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:
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.
I have just never understood the obsession with a child being biologically “yours.” What’s the big deal? I have shit genes; why would I want to specifically ensure that a child got them too?
Oh for god’s sake, I didn’t even see that.
*face-palm* Taking basic safety precautions (and remember, it’s your own fault if you don’t psychic yourself out of being raped!) = assuming women are liars. O_o
Note: once you’re actually in a relationship with someone, you are actually assuming they are not a rapist. Generally. Having a child should be a mutual thing, whether or not it’s planned. And if you actually suspect it’s not yours, do ask, sure. But you’re probably not in a good place to raise a child together.
And let’s not forget: the equivalent of a woman being cautious of the possibility of being raped on a date with a man is… a man being cautious of the possibility of being raped on a date with a woman! Or a woman with a woman! Or a man with a man! Because no gender has the corner on awfulness! (Though obviously it’s statistically far more dangerous being a woman dating a man… but I’m sure you can follow here.)
Haha, yeah, that’s not something I’m generally going to agree with people on. I can understand that it’s a biological urge, and can imagine the intensity of birthing your very own brand new baby.
But I actually see raising children similarly to puppies, as much as this offends many people. I don’t care if they’re related, look like me, or are babies. And there are so many that need good homes, why would I make more? 😛 Basically I’ve never wanted my own children, but I wouldn’t mind fostering and maybe adopting one day.
It is funny how my partner has been asked about having children (he’s a regional manager and has management meetings monthly so he gets a lot more of that yaymarriagebabieswhywouldn’tyou?!?! than I do) and said that we have shitty genetics so it seems like a terrible idea. This got him raaaaather confused looks. lol
I blame Fox News for this idea that for every idea there must be an opposite and presumed to be equal idea. If there isn’t one then you make one up, lest the disruption in your sense of how the universe works give you a headache.
@Kittehserf – nice try, but dictionary.com, which is neither a stronghold of feminist, nor MRA opinion, dates misandry to the 1940s, predating Warren Farrell and such by a long old time.
Misandry is real, it happens and the word is so widely accepted it’s in the dictionary. Case closed, you fail.
I see the usual efforts to shame cuckolded men into meekly putting up with the lies and deceit that were foisted on them are on prominent display in this thread.
It’s exactly that BS which makes the argument for mandatory DNA testing, for me.
Mandatory DNA testing both slams the door on any possible deceit AND it cuts off all opportunity for this kind of shaming horseshit. No man need ever listen to the bullshit “you don’t trust me, I would never, blahblah, you’re so evil and heartless etc. etc.” because: it’s the fuckin’ law.
Fatherhood MUST be proven by DNA OR accepted through formal, voluntary adoption post-tesing, in full knowledge of not being the bio-father. No arguments, no chance for man-shaming. Job done.
I’m circ’d and wished I wasn’t – bc women generally find uncut men to be more easy table. How is that fact “body shaming?” That’s an objective fact – more girth = more happiness. Would it be “body shaming” to acknowledge that women who have suffered FGM are permanently injured due to the bushit inflicted upon them by their culture? I would find any ethical system that permitted people to be brutalized that way very ugly.
Related to the uncut men issud, would pointing out that a smaller man is less satisfying generally be body shaming? I don’t think so – it is an unfortunate but true observation that some men are ill equipped to give most women pleasure through PIV sex. Pretendjng otherwise does men who need to keep a mate happy a disservice. Less well-endowed men can compensate plenty elsewhere as Good Vibrations or Dan Svage can expound upon in detail.
But in light of that fact, it seems like the choice of circumcision should be the man’s to make. My mom undoubtedly thought she was following good medical standard and hygeine, but now we have a fuller understanding of the issue.
Ah ha ha. The dictionary said so! Sure bro.
That said, I am totally down with misandry as a concept. It’s just that the idea of misandry as a social force is… patently ridiculous.
I have no idea what “more easy table” means.
Joe, get some help for that paranoia and anger before it eats you alive.
(Can anyone provide an MRA to English translation for “more easy table” and what it would mean in relation to penises? I’m not being snarky, I’m genuinely lost.)
[I]P.S. Note that since Ms Getta Lode has not devolved into spouting misogynist drivel, she is currently getting the benefit of the doubt. You, well, I don’t care if you’re an MRA, you’re a self-absorbed twat and not worth the time I just spent on you.[/I]
Aww geez, you know what, I’m sorry if you consider it “misogyny” for me to say that men should have the same right as women to be suspicious of what their partner is doing. Tell me, what do you think of the Schrodinger’s Rapist model? http://www.atheistrev.com/2012/10/schrodingers-rapist.html If you agree with it that women should be suspicious that the partner they see may be a potential rapist (which I would agree to), then you would also agree that men should be suspicious that his wife/GF’s firstborn may not be his biological child.
And calling me a “self-absorbed twat” will only reflect poorly on YOUR part because all you’re doing is spewing ad hominim attacks like a kindergartner without explaining why I’m self-absorbed, which you kind of half-heartedly did:
[I]And there’s the money quote. The child has no voice here, it’s all about you. Well guess what? FUCK OFF.[/I]
Oh wow, you can really spew insults like a child, and you’re doing it so proudly. Would you like a squeaky toy?
If I’m “selfish” for asking to keep the child to myself, how are you any less selfish? If your wife/GF lied to you and your child find out, would he be happy being forced to live with a mother that lied to her child? How about you COMMUNICATE to the child on how his mother deceived both of you, and ask him/her whether or not s/he’s comfortable to live with the lie and would like to stay living with his/her mother? This is ASSUMING that the mother lied (which you even admitted to) and NOT due to other issues like i.e. being raped.
Also:
[I]What would most people do? Scream and yell and trample on the feelings of their children because that’s what most people do anyway. This is why I would like parenting to be less of a default life plan.[/I]
Where did I say that paternity fraud victims can just “scream and yell and trample”? All I’m saying is that they have the right to be mad, and the right to find a way to get the biological father to compensate for the losses.
[I]Their reality is they have a child, and we’re going to assume they love their child, who loves them back. They cannot get that time back. They cannot get that money back. By loudly demanding compensation all they’re really doing is communicating to their child that if they’d known they weren’t their biological father, they wouldn’t have been there for them. Ie: they are hurting them out of pride.[/I]
Wow, and you call them sociopaths. I NEVER said that the father should place the non-biological child secondary to his own interests. All I’m saying is that he has the right to feel that his life has been cheated by the wife and the biological father, and deserve the right to compensate the loss.
If you asked your mother whether she’s abort you before birth, and she replied with “yes”, would you get back at your mother by saying that she’s hurting you out of pride?
(albeit abortion and paternity fraud are two completely different things, but that’s beside the point. Similar principles though)
And the last one takes the cake:
[I]See this to me shows your overly simplistic and gender role-entrenched view of the entire thing. Life is complicated! Some women may have sex with lots of people behind their partner’s back and lie about it to their partner. Pretty revolting behaviour but if the guy is happy to be a parent, he still gains a relationship with his daughter or son and the child gains a father. Not all’s well that ends well, but not something that can be fixed with money.
Some women might fall in love with someone else but not be willing or able to leave their partners and go back to them pregnant without telling them. Not OK but life is fucking complicated.
Some women might get drunk at a party and be raped without knowing it, and raise the child thinking it’s her partners. Because LIFE IS FUCKING COMPLICATED.[/I]
Your first two paragraphs can be summed up with this: What she did was wrong, but pssshh so what if he was being lied to! All men LOVE to be fathers! Never mind the fact that being forced to be a father of a child that isn’t his is morally wrong! He should just suck it up and clean up the mess his wife/GF made.
And I actually agree with your last sentence. Rape is a horrible crime, because it’s bad for women, but it can also be bad for men for this one reason alone.
Oh yeah and you totally missed my point with the paragraph. I was making a point on how it’s entirely incorrect to place the sole blame on the woman if a paternity fraud exists. The biological father also had a role to play in choosing to have sex, and he was the one who chose to run away from his own biological child. So if anything, I’m COUNTERING misogyny. Paternity testing is not a men’s right issue at all. If we live in a society where all men took responsibility with the children that they helped to create, we wouldn’t need paternity testing at all.
Look, hrovitnir, you’re taking this way too personally. I NEVER made a personal attack against you, and you decide to ramble on and on about your life story. Cool story bro (or sis; I don’t know what your gender is). I got mad at the stuff you wrote because you were labelling people who got angry at lies that his wife/GF made as “psychopaths”, as if there’s no way in hell people could get angry and demand justice.
[I]Don’t you just love the way the assumption is that the woman and the other man cheated and that they conspired to have the first bloke tricked into raising the child? Imagine the biological father in Joe’s scenario, being sued for the upkeep of a child he may not have known existed. But then Joe’s talking as if this is all some sort of property battle and the money he’s spent is the most important thing ever and he bought that kid and he was cheated and he still gets to keep it even though he has no biological connection with it and that’s the most important thing in the world or else why is he chasing this money in the first place …[/I]
The funny thing is, even if that is true, it’s mostly the other man (the biological father) that is to blame. It takes two to have a child, and the biological father was the one who chose to run away from his own child to become a deadbeat.
“And if you actually suspect it’s not yours, do ask, sure.”
Bwahahahahahhaahaaaaaa!!! OMG the naivety.
That you are able to even come out with this, I don’t even know where to begin in explaining to you how deeply this fails.
And by the way the incidence of cuckolding as found by genetic testing is about 30%.
3 in 10.
If you had a 30% chance of most of your time, effort and love being poured into a life that was a LIE, to the advantage of the liar that inflicted it on you – you’d be clamouring for mandatory DNA testing too.
And don’t give me all that “be a better judge of character” horseshit. A lot of people are very skilled liars, they do it by lying to themselves first.
One of my very close family members not only fooled a male relative of mine, but his mother, all his friends and everyone she had come to the wedding where she swore undying love and dedication to him. Everyone thought she was sweet and loving and truthful.
But, on that very day, she was heard to remark “I don’t know what I’ll have to look forward to now”.
Within 18 months, (indelibly testified through Facebook fail on her part, and still flatly denied to my relative’s face, even though she knows he’s seen the evidence!!) she was lying to him and fucking another guy behind his back, a couple months later she went through a sham “I just need some space” for a week, during which time she took out a loan in her married name to the marital home and got all settled in with her new fuck-piece (who had thrown out his pratner of 15 years and their 4 kids for the marrried woman, btw).
My relative was entirely in the dark until she announced she was leaving. Oh, he knew the mariage was failing and made efforts to reach out to her, but she was having none of it (with hindsight, because she was already fucking the next guy).
I could go on, there’s plenty more, but – the point:
Decent trusting people are the most vulnerable to lying cheats. Decent people have very little defence against them. That’s why they need protection with mandatory DNA testing.
Thank fuck my male relative had not had kids with his wife, nor had she got pregnant by the other fucker*, nor does my relative have any assets himself, nor a joint acount** with her. It could have been so much worse.
As it is, he’s got a fuckin’ ulcer and sleep panic attacks from the stress of behaving like a responsible adult in the midst of all this shit.
(*a violent, alcoholic, abusive footy hoolie, who has abandoned his own flesh-and-blood kids apparently.
**The wife’s mother had pressed for such, but my relative just responded with: “we both work and we pay 50/50, we don’t need one” – that he’d been screwed out of a stack of money ten years back by his last fiancee had him forearmed. That one had run off with the local drug dealer)
[I]That’s a fucking offensive comparison. “I might be in danger of rape or murder” compares with “this child may not be mine”? You even have to ask which is worse? In what universe?[/I]
Oh lovely. So you want a pissing contest? Ok fine.
Rape: A person having complete power and control over another person, leaving the other person scarred for life.
Paternity fraud: A person forcing another person to be a father of a child that isn’t his (it never happens the other way around because of biological differences), causing him to spend 18+ years of his life to be in economic burden that he did not choose to be in. And he would be scarred for life if he found out the lie.
The funny thing is, I never intended a comparison. My point was, if the women has the right to suspect that her partner MAY do something harmful to her, than the man should also have the right to suspect that his partner MAY do something harmful to him. It doesn’t matter what the harm is; harm is still harm. If pushing people off buildings is worse than pushing people off staircases, does that make pushing people off staircases okay?
Crap, typing fail. Should read:
“One of my very close male relatives was married pretty recently. The wife not only fooled my relative, but his mother, all his friends and everyone she had come to the wedding where she swore undying love and dedication to him. Everyone thought she was sweet and loving and truthful.”
“Don’t you just love the way the assumption is that the woman and the other man cheated and that they conspired to have the first bloke tricked into raising the child? Imagine the biological father in Joe’s scenario, being sued for the upkeep of a child he may not have known existed. But then Joe’s talking as if this is all some sort of property battle and the money he’s spent is the most important thing ever and he bought that kid and he was cheated and he still gets to keep it even though he has no biological connection with it and that’s the most important thing in the world or else why is he chasing this money in the first place ”
^This has been said/quoted twice now. All before I even entered this debate. So your attributing something someone else said to me.
And it’s spoiled people don’t understand that working class folks’ money is only gotten by the sacrifice of the time of their unique and irreplacable lives – doing some shitty job for a shitty boss… .
You can be 100% sure that anyone saying it’s “just money” aren’t talking about money they had to work for. People who talk like that get money handed to them.
It’s not money, if you’re a worker – it’s TIME. It’s LIFE. And it’s never, ever coming back.
“*face-palm* Taking basic safety precautions (and remember, it’s your own fault if you don’t psychic yourself out of being raped!) = assuming women are liars. O_o”
You can also argue that rape = assuming men are liars and he took you into his apartment just so he could molest you.
I think all women should take precautions, as I would with men.
Why? If you want to get a paternity test done, go ahead and get it done. Who’s stopping you? I would even be happy to support initiatives to have paternity testing fall under insurance/health care programs (if they aren’t already) in order to ensure that finances aren’t a barrier to getting them. My rights are mine. I don’t need anyone imposing paternity tests on me.
Cassandra – a) I’m not an MRA, and b) “more pleasurable.” I’m typing this on smartphone on a train, so the obnoxious spelling errors are a mixture of autocorrect and miscorrected typos.
I generally think MRAs champion the issue because FGM has been a bigger issue for longer and it lets them gain legitimacy by associating themselves with the grievances of FGM. But it doesn’t make them wrong and it doesn’t mean that the bodily autonomy issues aren’t there.
OK, that definitely makes more sense than something about a table. Was totally lost there for a while.
They’re not wrong about it being a bodily autonomy issue, but the attempt to gain legitimacy via association with FGM? Yeah, that’s wrong, and also really poor strategy since it repels people who might otherwise be inclined to support anti-circumcision ideas. Like a lot of issues, the involvement of MRAs hurts more than it helps because they’re really, really bad at both political strategy and PR.
@Pecunium & Leum
The hilarious thing is, I actually knew that, so there’s really no excuse for my biology fail. That being said, I wonder if people on the higher end of sensitivity have issues when circumcised.
Does that actually work? Growing up in a country where basically everyone was circumcised, it was those of us who weren’t circumcised that were the targets of teasing (though we made sure tease the circumcised dudes back), yet no one felt the urge to get circumcised.
Re: Men reacting poorly to paternity fraud.
I have sympathy for the anger of men who had no desire to be parents and ended up reluctantly/unhappily becoming parents because they thought the kid was theirs. I do think that, at the end of the day, the right and mature thing to do is get over it, because the kid is depending on you, but I judge them less harshly if they decide to go back to the life that they were living before this was all thrown on them.
But if your gripe is only that you thought the child was biologically yours, and you were perfectly happy and willing to be a parent, I have no patience or sympathy for any animosity directed towards your child or your status as their parent.
To be clear, I don’t have any sympathy for animosity directed towards the child in either scenario. I have sympathy for animosity directed towards your status as a parent in the former scenario.
I fully agree with Shadow.
Also, most people in this thread aren’t understanding the key fact that NONE of us ever said that women are cheaters or are conspirators. Yes it happens, albeit rarely, but the question is – what are you going to do about it if it happens? There is a 1 in 100 chance of dying from Salmonella poisoning from raw chicken, so does that mean that I deserve to die and be prevented from seeing the doctor if I were to get Salmonella poisoning someday?
But what you’re suggesting is essentially the equivalent of forcing the government to crack open every single egg and test it individually for salmonella before you eat it,. Which does tend to strike observers as overkill.
I’m not. I disagree with the idea of forced/mandatory paternity testing. However, I do think that paternity tests should be accessible and shouldn’t be that expensive.