Well, it took them a little while, but the folks at Men’s Rights hate site A Voice for Men have finally figured out an angle on the Trayvon Martin case. According to regular AVFM contributor August Løvenskiolds, the whole thing can be blamed on a woman — specifically, Rachel Jeantel, the friend of Trayvon Martin who was on the phone with him just before he was killed.
According to Løvenskiolds, who seems to know more about what happened that night than it is in fact possible for him to know,
During a post-trial interview with Piers Morgan on CNN, Rachel Jeantel, the reluctant phone witness who was talking to Martin just before Martin assaulted Zimmerman, finally revealed that she had warned Martin that Zimmerman might be gay, or even, a gay rapist preparing to approach Martin.
This isn’t news; Jeantel said in her testimony that she told Martin she was afraid the man following him might be a rapist. But Løvenskiolds moves quickly from “sworn testim0ny” to “making shit up.”
Martin freaked out over the idea that Zimmerman might have sexual designs on him or his family, and this seems to have precipitated the attack on Zimmerman – which, of course, would make the attack a violation of Zimmerman’s human rights as a (purportedly) gay man, and make Jeantel the proxy instigator of the attack.
Yes, that’s right, the whole thing was “violence by proxy” instigated by an evil homophobic woman.
Would you like some armchair psychoanalysis to go with your unfounded speculation?
So, Trayvon Martin was killed in the act of gay-bashing (in Jeantel’s and his own minds, anyway). The fury of Martin’s sudden turnabout attack is now explicable (he had been avoiding being followed up to the point of the introduction of the gay rapist idea) and it indicates the degree of Martin’s revulsion that he went from flight to fight mode in so short a time.
And this of course makes it all All About The Menz Rights.
The men’s human rights issues related to a woman (Jeantel) being held blameless for using gay/rape threats to precipitate man-on-man violence ought to be obvious.
It’s always a woman’s fault, isn’t it?
Elsewhere in the post, Løvenskiolds seriously suggests that when a police dispatcher told Zimmerman that “we don’t need you” to follow Martin, that was Super Seekret Man Code for “we actually DO need you to follow him.” No, really.
Such negative suggestions are as clear to savvy men as this: “Honey, you don’t need to buy me roses for Valentine’s Day” – meaning, of course, “if you know what is good for you, I’d better get flowers AND chocolate AND jewelry AND a nice dinner AND…”
The fact that the dispatcher further expected Zimmerman to meet with officers – drafting Zimmerman into the militia, as it were – made it clear to Zimmerman that his continued pursuit of Martin was expected by the police as well.
The societal expectation of militia service by all able-bodied adult males is certainly a men’s human rights issue and an indication of inequality between the genders that needs to be redressed.
MRAs may not be good at much, but they’ve got mental gymnastics down to a science.
EDIT: I added a graf after the first quote from Løvenskiolds clarifying that Jeantel says she did in fact tell Martin that she thought Zimmerman might be a rapist.
Wow, that’s almost impressive in just how completely unconnected to reality it is.
Reblogged this on THE VENUS ENVY.
I…I can’t even
What the fuck? GTFO AVfM
Exhibit A: Why MRA “advocacy” is counterproductive even in discussion of legitimate issues.
Also, even if his points made sense (and they don’t, nor are they non-bigoted), it would be an LGBT issue, not a men’s rights issue. Are they that stupid?
All evidence suggests, “Yes.”
Stupid, or deliberately claiming issues faced by other groups as “men’s issues” to try and make men as a group seem oppressed. Like their complaints about prison sentencing, which I’ve learned on this board is a race issue, not a gender one. Løvenskiolds seems to be playing the same game with homophobic violence.
LOL!
best joke I have heard all day, wait…. they really believe this?
That’s just vile. And not -ignorant- vile, like some shitsheads who just don’t know better, this is deliberatly fuckin’ vile. “Such negative suggestions are as clear to savvy men as this:” and what follows is an idiot’s idea of how relationships work, gleaned, I guess, from romcom clichés about what women want, like women are some homogenous blob. Løvenskiolds, you’re not savvy. You’re just sad.
I wonder what Fidelbogen thinks about all that. I’m sure he can come up with a tweet-metaphor on the men’s oppression from dispatchers saying no while clinging ‘yes’ with their eyes in morse.
AVFM Mental Gymnastics…
(commercial stunt, not real)
As a (white) woman, I have to say, the first thing I’d think if there was a man following me is “Is he planning to rape me?” and I don’t think I’m alone. So… if she did say that, I actually do kind of understand what she’s saying, though I know that male-on-female stranger rape is pretty rare, are male-on-male stranger rape is probably rarer.
It might still have been homophobic in phrasing, but I understand why she might have thought that.
That is still not the reason Trayvon is dead. Trayvon is dead because Zimmerman shot him after following him.
The MRA has sooper seekret access to Martin’s innermost thoughts. They also know what the dispatcher was “reely” saying. And the idea that the police were planning to “draft Zimmerman into the militia”… conspiracy theorist gold, folks. Mwah! That’s stupidity cooked to crumbly-textured perfection.
“The MRA has sooper seekret access to Martin’s innermost thoughts. They also know what the dispatcher was “reely” saying. And the idea that the police were planning to “draft Zimmerman into the militia”… conspiracy theorist gold, folks. Mwah! That’s stupidity cooked to crumbly-textured perfection.” Seriously, that is some grade-A convoluted conspiracy. Well, maybe guys are issued decoder rings at birth just for this purpose. Mine must have got lost in the mail, because I can’t make heads or tails of it except that it’s intensely stupid.
I’ve seen a lot of stupid bullshit from the MRM, but this takes the cake. And by cake, I mean steaming pile of elephant dung.
Reblogged this on MamaLiberty's Weblog and commented:
Well, it took them a little while, but the folks at Men’s Rights hate site A Voice for Men have finally figured out an angle on the Trayvon Martin case
So, that Martin would supposedly get violent over ‘gay panic’ is okay, the fact that Zimmerman stalked and shot Martin is unremarkable, but Jeantel suggesting that Zimmerman was a rapist was what really made shit hit the fan? Is there any limit to how little responsibility men should have for their own deplorable actions? If a man stubs his toe in a forest where no one can see or hear him, is it still a woman’s fault?
What am I thinking? Of course it is. In MRA philosophy, behind every bad man is a much worse woman.
If I shake my head any more over this it’ll fall off, I swear. MRM: Malevolent Reactionary Morons.
Multiple Repulsive Minions, in the case of the AVFM staff.
MRM: Mental Rectal Mix-ups.
Malignant Repellent Maroons.
Okay, Amnesia wins!
Moomoo Ruining Malcontents.
Eh, I like calling them Misogynists, Rapists, and Abusers.
Sarah wins for accuracy.
“The fact that the dispatcher further expected Zimmerman to meet with officers – drafting Zimmerman into the militia, as it were – made it clear to Zimmerman that his continued pursuit of Martin was expected by the police as well.”
Dude, what the fuck? Put the Kool-Aid down.
“The societal expectation of militia service by all able-bodied adult males is certainly a men’s human rights issue and an indication of inequality between the genders that needs to be redressed.”
He’s trying to compare the draft to a fantasy in which cops recruit untrained civilians into hunting down other civilians.
My question…does he even believe the bullshit he’s posting, or is he assuming everyone reading his posts are that easy to rile up? And if they are THAT easy to rile up after dropping the combination of words — “men’s human rights issue”, why try to hijack homophobia as an MRA concern? Does he even understand the MRA demographic?
Of course, they try to hijack a lot of issues that are the concern of marginalized people. Soooo, they seek minority status, while resenting minorities, and denying their privilledge? Jesus. How the hell do they get through a single day without their heads popping like a friggin’ balloon?