Woah! Just wanted to pass along this news from the Motor City Muckraker:
A controversial conference for a men’s rights group in Detroit appears to be in jeopardy after a fallout with downtown’s Hilton DoubleTree, which planned to host the event from June 26-28.
The inaugural conference at the DoubleTree has been canceled for unknown reasons, and organizers of the first International Conference on Men’s Issues haven’t said yet whether it will be moved to another hotel and conference center.
“At this time, they are not booked with us,” Larry Brown, manager of the DoubleTree, said this morning. He declined to elaborate on the cancelation.
There’s nothing on A Voice for Men about this latest development, though Esmay hinted during his Fox News appearance that they were possibly going to reconsider the Doubletree. But as of right now, AVFM is still selling tickets, as if the Doubletree convention is still a going concern.
Are they going to try to book the convention elsewhere? Or are they going to take the $29,000 they raised for “security” and, I dunno, send Esmay to a better stylist?
One other, ah, interesting detail in the Motor City Muckraker story:
When asked Tuesday whether the event would be moved, an organizer responded: “The DoubleTree GM (general manager) actually said that he has ‘feminist phobia’ and sort of laughed but in a nervous way. So its being discussed.”
It’s questionable whether this conversation ever occurred because the general manager is a woman.
Yeah. Seems like a lot of things about this convention have been pretty questionable from the start.
UPDATE: Well, one thing’s a bit clearer now, though. I called the Detroit Police and they confirmed that the Doubletree did indeed report to them that it had received threats. Who sent them, we still don’t know, but I think we can all agree that whether the threats came from some misguided feminist or “progressive” or from an MRA trying to stir shit and make feminists look bad, whoever made the threatening calls is a shithead who deserves to face the legal consequences for what they did.
UPDATE 2: According to the Detroit News, Elam says they’ve got another venue:
“We have scheduled another venue and will make an announcement on the site this evening,” group founder Paul Elam said in an email Wednesday.
So far no announcement on AVFM; I’ll post about it when there is one.
And I see I am late to the party.
Can’t say as I’m sad to see the back of him. tedious is as tedious does.
I’ll dig up the new thread to talk about my thoughts on banning.
I’m sorry Ally S. was subjected to that. I’ve spent a chunk of my morning reading this thread.
I think most of the regulars here handle trolls pretty, well, handily. But then, I am not triggered by them. I come here as an antidote/reality check for the PUA stuff I read. I’m a woman and a moderator (one of many) for a website where people talk about their relationships. It has led me to read a lot of stuff about love, marriage, dating, etc. Some of the “how to attract women” stuff I’ve read sounds just like Alejandro.
I trust David and the “regulars” who know the site best will hit on the right thing to do. On “my” website we warn people before banning; we have a “show respect to others”,community rule. But every once in a while someone is just so outrgaeously offensive they get banned immediately. It’s a case by case judgment call.
And here we have a perfect example of why banning people as soon as they make their first rapey comment is a good idea, because if that doesn’t happen they always make more. Always.
Waay late to the party here (internet issues, plus overtime at work). Virtual hugs to Ally if wanted, and to anyone else who was triggered by that piece of shit.
Glad Alejandro was banned, but to address some of the things he said: Assholejandro, I am a woman who likes dominant men when it comes to sexuality, yet them asking is in no way a turn off for me. Why? Because a simple “You okay?” makes me feel safe enough with him to be submissive and trust that he won’t hurt me. Besides, certain questions are super fucking sexy, and any of my consensual sex partners could tell you what my answers were and that they were loud and clear.
Also? I don’t particularly care for men who are are dominant outside the bedroom. If anything, men who talk over me and dominate the conversation and don’t take no for an answer convince me they’d be shit at sex at best and rapists at worst. The kinkiest sex I’ve ever had was with a man who talked to me like a person, didn’t make assumptions, and was even a little apologetic. Hell, I initiated the first kiss! And now our sex has involved him restraining me in ways that would have made me freak the fuck out if anyone else had tried it (even someone I was already having sex with), but with him it’s incredibly hot. In short, you’re full of shit. You know nothing about actual real women. Now that you’re banned, may you mansplain your ass over a thousand mile field of legos.
And I like men who’re submissive sexually, but not socially. It’s almost like women are individual people with unique preferences or something.
@Cassandra per your first sentence, so are men! It’s almost like this alpha/beta, dominant/submissive thing is bullshit!
Why are you such a misandrist, Alejandro?
@ emilygoddess
I know! Men who prefer dominant women (sexually and/or socially), they exist. Also, some people are not straight! But one step at a time, don’t want to confuse the poor dear with too much new information at once.
Do you think if he gets too much new information he’ll pop like a balloon? I wanna try.
I’m a subby guy, and so far, y’all have yet to run me out on a splintery rail. I seem to do just fine socially too!
But then again, I’m a poodle, so obviously I should feel shame.
Shadow Nirvana, which Cracked article to which do you refer? There was no link. You can just post the title and I’ll JGI, thx!
The furrinati have started their domination:
http://youtu.be/ExZ0i04pSeY
THIS. Whenever I see rapey types doing the “women like dominant men” shit, I’m quite sure they don’t mean just in bed; oh no, they mean women like men who are domineering shitfaces.
TMI: Not being into kink*, I don’t use the terms dominant or submissive. It’d be really jarring to frame Louis’s and my relationship that way; the words have the wrong connotation for me, in that context. Even if it is more about one person taking the lead, or being more active and the other more passive on a given occasion, the idea that domination comes into it squicks me out (again, can’t stress too much that this is not about anybody else’s pleasures or definitions!)
*Does knitwear count?
ROFL she’s lucky she didn’t get gouged shoulders from that leap!
I parse the statement “women like dominant men” as “women like abusive men” because that’s what they actually mean by the word “dominant”.
I parse it as “women like whatever I want them to like”.
Oh hey look, it’s another Lundy Bancroft quote!
Contrary to what some abusive men seem to
believe, women do not find abuse sexy. When a
woman’s partner calls her “bitch” or “whore,”mocks her, or physically intimidates her, the
image of entwining herself intimately with him
recedes far from her mind. How can you “make
love” after someone has just treated you in a way
that feels more like hatred? Abusive men do not
grasp how ugly they appear when acting cruel.
So why are his feelings so different? Does
abuse turn him on? Perhaps. Some men do appear
to find abuse arousing, probably because they
associate sexuality with domination.
Soooo basically the trope that all women like “dominant” (often used by these assholes to mean ‘abusive’) men is basically a trope used by abusers to justify their abuse. What a shock!
Im so sorry ally s 🙁 here are my presents to you and also to everyone else who had to deal with Alejandro.
http://www.cherrybam.com/hugs-and-kisses-comments.php
I wish we could do more than just ban awful cads.
I’m sorry I used the word ‘sociopath’ in my other post I didn’t know it was a mental condition I’ll won’t use it again.
YES to all of the above. That’s why I find the term dominant such a turn-off: outside the specific BDSM usage, it is code for abusive and controlling.
Cad, now there’s a term that should be revived!
Yup. It dovetails nicely with the complaint that women only like “bad boys”: women like abusive men, so if you become one, women will like you too.
And if by any chance you encounter a woman who doesn’t like abusive men, there must be something wrong with her.
TMI-ish?
———–
The term “dominant” makes me uncomfortable as well in that context, and I’m a lesbian. I prefer to think in very vaguely defined terms of passivity. As in, for instance, I prefer to be hugged rather than to hug someone. And I mean this in the context of a very balanced and egalitarian relationship, not one with predefined roles.
I parse the statement “women like dominant men” as “get away from me now as I am at the very least an obnoxious Nice Guy and at worst an abusive asshole”
^ What Ally said.
Though the hugs are pretty much both-at-once for us. 😉
Also what wewereemergencies said!
I know this is old, but I saw it mentioned Diana Davison and I just wanted to post a comment made to her when she did a vlog about rape being funny:
What excuse was made, and what reality is being “covered”? All I did was apologize for shitty behavior that wasn’t relevant to the argument. The thing is, I don’t care if you care about my opinion. You have been responding again and again to my comments, so I apparently didn’t have to wait two months. You attempt to make me feel irrelevant, but, see, you have it twisted. I don’t need to have a social media channel with followers who like me in order for me to feel whole, or offer me an infinite source of narcissistic supply. I don’t need to put pictures of myself out there to advertise. I am an academic, I am published, I am a mother – I am pretty fucking relevant to those who matter in my world.
I judge based on someone’s character – I don’t make sweeping generalizing statements like “women [add some inane opinion about what have you]”. Shit comes in both genders, all creeds, colors, ethnicities, and is not reserved for one demographic. Saying that someone fails as a human for laughing at someone else”s pain, especially if that act can possibly ruin that individual for a lifetime is an opinion, but one that a majority of decent people would agree with. I guess you might find it humorous that an elderly cardinal forced himself on young boys and young men for the better part of 24 years in PA, or Steubenville, or the cases where elderly women are viciously raped during in home invasions, and I am sure you aren’t alone. And among those who laugh with you are probably those who also laugh at lynchings, which still happened up through the 1980s, or better yet tar and feathering (because at least that didn’t always end in death), or laugh at collective casualties of war, or the homeless, or pretty much any situation in which someone suffers, because hey, that controversial shit gets me noticed – and why not, it’s funny right. Yeah, I guess. So long as it’s not happening to you.