogy compares abusers to natural forces with no will or agency, again blaming the victims of abuse for causing what happens to them.
I doubt I’ll keep talking to you–as a troll, you are depressing. But I want to try one last time to make you see what you are doing, so that in future you might avoid doing this very thing to a woman who is being abused–because the more you support the patriarchal/misogynistic narrative of “this is just the way the world is,” the more you are being an apologist, a misogynist, and blaming the victims.
If you look at the stats, that’s usually when the abuser kills them, or tries to. Women who are in abusive relationships are usually aware of this, often because the abuser has told them very clearly that that’s what he’ll do if they try to leave.
“If someone forgot to lock their door (or chose not to bother) and had their stuff stolen, I would be very sympathetic; I would offer them both practical assistance and emotional support, and I wouldn’t say that they deserved it. BUT, I would say (if it needed saying) that they could reduce the risk of future burglaries by locking their door. Surely the same principles apply to any crime, do they not? If not, please explain some are different.”
You’re missing one pretty important point. You are not the only person to point out a correlation between locked doors and burglary. If someone forgot to lock the door you are not being helpful by reminding them of a mistake they already recognize, you’re just making them feel more shitty about something they can’t fix now anyway.
I think that kind of victim blaming shit works to keep people in abusive situations especially when it’s constantly brought it up in ways that clearly make the victim uncomfortable. From a strictly psychological perspective it puts the victim in a position of having to defend the abuser out loud and come up with more excuses for the behavior. Why would someone who’s already hurting confide in a person who is going to make them feel stupid, even if you don’t mean to?
Even if you know you’re right and events bear out your instincts it’s just not a useful strategy for anything other than feeling self-righteous.
I’ve been in the same situation. My parents repeatedly got involved with people who just gave me the creeping willies and there was nothing I could do to talk them out of it. Not even when they specifically asked for my blessing. I lived with abusive women for all of my teenage years. Believe me I tried everything. Talking about it didn’t help, not talking about it didn’t help, refusing to eat and other means of self harming didn’t help, acting out violently didn’t help nor did running away. (Talking openly with adults I was supposed to trust also didn’t help, thanks for asking.) My dad still defends our abuser when I try to talk about it, which is why I don’t talk to my dad. I absolutely blame him for putting me in that situation and for steadfastly ignoring every attempt to get away from it. I undertand where his head is, I have a psych degree, I’ve read extensively on the subject of abuse I still can’t reason myself out of feeling angry and hurt. Bizarrely, I feel like it helps me understand why even feminists who understand abuse on an academic level can’t just reason themselves out of shitty relationships. I know what I needed, and it wasn’t someone to tell me the facts. It was someone to tell me I wasn’t crazy for acting out or stupid for staying, or somehow bringing on myself.
A friend of mine from high school met a guy in college; they dated for years, and eventually had two kids together. He was a good father, and never physically abused her, but he did engage in a bunch of stuff that (in hindsight) she realized was emotionally abusive and controlling. She is a feminist, a strong and independent person, and she still put up with his emotional mistreatment because (a) they were partners and parents, and (b) she knew he’d been abused emotionally as a child so she made allowances. This state of affairs was fairly stable until two things changed: she cut her hair in a way he didn’t like, and she joined a gym. Not long after that, she woke up in the middle of the night to find him trying to strangle her.
I suppose she could have reduced her risks by not having kids with him, but of course by the time she realized that he had serious emotional problems he had already tried to kill her. Luckily she was able to fight him off and escape, but if he had killed her I suppose that would just have been the predictable consequences of her bad choices. And if I am ever run over by a car in Los Angeles, that would really just be a totally predictable consequence of my choice to be a frequent pedestrian in a car-friendly city so I bear some of the responsibility for my own demise.
nezumi, shit, so sorry that happened to you and so glad you survived it.
Everyone has failed to mention the most hilarious aspect of the car dealership fiasco, where head cheese Paul Elam immediately wrote articles about how evil feminists had the man arrested because he dared speak against him.
Was there ever closure to that story? Did we ever find out why the partnership collapsed at that moment? Was the guy ever charged with anything?
When my older brother married his now ex-wife, I remember how disappointed I was, that he had to pick someone who seemed to be so intellectually lower ( I don’t mean inferior as a person) — but this had been the pattern with two brothers of mine–they did not like, were threatened by, women who they thought were too intellectual. My older brother’s now ex-wife, in years past, told me how abusive he was (other girlfriends had experienced frightening behaviour from him). Now, she has behaved apparently vindictively (mainly by not letting him see his sons whenever he wants to) and he has embraced much of the language of the MRAs. I have had to endure his tyrannical behaviour recently as he has decided to take his rage out against all the women in his life. –what am I driving at? I’ve made an effort to understand how our upbringing/family dynamic/environment has made us the way we are. This brother (and another younger one) have been very content with the belief that women are responsible for the evil in the world.
Yes, “concern troll,” that is the definition.
Ignoring Melissa the Blamer, so Les Mis. I read the book years ago, and it left me a weeping pile of tears on the floor. But I never saw the play. I’m wondering if I should just catch the movie,or try to find a theatrical performance first? Everyone says the movie is more like the play, obviously with all the singing, but how far off is that from the book?
The 1935 (non musical) Hollywood version of Les Miserables is very powerful. An abridged version of the story, with Frederic March and Charles Laughton.
From 1830–one of the greatest novels I have ever read–The Red and The Black, by Stendhal. Speaking of Stendhal, if you ever want an antidote to misogyny, read him. Here was a man who truly loved women, as they really were. When I first encountered him I was astounded. Look at his On Love, or The Charterhouse of Parma. (brief literary digression inspired by all your comments on the new Les Mis movie).
@Ranter: I read the book and never saw the play. Obvs, singing and what not will affect the perception of each. It has been years since reading the book, but from what I understand, the movie is more book-like in terms of plot and detail stuff. Like I said, I never saw the play. But there were things in this film that weren’t in the last, and I read critiques of the film from people who were really into the play, but had not read the book. Overall, as a fan of the book, I liked it.
Also: I don’t mean to be ignoring the discussion above. I just got into a beat down with a troll at Jezebel who argues that all women and children who file abuse claims are liars. I don’t want to put a wet blanket on anyone, I just can’t engage that now.
The musical is actually the most accurate and complete version I’ve seen previously (though I haven’t seen the 1935 version), and this movie incorporates quite a few additional things that weren’t in the musical, so I think fans of the book ought to like it very much.
But of course it all comes down to whether you like musicals.
That would be the issue for me. I just can’t manage the suspension of disbelief necessary not to laugh when someone bursts into song at a serious moment.
Oh, musicals are fine! I am a classically trained (“opera”) singer myself, and appreciate all kinds of interpretation of a story, as long as it makes good art–as Oscar Wilde said, there are no good or bad books, only well written and badly written ones.
I’ve only seen the Michael Rennie version from 1952, which apparently is very different from the book. I think it was on telly back in the days of the midday movie (sigh) so that would have been when I was at school.
Which isn’t a snob thing, btw. I have the same issue with opera, especially since the performance of Carmen that my friend dragged me to where the lead performed a very dramatic death scene and then remembered that she hadn’t sung her final number, so she came back to life and did it. Zombie Carmen was just too funny.
Zombie Carmen OMG! 😀
I can think of four musicals I like, offhand – Camelot, My Fair Lady, Singing in the Rain and Sweeny Todd. Opera, no, doesn’t do it for me at all. Though it has to be praised for giving rise to this.