Here we go again. Like small children who have just discovered the power of the tantrum, the terrible people at A Voice for Men seem to have realized that the only reliable way for them to get the attention of the world is to act like complete assholes in public. And so some fans of AVFM have decided to bring back the “Don’t Be That Girl” campaign — you know, the witless and misogynistic “parody” of the successful Canadian “Don’t Be That Guy” rape awareness campaign. Now they’re postering in Halifax.
But there’s one difference: this time they’ve put the logos of the real sponsors of the real “Don’t Be That Guy” rape awareness project on their phony posters. (You can see the whole list by downloading one of the pdfs of the real posters on this page.)
So far, two of the organizations listed on their phony posters – the Bryony House shelter for victims of domestic violence and the Halifax Police Department – have made very clear that their logos are being used without permission.
https://twitter.com/BryonyHouse/status/448148862193389568
@Allisomething Tk u for reporting. We're not a sponsor of this campaign and find it deeply troubling. We'll be looking into this further HT
— Halifax_Police (@HfxRegPolice) March 24, 2014
It’s a pretty safe bet that the other organizations whose logos were appropriated feel similarly.
I’d like to encourage anyone who can afford it to follow up on a suggestion from Cloudiah in the comments and donate to Bryony House so that some good can come out of all this.
Now, I’m no expert on Canadian law, but it seems rather unlikely to me that it’s legal to simply stick some organization’s logo on something and pretend that they have endorsed it. Especially when that organization is the police.
Apparently some MRAs disagree with me on that:
https://twitter.com/AVoiceForMen/status/448225043026149376
“Your consent is not required” seems to be the operating assumption of a lot of those drawn to the Men’s Rights movement.
In later tweets, Elam claims that using the logos is legal because of “fair use,” which is not actually a term used in Canadian law, and promises that the “[p]osters will continue, cupcake.”
I guess we will see. Here are several more photos of the posters. There’s more discussion of this in the AgainstMensRights subreddit.
Lots of real comedians around town apparently… pic.twitter.com/P92KmW3I41
— Handsome Adam Barrett (@im_adam_barrett) March 24, 2014
and one more before I vomit everywhere pic.twitter.com/jEJTXSSHXG
— Handsome Adam Barrett (@im_adam_barrett) March 24, 2014
EDITED TO ADD: Elam has now responded to the critics, and promises to bankroll any legal challenges against the posterers. It’s pretty clear that he doesn’t understand why the logos are a problem.
EDIT/CORRECTION: It’s not completely clear that this postering campaign originated with AVFM. It’s pretty clear, though, that it’s supported by AVFM, and that those involved in it are supporters of AVFM. I’ve made a few changes to the headline and first graf to reflect this.
What I find funny is that if there is any group which works as apologists for child abuse that it’s the fathers’ rights people who are MRAs (I don’t mean to imply that the two groups overlap completely). How dare those ex wives use the father’s abuse as a reason to limit contact with HIS kids, don’t cha know.
Yeah, really. A dumpster baby is nothing compared to years of paternal abuse. Dumpster babies get rescued sometimes. But who’s gonna rescue an abused kid from a “father’s rights” abuser?
(Not to minimize the awfulness of baby-dumping or anything, but really, it’s just no comparison.)
This is really weird:
http://www.heleneinbetween.com/2014/03/my-face-is-viral-meme.html
This seems related. It seems like right wing types never bother with things like consent.
The least-depressing thing in all this (I can’t seem to find anything actually funny) is how MRAs are so convinced they are the voice of reason and logic, and fail to notice how every poster conveys A LOT of anger.
The fine print in the sex worker’s image is pretty eloquent, the whole poster seems to scream: SEE?? THIS IS WHAT YOU TELL US, BUT YOU DON’T LIKE IT WHEN WE SAY IT ABOUT YOU!! (NEVERMIND WE MISSED THE POINT) HA!! ALSO, WHY ARE YOU SO STUPID THAT WE NEED TO MAKE THIS POSTER TO MAKE YOU UNDERSTAND!!
@cloudiah the Anita Sarkeesian poster is pure gold! I should tweet it right now (to my 3 followers)!
@cloudiah: Our robotic cats are flying off the shelves. Literally.
Oh, that sex worker poster. I should say right away that I don’t know what the least bad law is regarding sex work. The most bad kind of law is probably the one that makes selling sex a crime, so that customers can rape and beat sex workers any way they want to and they don’t dare going to the police unless they’re arrested themselves.
But is it the least bad to completely legalize, like Germany did, or only make buying sex illegal, like Sweden? There’s the argument that even if only buying is illegal, it forces the whole business underground, making sex workers more vulnerable. Also, as long as buying is illegal, there will be stigma attached to being a sex worker. On the other hand, there’s the argument that legalizing completely means that the trafficking of sex slaves spikes. I’ve seen arguments made by German police officers and various activists that German brothels are probably largely staffed by trafficking victims, since lots of girls there hardly speak any German, often look really really young and overall don’t really seem like they’re in control of the situation, but in most cases you can’t actually prove that they’re forced to work there. You make sex work completely legal, you take away much of the stigma attached to buying sexual services->demand spikes->most women still only wanna have sex with people they’re actually attracted to, rather than anyone who pays->supply doesn’t meet the demand->there’s a huge market for sex slaves.
So what I’m getting at, finally, is that it really doesn’t seem to be the case that women “offer” as soon as there’s demand. Why not attack the “demanders” instead?
Elam wants to be sued, more publicity, and an attempt to martyr himself at a time when many MRAs are asking questions about him.
Brain bleach: Look who just arrived!
It’s a hell of a lot more common, auggz – and a lot of it comes from men, something MRAs never acknowledge.
Opposition to the Don’t Be That Guy campaign from MRAs is interesting, to the extent that anything bigots do can be interesting. Some of the opposition takes the form we see here, where the parody presents something that is overwhelmingly considered to be morally repugnant, and then instructs women not to do it. “See!?” the poster seems to say, “it’s super super ultra insulting to have such an obvious message directed at your gender! Implying all women everywhere don’t already know you shouldn’t dump babies in dumpsters, when that is so obvious and well-understood by everyone else, is like calling all of you morally bankrupt baby murderers! It’s just like how implying all men don’t already know you shouldn’t rape people,* when everyone considers rape to be just as obviously horrifying as infanticide, is calling us a bunch of evil rapey rapists of rape!”
But then there is the other form of opposition, which seems to me to be more common, where the parody turns the original campaign poster into something that is the victim’s fault. Messages like “Just because you regret it, doesn’t mean it was rape.” It’s clear from these parodies that their creators do not consider the scenarios presented in the original campaign to be obviously horrifying acts of rape. Obviously, the “rape is obviously not okay, how dare you tell us we need to learn it’s wrong!” crowd and the “those things are totally not rape!” crowd are contradicting one another.
*This is, of course, not what the Don’t Be That Guy campaign actually does, but MRAs certainly seem to think so
If someone did start posting those posters with AVfM’s logo on feminist messages, I guarantee you he’d be crying for a lawsuit. I would say Paulie’s showing his ass again, but that’s pretty much every day.
Squeeeeee!
Hadji for the black kitty (‘cos he’s just like our boy at that age). 🙂
KITTIES!!!!! I dumped some silly name suggestions into your comment section.
That tabby, I just want to cuddle hir forever.
” “because everyone on the planet agrees that child abuse is bad””
If it were so. Using physical violence against children for punishment has long been generally accepted and still is legal in many places (only illegal in 34 countries).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporal_punishment_in_the_home
And a friend of mine has fallen in love with the gray one, and she’s in Pasadena. I’m trying to convince her that she NEEDS a kitty.
Everybody needs a kitty. Because a cat’s the only cat who knows where it’s at.
someone else commented about this but my story does seem to go along with this. My photo was stolen and used as a “dumb girl” who doesn’t understand healthcare. However, I have healthcare and it’s just fine. Not only did they steal my image, it’s mocking me. So far it’s been shared 10s of thousands of times. my post is here. http://www.heleneinbetween.com/2014/03/my-face-is-viral-meme.html
I don’t…get the last one. Are they telling women not to be prostitutes in spite of the fact that there’s a demand and they’ll make money?
Do they even have a *reason* to be anti-prostitution? Apparently the fact that it’s a job women do is enough to encourage women to stop? And isn’t trafficking–involuntary prostitution–a huge problem?
So, let me get this straight, “Women, stop being kidnapped and raped because that’s a woman’s job and you shouldn’t for inexplicable reasons!”
@talacaris: Most people are more against the concept of a bad thing than the specifics. Most people agree that racism is terrible, but carve out exceptions for anything less than the Nazis or KKK.
karak: The only way I can make sense of that poster is if it were made by a fan of Tom Martin.
@leftwingfox True. and that was one of the things the original campaign was pointing out re. rape (where many people carve out exceptions for anything else than an armed stranger jumping out of the bush)
How about just convincing her that she NEEDS to come visit the kitty?