Categories
a voice for men antifeminism doxing dozens of upvotes drama evil women gullibility misogyny MRA reddit straw feminists TROOOLLLL!!

Gullible Men’s Rights Redditors fooled by fake Jezebel article arguing that paternity fraud is “one way to break the rule of fathers.”

Some people are easily fooled.
Some people are easily fooled.

This just in: Men’s Rights Activists are some of the most gullible nincompoops in the history of ever.

The latest evidence of this? The regulars on the Men’s Rights subreddit were fooled by an obviously fake “screenshot” of an article from Jezebel that had been altered to make it look like a Jezebel staff writer thinks that paternity fraud is justifiable as a way to fight patriarchy.

No, seriously, the Reddit MRAs actually thought that Anna North of Jezebel had written that “the ability to lie about your children’s parentage is one way to break the rule of fathers.”

Here’s the “screenshot.” And here’s the original thread, which has been deleted from the Men’s Rights subreddit but which is still up, just not reachable from the subreddit.

The irony in many of the comments is off the charts. “It’s Jezebel, of course they think this way,” writes Riesea. “Wow,” says actorsspace. “If Jezebel had a sense of humor, I would suspect them of trolling.”

Blueoak9 — what happened to the original eight? — is stunned that even the evil feminists would sink so low:

blueoak9

There are, of course, a few teensy clues that North’s supposed quote about “break[ing] the rule of fathers” is a big fat fake (as are some of the others in that “screenshot”).

One is that nobody at Jezebel writes or thinks like that.

And second, there’s the tiny fact THAT THE REAL ARTICLE IS UP ON JEZEBEL AND IT DOESN’T SAY ANY OF THAT SHIT AND ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS GO READ IT FOR FUCK’S SAKE IT’S RIGHT HERE.

In fact, Anna North, the author of the Jezebel article, makes an argument that’s the exact opposite of the one attributed to her in the “screenshot.” Challenging a writer in the London Times who had argued that “the ability to pass a child off on a man was a potent female weapon,” North countered that such a stance was not only morally questionable but also pretty antifeminist:

I’d rather “make male claims to omnipotence absurd” by, say, being economically and politically equal to men — not by making them raise babies that aren’t theirs.

Now, you might wonder why exactly the Men’s Rights crowd on Reddit was reading a screenshot of a Jezebel article and not an actual Jezebel article. Well, that’s because the Men’s Rights subreddit has banned all direct links to Jezebel and other Gawker media sites because the MRAs are still mad about that Violentacrez thing.

Yes, the subreddit that links in its sidebar to a site — A Voice for Men — that not only has offered thousand dollar bounties for the personal information of its feminist enemies but that also carries an open call to firebomb courthouses and police stations in its “activism section” is still pig-biting mad about Gawker’s “doxing” of the man who helped to ruin the lives of countless teenage girls by founding and protecting Reddit’s Jailbait subreddit and dozens of other noxious subreddits.

And so someone was able to use this fact to exploit MRA ignorance and paranoia about feminism and make the inhabitants of the Men’s Rights subreddit look like fools.

Again.

Or some MRA with zero ethics wanted to make feminists look bad and failed utterly. I think this is less likely, but with MRAs, anything is possible.

When you’re done reading the original discussion of the fake article on the Men’s Rights subreddit, you can read the discussion there about how they were trolled. Including the comments from this person who thinks that “even if it’s a troll… so what? It’s still presenting an opinion that many a feminist has held.” Straw feminism is REAL! And this person (with dozens of upvotes) who thinks they should just ban all links to all feminist blogs because, hey, what’s the point in knowing anything at all about something you talk about constantly?

EDIT: Thanks to the AgainstMensRights subreddit, I was able to find the link to the original banned post, and so I’ve put the link (and some comments from the discussion) into the post above.

856 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Shadow
Shadow
11 years ago

C and B, is that your final answer?

The fact that I’m so excited tells me exactly how bored I actually am

Catwoman
Catwoman
11 years ago

LOL, Ugh, talking to you is like talking to a wall. I guess it because you don’t understand the social construct of masculinity and femininity and all it involves, so all you can come up with is “men only rape because they are stereotyped as rapists”. read a book. no, not that farrel guy, just a book on 101 of gender studies and then we can start talking.

hellkell
hellkell
11 years ago

For Breadmold and Catwoman:

Catwoman
Catwoman
11 years ago

“C and B, is that your final answer?”

was that not enough or you want a calculated distance between our homes and work places?

breadmold
breadmold
11 years ago

@Catwoman: I’m guessing the folks here spent too much time hanging out with the MRA crowd and reading Farrell’s books to the point where feminism becomes a lost cause for them. No wonder why they lack basic understanding of patriarchy and gender culture.

Fade
11 years ago

“Look, my solution is get a paternity test if it’s bugging you so much, don’t if it’s not, then stop whinging about it on the internet”

And what happens after?

If it’s not, you wouldn’t have to pay child support presumably, and then you can drop out of the kids life or whatever it was you wanted to do. And then stop whining about it.

or what Ugh said

I guess it because you don’t understand the social construct of masculinity and femininity and all it involves

Okay, you wanna know why I think lots of men rape?

male entitlement.

not a stereotype. An attitude lots of men have.

Catwoman
Catwoman
11 years ago

I think they are just on defense constantly. So they become whine asses before its necessary.

Catwoman
Catwoman
11 years ago

Where do you think male entitlement comes from?

As for the paternity thing,so after divorce will he get compensated for the fraud? so he can “stop whining”?

inurashii
inurashii
11 years ago

Seriously tho, nobody on this forum has ever claimed that patriarchy doesn’t harm men. It does. EVERYONE AGREES.

Arguing that men’s issues due to patriarchy need to be given special attention is a classic MRA argument, it’s just that they hate the word ‘patriarchy’ and you seem to want to weaponize it against us (feminists). Your angry word salad arguments seem to have nothing to do with anything and reflect no feminist platforms I have ever seen anyone espouse, but you are really invested in attributing them to feminism.

You might as well join the MRA, kids.

Bostonian
Bostonian
11 years ago

FIVE FEET!

(no feet most likely)

distance between bread and cat

Catwoman
Catwoman
11 years ago

sure, just need to find out where he is now. home or school or work

Bostonian
Bostonian
11 years ago

LET ME CHECK IN WITH MYSELF! I’m totally at work and home at the same time!

inurashii
inurashii
11 years ago

this episode is getting exciting

breadmold
breadmold
11 years ago

“Arguing that men’s issues due to patriarchy need to be given special attention is a classic MRA argument, it’s just that they hate the word ‘patriarchy’ and you seem to want to weaponize it against us (feminists). Your angry word salad arguments seem to have nothing to do with anything and reflect no feminist platforms I have ever seen anyone espouse, but you are really invested in attributing them to feminism.

You might as well join the MRA, kids.”

We never said it should be given special attention. We said that it should be given ATTENTION (<– no special 🙂 ).

And please, look up patriarchy and gender culture yourself, for Christ's sake. Hint: Warren Farrell's book is not a reference :).

Fade
11 years ago

As for the paternity thing,so after divorce will he get compensated for the fraud? so he can “stop whining”?

Um, if he was just paying child support and not being part of the kids life, I guess, though child support is still there for the child. Who would pay? The biological dad?

If they were married, living together, he was raising the kid like they were in a good relationship, no. I mean, it’s not like they’d be just paying stuff like with child support. It’d be very complicated to figure out who owes what, and also the relationship with the kid. Does that suddenly count for nothing if it’s not blood related? Would you rather have money over that?

Bostonian
Bostonian
11 years ago

THE CALLS ARE COMING FROM INSIDE THE HOUSE!!!
(from a really old movie)

hellkell
hellkell
11 years ago

OMG, best thread ever.

inurashii
inurashii
11 years ago

Moldbread, no one disagrees with you on that, just with all the other questionable shit you said. Don’t tell me to look things up when you didn’t even point out how I got either of them wrong.

Your stealth MRA tricks won’t work on me.

breadmold
breadmold
11 years ago

“Um, if he was just paying child support and not being part of the kids life, I guess, though child support is still there for the child. Who would pay? The biological dad?”

Yes the biological dad because he was the one who chose to have sex.

hellkell
hellkell
11 years ago

Stealth tricks? If this moron were any more transparent, they’d be glass.

Catwoman
Catwoman
11 years ago

“No you don’t, catwoman, just assume you’re at the closest point. How far.”

11 km

1 19 20 21 22 23 35