So the self-described “human rights activists” at A Voice for Men have found three more women to harass. Here’s the story, which for many of you will have a depressingly familiar ring:
Members of Men’s Rights Edmonton, a small group that is for all intents and purposes a local chapter of A Voice for Men, has been putting up pictures targeting Lise Gotell, the chair of women’s and gender studies at the University of Alberta. The pictures, which seem inspired by “Wanted” posters of yore, feature a large portrait of Gotell and the caption:
Theft isn’t black. Bank fraud isn’t Jewish. And rape isn’t male.
“Just because you’re paid to demonize men doesn’t mean rape is gendered. Don’t be that bigot.
Gotell’s crime? She was involved in what appears to have been a remarkably effective rape awareness campaign focusing on date rape and featuring the slogan “Don’t Be That Guy.”
A Voice for Men took exception to the campaign because, even thought it did deal with the male victims of rape, it didn’t devote equal time to the problem of evil, false-accusing “girls.” No, really. Men’s Rights Edmonton Activists put up “satirical” versions of the campaign’s posters with the slogan “Don’t Be that Girl.” Now, MR-E and AVFM, at least according to the “argument” advanced on their new poster, seem to be upset that the campaign didn’t devote equal time to the problem of female rapists. [Note: this paragraph has been corrected; see note at end of piece.]
Gotell spoke out against the posters, and now Men’s Rights Edmonton and AVFM are doing their best to smear her as a “bigot.” Because she doesn’t believe that women are responsible for half of all rapes.
Since this is not actually true — more on this in a later post — it’s hard to see how this makes her a bigot.
As a rule, I don’t support tearing down the posters of one’s ideological enemies. Free speech and all that. But these posters are different: they’re slanderous personal attacks designed to harass an individual. Were they posted in my neighborhood I would tear them down.
And evidently that’s what some people in Edmonton have been doing.
Indeed, one recent night, several members of Men’s Rights Edmonton claim to have caught two women doing just that. While they don’t seem to have video footage of the women tearing down the posters, the MRAs filmed themselves following the women down the street and angrily confronting them for this alleged crime.
They posted the video to YouTube, and AVFM posted it as well, under the typically overheated title “Men’s Rights Edmonton confronts fascists.” They screencapped images of both women from the video and announced their intention to uncover their personal information:
MR-E would like to know the names of these two women so that charges of destruction of property can be laid against them. Also, the world should know the identities of those who seek to silence and censor messages advocating for human rights.
Of course, this is ridiculous. Tearing down a poster that was almost certainly posted illegally in the first place isn’t “destruction of property.” No one is going to be prosecuted for this. The police have better things to do.
But of course that’s not the real intent here. The real intent here is to scare the shit out of these women and other feminists by exposing them to harassment online — like the woman labeled “Big Red” and countless other women who have been targeted by AVFM and other MRAs (sometimes completely erroneously).
AVFM’s Paul Elam gave the game away with an “editor’s note” added to the post:
[A] woman who vandalizes man’s property and then flips him off when he confronts her about it on a dark street at night only acts in this manner because she is certain she has absolutely nothing to fear. Feminists terrified of MHRAs? My ass.
Elam could not have made it any clearer: the main point of this kind of “activism” — which has become AVFM’s bread and butter — is all about intimidating women, not helping men.
AVFM, where terrifying individual women is “human rights activism.”
Here’s the appropriate response to that:
CORRECTION/CLARIFICATION: I rewrote the paragraph starting with “A Voice for Men took exception,” which confused AVRM/MR-E’s current objection to Gotell’s views with its original “argument” against the “Don’t Be That Guy” campaign.
Folks, Jason’s just acknowledged being a fan of The Amazing Atheist. At this point, it’s almost impossible to insult him more than he’s managed to denigrate himself.
@freemage
XD
@Jason
I’m not going to retype the links, but scroll down to the bottom of this comment if you want the links; otherwise, just read.
*requoting myself because I am lazy*
Now, some of the wording was off there, but it should work. Remember to read the links!
“I mean, if I didn’t want to have sex from the guy, I should at least be honest enough to not accept his one-sided altruism?”
There is no such thing as one-sided altruism where you get mad if you don’t get sex out of it. You are an idiot and you are horrible. You should go away.
How much more bigoted will he get?
“strawpeople”
Wow, political correctness has reached a new height.
“white men are the most disadvantaged group EVER.”
Now that’s a strawperson if ever there was one.
freemage – If Jason turns out to be an atheist, I’m going to be even more disappointed by my atheist brethren. The atheists in my life at least aren’t assholes, and he’s making us look bad.
Jason, you’re a terrible human.
shit i’m dying here i can’t type aldskjflasjdf
hahhahahhahahahhahahahhahahahah
how is straw people political correctness reaching a new height?
did I miss something?
does jason know what a strawman is?
omigod was he objecting because someone typed strawpeople instead of strawman?
aas;dlfj;sa
::snortle::
@Alice
eh. There are assholes of every group. I wouldn’t worry too much about it.
*about jason making atheists look bad.
Can I just say, having worked in a lab, that ordering safety supplies is really fun? “Ooh, a 350-item first aid kit!” “This flammables cabinet has auto-latching doors!” “We could put a safety glasses notice by the front door and the back door!”
@katz, that script was pretty much perfect.
I have a meeting — you all have fun poking the troll until he explodes!
Jason – That’s your entire argument. You JUST said that men are as equally oppressed as women, and you misconstrued people’s actual grievances with a system that doesn’t work for us and that doesn’t actually help us with slander, slurs, and stereotypes.
The MRA’s whole thing is about how white men are the most oppressed group ever.
And yes, strawpeople. We’re all not a monolithic group telling you off, we’re individual people and you’re making strawpeople of us and tearing them down.
Wrong-o! A disabled woman speaks up!
If ableism were not a force, it would just be “unfortunate” to be disabled. But right now, I get
“You’re a pro!” when I do something as simple as freaking opening a door.
i get jokes at which my visible disability is the expense “Did you hurt yourself jumping on the bed lol?”
People like me are paid less than minimum wage
Disabled children are freaking killed by their parents
disabled people are medically abused, neglected, and sterilized against their will
I can’t reach my fucking apartment door because nobody cared to put in a ramp here?
the sidewalks have curb cuts that are only accessible by able bodied or walking disabled people?
And telling: the disabled entrance for the city hall, where we vote, is hidden in the back with no visible indication it exists from the front.
All of these things are social. They are not “unfortunate”. They are fucking intentional.
And i already made a comment about sexism…
Yar, that be due to toxic masculinity, another product of the patri-ARRR-chy.
/pirate-voice
BOOM!
@cloudiah
Have fun/ good luck, whichever is more appropriate!
So Jason, just out of curiosity, if someone gets a bag of groceries from their local food bank, what do they owe in return?
Marie – I know, but seriously, a large amount of people consider all atheists to be untrustworthy assholes, which really pisses me off.
“Well, if I was happy to take every single thing that nice guy did for me, I’d have to expect to give something in return, wouldn’t I?”
Ding ding ding! Ooh, I know the answer to this one! It’s whore penguins! Because all women use the promise of sex to extract favors and material goods from men! Because nobody ever does anything nice for anyone out of the kindness of their hearts, and sex is a commodity to be traded! And anyan who does any nice thing for a woman is entitled to sex!
Katz: Oh, I can’t wait to hear his theories on the poor. This oughtta be good.
“When women are paid less than men, valued less than men, sexual assaulted at a much higher rate with only 3 percent of rapists seeing prison time, and you say that misogyny does not exist, you are a misogynist. When people think that they can silence women by insinuating that they are all whores and that that is a witty retort instead of a blatant display of male privilege, misogyny exists. When people tell men to smile bastard, instead of smile bitch you can go on about misogyny not existing. When absences of men in history are made and then it’s treated as if men were just never competent enough to compete with the women, I’ll give a shit about your opinion. When people think that men talk to much when they talk the same amount as women I will say that misogyny doesn’t exist.”
When men do less pleasant jobs than women, are treated more disposably than women, are victims of violence at a much higher rate than women and everyone is okay with this, and you say misandry doesn’t exist, you are a misandrist. When people think they can silence men by insinuating that they are all losers and that that is a witty retort instead of a blatant display of female privilege, misandry exists. When people tell you to woman up and support your family, rather than man up and support your family, you can go on about misandry not existing. When absences of women in professions like coal mining and sanitation are made and then it’s treated like men’s fault that that women weren’t leaping over themselves to do those jobs, I’ll give a shit about your opinion. When people think that men don’t face adversity, when they face more adversity than women I will say misandry doesn’t exist.
I remember very well the story of the good samaritan, when after helping the guy, the samaritan said “So, dude, where’s my dough?”
the most ultimate example of political correctness gone amok – my microsoft word suggested “congressional representative” instead of “congressman”
*faints from the misandry*
/sarcasm
You realise I talk to feminists, right? I mean, right here, right now, the majority of the people speaking on this forum are feminists. None of them are saying that we’re slavering beasts, or that women have to stay indoors to protect themselves from us.
I also talk to the MRM. Well, more importantly I listen to the MRM. See, that’s how I work things like this out. A lot of people pick one side, challenge the other side to defend themselves against strawmen, and take the inevitable backlash as evidence that they picked well… that’s a really dumb method. I lurk, read, and listen.
I listen as MRAs proclaim that “everybody knows that rape is wrong!” and that only hard-wired rapists will ever rape someone then go on to claim that having sex with someone who tells you they don’t want to, but doesn’t fight hard enough isn’t rape, and they do it at least once a month.
I listen as feminists explain that you can’t just detect a rapist by sight or smell, because they’re generally, with some outliers, ordinary people, even nice people in most ways, who approach sex in destructive ways.
I listen as MRAs scream about how recognising that rapists are human beings means that all men are rapists, and that it’s unfairly targeting only men (even though it doesn’t, which you guys would know if you listened).
I listen as feminists react with excessive vitriol as yet another guy asks the same question about what a woman did to provoke a rape.
I listen as MRAs explain that this is because feminists are fascist ideologues who hate men, rather than because it’s a fucking stupid question which puts the blame in exactly the wrong place.
Both sides have positive and negative aspects… the problem is that the MRM is mostly negative.
There’s also, despite the claims of members of the MRM, a greater adherence to rational thought within most of the feminist movement, at least with regard to gender issues – too many of the tenets of the MRM contradict each other for it to be possible to hold them without serious cognitive dissonance. (As an example – men are oppressed because we’re the ones going into combat in the army / women shouldn’t be allowed to go into combat in the army because of this handy list of biotruths! You can only have it one way, guys. Either we’re oppressed because women are refusing to fight alongside us, or they’re simply too pathetic to lift a rifle, or neither… certainly not both.)