Categories
a voice for men a woman is always to blame anti-Semitism antifeminism doxing false accusations gross incompetence gullibility harassment hate hypocrisy literal nazis misogyny MRA none dare call it conspiracy paranoia paul elam

Why haven’t Men’s Rights Activists turned on Paul Elam for falsely accusing Arianna Pattek of civil rights violations? [UPDATE: Elam retraction]

Graphic from SAVE Services, whose press releases are regularly run on A Voice for Men. Why doesn't this apply to Paul Elam?
Graphic from SAVE Services, whose press releases regularly run on A Voice for Men. Why doesn’t this policy apply to Paul Elam?

UPDATE: Elam has retracted his original story. See the end of this post for more details.

Men’s Rights Activists often insist that false accusations of rape are literally as bad as rape itself, and that false accusers of rape should spend as much time in prison as actual rapists.

Presumably they feel the same way about false accusers of other crimes, from murder to check kiting.

So in the wake of Paul Elam’s reckless false accusations against recent Georgetown graduate Arianna Pattek, one would expect other MRAs to rise up en masse to demand that Elam turn himself in.

Elam, you may recall, accused Pattek of serious violations of civil rights laws, claiming that she, as an employee of Georgetown’s admissions office, showed clear bias against white men. Indeed, Elam didn’t even qualify his accusations with an “alleged,” as journalists routinely do when writing about those accused but not convicted of crimes. Here’s what he wrote about her:

Pattek, who clearly has issues with sexual and racial bigotry, decided she would not only trash the applications of white males on sight, she also decided to blog about her activities under what she assumed was anonymous conditions. Writing for a web blog called The Feminist Conservative, Pattek laid out precisely what she was doing in very clear terms. …

Clearly this is a person not only warped by ideology, but who also holds deep seated prejudices that guided her unscrupulous actions. Her targets were selected by sex, race, political beliefs and perhaps even religion. Her identity was traced after she referenced the subject of her master’s thesis at Georgetown in some of her writing, including the “about” page at the Feminist Conservative.

The trouble is that absolutely none of this is true. There’s nothing linking Pattek to the blog, which seems to be a hoax, and numerous things suggesting that she is NOT the author of the blog any more than Paul Elam is.

As Georgetown has made clear, Pattek never worked for the school’s admissions office. She never wrote a Master’s thesis; she graduated from Georgetown in 2012 with a bachelors degree, not a masters (as Elam claims) or a doctorate (as the FeministConservative blogger claimed about herself, if she is even a she). Pattek’s thesis was a Senior thesis required for her minor in Justice and Peace, which a program for undergraduates. The topic(s) of her senior thesis only bear a slight resemblance to the topic(s) of the alleged doctoral thesis of the FeministConservative blogger. Even a quick perusal of the “evidence” posted on A Voice for Men will reveal numerous other discrepancies.

Indeed, the falsity and recklessness of Elam’s charges against Pattek are so patently obvious that even some MRAs have begun to doubt. On the Men’s Rights subreddit, for example, the mods have added “May be fake” to the title of the thread discussing the feministconservative blog controversy.

In the comments, someone called isktamin offers this take:

I’ve been on another forum with a couple other people, and this is absolutely a fake. [Pattek’s] thesis states that she is of Jewish descent and identifies wholly as Jewish, while the blog states that she is Christian and not of Jewish descent.

Pattek seems to be a pretty good person. Someone’s been deleting all traces of her from the GU website, likely another student. Google archives are telling us that she has multiple awards, she helped children in need in Kenya. Her thesis is of pretty good quality, too. The blog is of shit quality without effort to spell things correctly. It’s quite the blatant online defamation campaign, and I haven’t the slightest idea why.

Incidentally, he’s right about the difference in religion, the awards, the work Pattek did in Kenya, the difference in quality between the blog and Pattek’s thesis. He’s wrong about who deleted the information: as we learned yesterday, it was the current director of the Justice and Peace program, in response to harassment from white supremacists.

Meanwhile, alt right Manosphere blogger Chuck Ross of Gucci Little Piggy has also cast serious doubt on Elam’s accusations.

Even on A Voice for Men a few Men’s Rights Activists have challenged Elam’s case, most notably Chris Deslone, the founder of the Men’s Rights subreddit and a contributor to AVFM.

So where is the upswelling of outrage amongst MRAs at Elam’s false accusations? Where are the calls for him to be charged with crimes as serious as the civil rights violations he has accused Pattek of? Where are the calls for him to turn himself in – or at the very least, to apologize for his misdeeds and step down from his position at A Voice for Men?

I haven’t seen any.

For MRAs, sorry seems to be the hardest word.

You might expect Pierce Harlan of the so-called Community of the Wrongly Accused to have some sympathy for the wrongly accused Pattek. But he’s said nothing on his site (or anywhere else, as far as I know) about Elam’s false and reckless accusations, and Elam is still listed in the Community of the Wrongly Accused sidebar as a “False rape activist,” whatever that is.

Over on the Men’s Rights subreddit, meanwhile, the mods actually deleted a post asking “So, when does the woman you guys falsely accused get an apology?” (You can still find it here, but you can no longer reach it from the Men’s Rights subreddit itself.) The comments, naturally, are full of denial, and many have been deleted, making for a surreal discussion indeed. “I don’t recall having falsely accused anyone of anything,” real-boethius wrote indignantly. “Even AVFM had the story up as “Georgetown University Coverup?” – note the question mark, and they state that the evidence is inconclusive.”

Uh, Did. You. Actually. Read. Elam’s. Post?

Elam, for his part, after adamantly attacking all those who challenged his accusations in any way, may now realize that he’s made a huge mistake. He hasn’t admitted this, of course, but he has awkwardly appended to his post some of the information gathered by Chris Deslone that clearly shows that his accusations are completely bogus. So now we have the strange spectacle of a post that accuses Pattek of various civil rights violations, without even an “allegedly” to qualify the accusations, which ends with links to official statements from Georgetown that undercut everything Elam has said:

chris

Here, here and here are the Twitter links in that screenshot.

All of this is surreal enough, but perhaps the most surreal response to the whole thing comes from the Reno, Nevada MRA known as Scarecrow, a former-but-now-banned Man Boobz commenter, in a comment on Reddit:

scare

Apparently nothing is ever the fault of MRAs ever, including the things they do.

UPDATE: Elam has now retracted his original story naming Pattek as a civil rights violator. Here are the key bits of his retraction:

In hindsight it is apparent that I was too fast on the trigger in establishing a connection between the blogger who claimed to have sabotaged the applications and that of a former student at Georgetown. While there is circumstantial evidence that does connect the two, and many unanswered questions, there is nothing that makes that connection a verifiable certainty.

It was a mistake on my part for which I apologize to the woman in question, and to any readers who felt they were misled. The original article naming her has been updated with a link to this retraction and her name has been redacted from the article. I am also removing all comments to the article and closing them to make sure no references to her are made.

I think this somewhat mealymouthed mea culpa is about as close to an admission of wrongdoing as we’re ever likely to get from Elam on anything.

Elam continues to cast vague aspersions on Georgetown itself, however:

I also want to make it clear that this retraction does not mean that AVFM is abandoning its investigation into the validity of the claims made about trashing university applications based on sex and race. Additionally, we are not done with concerns about the university itself, whose unusual and somewhat cryptic manner of responding to this story leaves more questions than answers.

Actually, I think Georgetown was fairly direct in responding to most of the questions on its official Twitter account. Elam also brings up his conspiracy theory, saying that

we did not take an interest in it until it became apparent that Georgetown University was moving, without explanation, to remove all references to her from their websites.

In fact, the director of the Justice and Peace program at Georgetown, Mark Lance, provided an explanation of this to my readers yesterday, as I pointed out in this post. But I’ll recap: according to Lance, the past director of the Justice and Peace program took her information down in response to harassment from white supremacists. There’s nothing particularly mysterious about that.

I’m honestly surprised to see Elam admit to being wrong about anything. I suspect — though I have no proof, and this is simply speculation — that he may have spoken to a lawyer — either his own, or someone else’s.

315 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Quackers
Quackers
11 years ago

like we aren’t even allowed to discuss the shitty things some men do to coerce women into sex without these fuckers coming in and trying to silence us. How are we ever going to fix the problem if we aren’t allowed to discuss it? No one is saying ALL men do this, and I think deep down they know this too.

I’ve just seen more attempts at silencing feminists from MRAs than the other way around, the way they’re clever though is that they usually do it online so it makes it harder to prove.

Marie
Marie
11 years ago

@Aaliyah @opheliamonarch

All the internet hugs if either/both of you if you want them.

Quackers
Quackers
11 years ago

@OpheliaMonarch

Yeah that makes sense. I dunno, see I’m kinda torn. Because on one hand I see their point and even sort of agree. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with changing the slogan to “teach people not to rape” so that it doesn’t sound blamey. But on the other hand, I can’t just ignore every piece of evidence and statistic that says rapist tend to be male, and rape victims usually tend to be female. Not just that, but every day in the news “woman sexually assaulted by man” “teen girl raped” etc. I cant just ignore all the PUA blogs that basically tell men how to coerce women and get away with. I can’t just ignore all the rape threats that women and feminist women especially, get. Being told this is all just a feminist conspiracy just does not cut it.

@Cassandra

Lol…it really is isn’t it?

Kittehserf
11 years ago

opheliamonarch, there are a few books I’d recommend – alas, they’re not on Kindle, though Amazon should have them all.

Louis XIII, the Just – A. Lloyd Moote

Privileged Persons: four seventeenth-century studies – Hester W. Chapman

France in the age of Louis XIII and Richelieu – Victor-Lucien Tapie

They’re all fairly old; Tapie’s was written in the 1950s and Moote’s, the most recent, in 1989. It’s the only full bio of Louis in English that I know of (I haven’t looked for a good few years, my need for knowing stuff about the first tenth of his life having diminished considerably). I picked those three because they give him due credit, unlike a lot of garbage that derives heavily from Tallemant’s gossip (written a generation later by someone who never met him) and Dumas’s disgraceful gutter-press nonsense.

(Biased? Moi?)

Kittehserf
11 years ago

clouiah, those kitties! They totally win that page. Can’t say les hommes there do anything for me (though I wouldn’t mind using the shot of the smiling guy with his legs dangling out of the bath as a basis for a picture). 🙂

opheliamonarch
11 years ago

@Quackers, oh I hate commenting, I can never seem to get it right.

Sorry, I was agreeing, just said it badly.

I meant that guys shouldn’t rape OR try to manipulate girls into bed, I think both are terrible.
Unfortunately some people seem to think getting a girl drunk and sleeping with her is just fine, that really pisses me off. To me, that is sexual misconduct. (Although, now I read that back, the term sounds kind of lame. It might be a good teaching tool for boys though, and you’re right, I’m not apologising for saying ‘boys’ either.)

I really didn’t mean to reference the nonsense MRAs spout about it being sexist to say women don’t rape, that’s all poo 🙂 I totally agree, they are just trying to silence us.

My solution? SHOUT LOUDER, or call ’em names! If they want to be disingenuous, immoral wankers then I gets sweary. Also kittens help 🙂

Hope it came out right this time.

@Marie, you so nice 🙂

Deoridhe
Deoridhe
11 years ago

It isn’t kitties or puppies, but this has been my brain-bleach for the last 6 hours or so:

opheliamonarch
11 years ago

I can never believe he was in Bros, I hated their music, ha, ha. That boy done good.

opheliamonarch
11 years ago

Deoridhe, that was to you, sorry.
You do know Luke Goss was in a boyband in the U.K. ? Otherwise my comment would seem really cryptic 🙂

Deoridhe
Deoridhe
11 years ago

I had no idea, actually. I just love that character. Hee hee.

opheliamonarch
11 years ago

Deoridhe, oh he has so come a long way 🙂

Bros consisted of Luke Goss, his Identical twin brother Matt Goss (yes, there’s two of them, lucky, lucky) and some bloke no one could remember the name of who ‘played’ the drums.

Sorry, he try’s to leave it behind, and gits like me just won’t let it go 🙂

opheliamonarch
11 years ago

Tries, even, oops.

Aaliyah
11 years ago

@Quackers

and one 12 month CDC survey is not enough to convince me yet.

Speaking of that, you might be interested in this entry I wrote a while ago. I seriously hate it when people bring up that study to argue that rape is a gender-neutral crime.

Quackers
Quackers
11 years ago

@opheliamonarch

Oh no worries, I didn’t think you were disagreeing. I was kinda just blabbing my thoughts on the matter lol. Yeah I find MRAs really dismissive of drunk sex. It’s not always rape, but if you’re too drunk to consent, then yeah, it is. They don’t seem to get that, and if they do, they ignore it, and that’s really messed up. They like to pretend that there aren’t skeevy men out there who do use alcohol as a means to sex either. But you know them, unless you aren’t praising all men everywhere its misandry!!!!!1

@Aaliyah

Oooh awesome! Really good points there. Especially about how men report 93.3% male perpetrators. Sexual Coercion is also reported with more female victims (just quickly reviewing the study, I haven’t looked at it in awhile) Somehow these is always overlooked by MRAs. They just fixate on that one made to penetrate point without looking at the overall study…so cherry picking.

I’ve pretty much come to the conclusion after all I’ve read regarding this, that rape is still pretty gendered, however it does show evidence of changing. Needs moar data on all people, basically. In the meantime I think teaching about consent to everyone is really important, and putting an end to victim blaming. Of course I’ve seen MRAs raise objections to both these things too, surprise, surprise >_>

thebionicmommy
thebionicmommy
11 years ago

@Quackers,

I completely understand your frustration and I agree with you. The MRA’s want so badly to make everyone believe that rape is a 50/50 crime (they do the same with domestic violence.) The stats just don’t back up what they say, though. They are misinterpreting the CDC study, which Aallyah did a great job of explaining. They hand wave away any other information that doesn’t fit into their narrative by claiming that male victims under report rape and female victims over report it. The reality is that all types of victims under report rape, but why let the truth get in the way of their agenda?

During a AVfM thread about the Toronto case where women gang raped a man, one of the commenters claimed that ALL men have been raped by a woman at least once in their life. So in other words, 4/4 men have been raped by a woman. But they do not believe that 1/4 women has been raped. They say that number is hugely inflated. When it’s female victims, then they’ll claim that most accusations are false, unless it’s the rare case of a woman raping another woman. I guess it’s just their double standards, lying, and hypocrisy that get me the most.

Aaliyah
11 years ago

Another thing I want to mention is that statistical results shouldn’t be separated from social context. Society is inherently biased against women, and there are mountains of evidence supporting this idea. So the idea that the statistics that highlight the gendered nature of rape are more reliable is certainly plausible. The only reason I think most people don’t want to point that it is that it makes them sound like they have a cognitive bias. But that’s not necessarily the case.

Aaliyah
11 years ago

They hand wave away any other information that doesn’t fit into their narrative by claiming that male victims under report rape and female victims over report it. The reality is that all types of victims under report rape, but why let the truth get in the way of their agenda?

I think they do so because they falsely assume that the fear of being seen as unmanly, gay, feminine, etc. is stronger than the fear of being seen as “used goods,” “a slut who cried rape,” asking for it because of her clothes/behavior, etc. Perhaps it’s fair to say that they are equally likely to report rape to the authorities, but in any case, their reasons for not reporting differ in many significant ways, ways that only highlight the fact that it is misogyny, not misandry, that silences them.

chuckeedee
chuckeedee
11 years ago

I’m honestly surprised to see Elam admit to being wrong about anything. I suspect — though I have no proof, and this is simply speculation — that he may have spoken to a lawyer — either his own, or someone else’s.

Actually David, I was surprised and disappointed in you that you’d go and compare Paul Elam’s post made in good faith (even before he retracted it) with a slag who would deliberately and vindictively lie about rape to destroy the future of someone she knows to be innocent. There’s no comparison – as if Elam would stoop to something that low. I thought you were better than that. Glad you’ve cleared that up.

archaeoholmes
archaeoholmes
11 years ago

Hey Chuckadee, hope you’re well. You realise women lie about rape many degrees less than it actually happens, or is even reported. Feminists throw the applications of white male students in the bin probably never. You are fighting against imagined injustices and ignoring real ones.

archaeoholmes
archaeoholmes
11 years ago

Also, Chuckadee, it isn’t as if the party involved with the stupid white-males-discriminated-against-at-university hoax hasn’t been hurt by it. She has been the target of a hate campaign by your fellow human rights campaigners on the basis of no evidence. You might not like women, but try to imagine how this poor women is feeling right now. Elam knew he had a pack of wolves that hate chicks at his disposal and he used it. You’ve shown yourselves for the people you are.

chuckeedee
chuckeedee
11 years ago

Chuck, Elam clearly likes launching hate campaigns against women.

Here we go again, typically conflating “feminist” for women. Elam frequently makes the point that feminists and women are two entirely different things, that feminism is a movement comprised of both men and women… in fact, just noticing his most recent post, “A hard-on for the Good Men Project”:

First, in conflict with Schroeder’s understanding, and as we have endlessly pointed out on this website, feminists and women are two entirely different things. Feminism is an ideology of sexual politics. Women are the female part of the human race, the counterparts to men. Feminism does not have a vagina, or even tits. It has adherents who possess both kinds of human genitalia, but almost always one or the other. Getting these two things confused is kinda stupid. Mmmkay?

Where’s the ambiguity? And you even finish with the same, tired conflation:

I would say that Elam’s recklessness, combined with the vindictiveness he regularly shows towards feminists and many other women, makes Elam as bad a false accuser than the stereotypical women who falsely accuses a man out of spite.

It is feminists to whom Elam and I are opposed, not women. So fair is fair, given the sort of unsubstantiated, hatefull swill that feminists have been serving up for the past 40-50 years. Look, we get that we have ideological differences, but your current stand in this thread marks a new low that I had not expected to see coming from you.

Fade
11 years ago

So, chuch, waht’s wrong with feminists that makes you so opposed to them?

archaeoholmes
archaeoholmes
11 years ago

Chuck – hatefull swill, we hate it. Right?