Categories
a voice for men anne cools antifeminism antifeminist women Dean Esmay hetsplaining homophobia hypocrisy judgybitch misogyny MRA paul elam transphobia

Why is A Voice for Men giving a platform to one of Canada’s leading opponents of gay and lesbian rights? [UPDATED with AVFM response]

 

Gay marriage isn't a men's right, according to AVFM conference speaker Anne Cools
Gay marriage isn’t a men’s right, according to AVFM conference speaker Anne Cools

A Voice for Men likes to present itself as a voice for gay men as well as straight ones. In a recent post, site founder and chief fulminator Paul Elam declared that

We regard men as human beings, regardless of their sexuality. And most of us feel that this is the salve that heals what has in recent history been inflicted on gay men.

No mention of lesbians, but of course they’re women, and Elam does not seem to like women very much.

AVFM managing editor Dean Esmay, meanwhile, likes to present himself as a champion not only of gay men but of lesbians as well, boasting in one recent tweet that “I have been lesbian-supporting since the ’80s.”

So why is AVFM giving a platform to one of Canada’s most influential opponents of same-sex marriage  — and gay and lesbian rights in general?

Canadian Senator Anne Cools, one of the scheduled speakers at AVFM’s upcoming “Men’s Issues” conference in Detroit, has been a staunch opponent of same-sex marriage for decades.

Her objection? That only heterosexual marriage deserves legal protection because gay people can’t make babies – at least not with each other – thus making their interest in sex all about lust.

In a speech before the Canadian senate, she argued that

The public interest in marriage is reproduction, the continuation of the species, the offspring. There is no public interest in sex or the gratification of sexual impulses for their own sake. …

[L]ust, like all human passions, is not to be trusted. Lust and sex on their own have no public character and contain no public interest or public good. Marriage is about man and woman in a peculiar act of bringing forth offspring.

Never mind that plenty of stright couples don’t, or can’t, have kids. Or that some trans men can.

She’s not simply an opponent of same-sex marriage. Cools has consistently opposed other legislation designed to afford gays and lesbians the same basic rights as straight people — and the same legal protections as other victims of bigotry and discrimination.

She opposed adding “sexual orientation” to hate speech legislation, warning that doing so would expose “millions of Canadians…who hold moral opinions about sexuality, to criminal prosecution.” (Needless to say, the passage of the bill in question did not lead to millions of Canadians being rounded up and arrested.)

She also worried that adding “sexual orientation” to hate speech legislation would somehow – I don’t quite understand the logic – encourage the “depathologizing the paraphilias” and ultimately lead to children being “seduced” into dangerous sexual activities. Here’s her argument:

The fact of the matter is, honourable senators, that we discourage children from smoking cigarettes because tobacco is harmful. I would submit that we are talking about some sexual activities that are dangerous and life-threatening. The committee should have the moral courage to hear something of it. I have lost a lot of beloved friends to a variety of these conditions. I have made it my business to instruct myself. That is the first question. You can think about that.

Ms. Landolt, your concern that the term “sexual orientation” is so wide as to involve a wide range of sexual behaviours is well founded. I would like to put on the record here for this committee a document called the Journal of Homosexuality, particularly, volume 20 in 1990. The subject of the entire volume is pedophilia and male intergenerational intimacy, historical, social, psychological and legal perspectives. If you were to open up this text, the foreword is the debate on pedophilia, and the second article is “Man-Boy Relationships: Different Concepts for a Diversity of Phenomena.” It continues with “Pederasty Among Primitives and Institutionalized Initiation.”

She continued:

I want to know about these children out there and the impact that this is having on them, and, in addition to that, all of these children who are being seduced at youthful ages and who are discovering what is happening to them two or three years later. I have done a lot of counselling. I would like to get a greater picture of the problems out there for children on these grounds, because this sexual orientation debate is going on here as though children do not exist.

She also tried to raise the question of “the medical consequences to individuals who involve themselves in activities such as ‘rimming,’ … sado-masochism and so on.”

In explaining her opposition to adding sexual orientation ito the Canadian Human Rights Act, she offered a similar “slippery slope” argument:

The concern is that pederasts and paedophiles will advance claims to engage in adult/child sexual relationships as a matter of human rights; that claims will be advanced on the legal grounds that pederasty and paedophilia are sexual orientations having entitlements.

For more on her various backwards views, as well as the source of that last quote, see here.

On Twitter, I asked Esmay to explain why AVFM is providing a platform for a woman who opposes same-sex marriage. He hasn’t replied.

Another curious Twitterer asked the same question of Janet Bloomfield, the official spokeswoman for the upcoming AVFM conference. She handled the question with her usual (lack of) aplomb.

Alex McKenzie ‏@anArchaeopteryx 3h  @JudgyBitch1 The issue here is that there's a speaker at your conference who is against the rights of gay men. And you're PR, so I ask why.      Reply     Retweet     Favorite  JanetBloomfield ‏@JudgyBitch1 3h  @anArchaeopteryx Her views on shared custody are more relevant. We include a diverse array of speakers with different views @avoiceformen      Reply     Retweet     1 Favorite  Alex McKenzie ‏@anArchaeopteryx 3h  @JudgyBitch1 at a conference for <<men>>      Reply     Retweet     Favorite  JanetBloomfield ‏@JudgyBitch1 3h  @anArchaeopteryx That is not for you to decide @AVoiceForMen @deanesmay Discussion closed. Further tweets will be considered harassment

Apparently AVFM’s much vaunted “compassion for men and boys” doesn’t apply to gay men who want the same basic rights as straight men.

For more on AVFM’s tolerance of homophobia – and Elam’s notorious attack on one trans women, see here.

EDIT: After I put this post up, I decided to see if I might have better luck at getting answers from Bloomfield on Twitter. The conversation went about as well as could be expected. Remember, Bloomfield is AVFM’s offical “social media” spokeswoman for the conference.

 David Futrelle ‏@DavidFutrelle  @JudgyBitch1 Why is AVFM providing a platform for one of Canada's most influential opposents of gay rights? http://wp.me/p17cYK-3bW       Reply     Delete     Favorite  12:23 PM - 19 Jun 2014 Tweet text Reply to @JudgyBitch1       JanetBloomfield ‏@JudgyBitch1 20m      @DavidFutrelle Because she also one of Canada's most influential supporters of children and father's rights after divorce.     Details         Reply         Retweet         Favorite     David Futrelle ‏@DavidFutrelle 19m      @JudgyBitch1 So the fact that she's been actively campaigning against gay and lesbian rights for decades doesn't bother you at all?     Details         Reply         Retweet         1 Favorite         Delete     JanetBloomfield ‏@JudgyBitch1 15m      @DavidFutrelle I vigorously denounce the anti-gay rights agenda. I don't have to agree with 100% of her beliefs. She cares for men and boys     Details         Reply         Retweet         Favorite     David Futrelle ‏@DavidFutrelle 13m      @JudgyBitch1 If you denounce her agenda, will you publicly denounce her for pushing this agenda? If not, why not?     Details         Reply         Retweet         1 Favorite         Delete     David Futrelle ‏@DavidFutrelle 11m      @JudgyBitch1 If you don't want to be seen as endorsing her agenda, put out a statement explicitly denouncing her for supporting this agenda     Details         Reply         Retweet         Favorite         Delete     JanetBloomfield ‏@JudgyBitch1 11m      @DavidFutrelle You think Twitter is private? Of course I would, I know how to criticize respectfully. Don't always choose to though.     Details         Reply         Retweet         Favorite     David Futrelle ‏@DavidFutrelle 10m      @JudgyBitch1 Is she being paid for speaking at your conference, or being provided with lodging, transportation expenses, and so on?     Details         Reply         Retweet         Favorite         Delete     JanetBloomfield ‏@JudgyBitch1 9m      @DavidFutrelle None of your business @avoiceformen @deanesmay     Details         Reply         Retweet         Favorite     JanetBloomfield ‏@JudgyBitch1 9m      @DavidFutrelle You do not get a say.     Details         Reply         Retweet         Favorite     David Futrelle ‏@DavidFutrelle 9m      @JudgyBitch1 Well, let's hear you specifically, and officially, repudiate her for supporting a bigoted agenda.     Details         Reply         Retweet         1 Favorite         Delete     JanetBloomfield ‏@JudgyBitch1 8m      @DavidFutrelle I do not take orders from you. I don't take orders from anyone, actually.     Details         Reply         Retweet         Favorite     David Futrelle ‏@DavidFutrelle 7m      @JudgyBitch1 That's not the issue.The issue is whether AVFM supports Cools and her anti-gay agenda.If it doesn't, you should probably say so     Details         Reply         Retweet         1 Favorite         Delete     JanetBloomfield ‏@JudgyBitch1 6m      @DavidFutrelle This issue is closed. Any further tweets will be taken as harassment and you will be blocked.dfjb2dfjb3

I didn’t see her comment about harassment until after I tweeted a couple more times.

David Futrelle ‏@DavidFutrelle 15m  @JudgyBitch1 I'm not issuing orders.But if you don't want people to think AVFM supports her bigoted anti-gay agenda,you should repudiate her Details      Reply     Retweet     Favorite     Delete  David Futrelle ‏@DavidFutrelle 14m  @JudgyBitch1 Or at the very least issue a statement officially saying that AVFM opposes her anti-gay agenda. Details      Reply     Retweet     Favorite     Delete  JanetBloomfield ‏@JudgyBitch1 14m  @DavidFutrelle Go write a column about it, David. Get us even more press. We could use Canadian coverage. And good-bye. You were warned. Details      Reply     Retweet     Favorite  David Futrelle ‏@DavidFutrelle 13m  @JudgyBitch1 Would you have a racist speak at your conference if he or she supported your position on some other issue?

Some more bang-up public relations work from Ms. Bloomfield here.

 

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

504 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
brooked
brooked
6 years ago

It isn’t a child before birth. I trust that women, knowing that her sperm donor declines fatherhood, will make the right choice for herself…or better yet take/insist on better precautions before getting pregnant.

Wow, this is by far the most offensive 2cyar said here, which is amazing because I was infuriated and wildly offended by several of his earlier posts. Yes, you insufferable creep, I’m sure a father lawfully weaseling out of his parental responsibilities would encourage a woman to “make the right choice for herself”. And by right choice you mean have the abortion the father wants her to have or magically prevent all accidental pregnancy by willpower, apparently.

TTFN

Toodles, chucklefuck. Good luck to the next message board you assault with your monstrously vast ignorance, laziness and poor reasoning.

weirwoodtreehugger
6 years ago

I love how there’s an MRA on this thread arguing his right to abandon his kid while on the other thread an MRA in disguise as neutral female party is arguing that men are oppressed by losing custody.

Which is it?

Basically MRAs just think they should be able to what they want all the time without a thought to anyone else. It they want kids, women are required to birth them and then give them full custody. If they don’t want kids, women are required to get an abortion whether they want to or not.

fruitloopsie
fruitloopsie
6 years ago

2cyar

“It isn’t a child before birth. I trust that women, knowing that her sperm donor declines fatherhood, will make the right choice for herself…or better yet take/insist on better precautions before getting pregnant.”

It’s both the man and woman’s responsibility to take precautions. Even if they do take them they still have a chance to have a baby and it’s still their responsibility.

If I was a man and I got a woman pregnant I would help her and the baby as much as I possibly can, I could never abandon them. Being a single parent is hard. Me and that woman made that child so we are gonna to raise him/her together. I’m a woman so I can’t say I know how to be a man but I know how to be a responsible human being.

WWTH

“I’m not sure what of kind of fucking monster would want to let their own kid go hungry or homeless though. I wouldn’t even abandon my cats. You should feel bad about being such a terrible person. My own dad is great but I’ve known people with deadbeat dads and it’s caused them a lot of pain and insecurity. More evidence that MRAs don’t give a shit about human rights. You care for nobody but yourselves.”

Is it dehumanizing to call someone a ‘monster’? I mean saying that the person is acting like a monster is ok, right? And you’re right about everything else.

http://youtu.be/5Gu50vq5ux4

Marie, did I do everything ok?

Marie
Marie
6 years ago

@Fruit loopsie

Is it dehumanizing to call someone a ‘monster’? I mean saying that the person is acting like a monster is ok, right? And you’re right about everything else.

i would say no? It hasn’t really been used to oppress ppl, I think, or dehuamnize them

and sorry, I didn’t mean to sound like the mammoth police :3 You dn’t need to check with me every time, it just makes it a little easier to read when you use quotes. Which you did! Yay! 😀

fruitloopsie
fruitloopsie
6 years ago

@Fruit loopsie

“Is it dehumanizing to call someone a ‘monster’? I mean saying that the person is acting like a monster is ok, right? And you’re right about everything else.

i would say no? It hasn’t really been used to oppress ppl, I think, or dehuamnize them

and sorry, I didn’t mean to sound like the mammoth police :3 You dn’t need to check with me every time, it just makes it a little easier to read when you use quotes. Which you did! Yay! :D”

Please officer!! It was only just this once, I swear! I don’t want to go to jail! Lol 😀

marinerachel
marinerachel
6 years ago

What is this shit?

emilygoddess
emilygoddess
6 years ago

Straight men can marry, but they have no choice about whether they can stay that way.

IKR? Things were much fairer when women weren’t allowed to divorce their husbands. Once you say “I do” you should be trapped forever, amirite?

They can legally have sex, but are at risk of being called a rapist for doing so.

Only if they commit rape. Funny how the majority of men manage to have plenty of sex without ever being accused of rape…

Straight men are literally setting themselves on fire to protest their treatment if family court

Because they’re entitled, rage-filled babies who would rather die (and traumatize any number of onlookers, and deprive their children of their father) than endure the humiliation of attending even one anger management class. I have zero sympathy for Thomas Ball, and very little for people who idolize him.

Replace “gay men” with the word “men” and what you are saying is pretty much the same as how ALL men are portrayed in our society and one of the things that the MHRM is fighting against.

…so if she hated all men the way she hates gay men, she’d still be allowed to speak at the conference? What even is your argument here?

I am going to click on these links and educate myself.

Would it kill you to read up on a subject before you jump in and rabidly defend it and throw around “I suspects” and “ur so rude”s?

At some point it will become increasingly unfair to women and then they will be the ones who get rid of it.

Did you miss the last 50 years of feminism or?

cupisnique
6 years ago

“At some point it will become increasingly unfair to women and then they will be the ones who get rid of it.”

Funny how they can switch between women being too stupid and requiring the aid of men at all times to make decisions for them, etc. etc. But, when it suits their argument apparently men are helpless and society only caters to women’s demands, is this also because men are helpless when faced with the shapely bum of a female so as soon as we ask for something we just collectively shake our asses in front of male politicians or is there some feminist conspiracy where we really hold all the power and just pretend otherwise to continue reaping the benefits?

Argenti Aertheri
Argenti Aertheri
6 years ago

I was really, REALLY, hoping this ass would be banned before I caught up. But I see that that has not occurred.

Besides being furious about ALL THE THINGS, this one is extra sickening, cuz stats.

It isn’t a child before birth. I trust that women, knowing that her sperm donor declines fatherhood, will make the right choice for herself…or better yet take/insist on better precautions before getting pregnant.

So, he should get to decide, after she’s pregnant whether he’s going to support the kid she’s gonna birth? Assuming she doesn’t abort, which, apparently, is what she has to do if she can’t afford to be a single parent.

Ever heard of “reproductive coercion”? I’ll be back with stats, you shit on the shoe of humanity.

Argenti Aertheri
Argenti Aertheri
6 years ago

Not a large sample size, but I don’t feel like doing your homework — http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/16845768

Of the 34% of surveyed women who’d experienced reproductive coercion, ~30% said their partner had insisted on no birth control and then demanded she get an abortion.

This is wtf you’re supporting, a world where men are completely able, potentially encouraged, to sabotage birth control, and then tell her tough luck, guess you oughta get an abortion! Something that already happens with enough frequency for ~10% of women in that study to report it.

AND YOU WANT THIS TO BE COMPLETELY ACCEPTABLE!

You are the dog shit that humanity stepped in while cleaning out week old rotting fish shit while barefoot!

——

I missed the dog shit, narrowly, but HOLY FUCKING SHIT did the filter smell foul! Otoh, the tank is ready to be filled and cycled. Somewhere between a week and a month before I can get fish. And yes, there will be pictures!

Isabelle
Isabelle
6 years ago

“Of the 34% of surveyed women who’d experienced reproductive coercion, ~30% said their partner had insisted on no birth control and then demanded she get an abortion.”

Those are deplorable stats. I am just truly surprised as I was not expecting it to be so bad. Actually, I was thinking that reproductive coercion was such a rare event that it would be on par with albino lobster. Its hard to imagine there are still so many sick fucks roaming free.

LBT
LBT
6 years ago

RE: Marie (and Unimaginative)

I hope you have fun drawing the sketch :3

I did! Here it is!

RE: Ally

Also, are you cis? If so, then you don’t have a place in telling us trans women what our reasons are for using TERF.

Thank you. By that point, I was so angry about 2cyar that I know I wasn’t being coherent, and you basically summed up most of my grievance. Trans people, don’t call out cis feminists for their horrible transphobia, because you’ll wreck the movement! (Even though radical feminism has survived decades just fine despite having transphobes in their midst!)

RE: 2cyar

I’ve come to the conclusion that she is indeed a traditionalists but by no means the drooling hatemonger that she has been portrayed as here.

I am so shocked. Guys, look! 2cyar has kept to exact same opinion he had at the beginning, after asking us to do all his research for us! Look at that intellectual vigor, everyone! He totally knows what he’s talking about!

Grah.

Ally S
6 years ago

*and I know the term is trans exclusionary but a lot more of TERFs shit is directed to trans women, not just trans people in general.

That’s why sometimes I prefer to say TWEF/TWERF (trans woman-exclusionary (radical) feminism). Their views are inherently discriminatory towards trans men, obviously, but trans men frequently side with TWERFs because they benefit from TWERF narrarives of “female socialization”.

emilygoddess
emilygoddess
6 years ago

“Of the 34% of surveyed women who’d experienced reproductive coercion, ~30% said their partner had insisted on no birth control and then demanded she get an abortion.”

Correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t that mean that ~10% of women in general have experienced this particular form of reproductive coercion (refusing BC than demanding she abort)?

I know trolly or some other MRA is gonna come back with “forcing him to be a father is also reproductive coercion”, so I’m wonderinf if you found any stats on how common that is?

LBT
LBT
6 years ago

RE: Ally

Their views are inherently discriminatory towards trans men, obviously, but trans men frequently side with TWERFs because they benefit from TWERF narrarives of “female socialization”.

Yeah, they’re transmisogynistic as hell. I haven’t encountered much of anyone who shits on trans men and not trans women. GEE I WONDER WHY.

Argenti Aertheri
Argenti Aertheri
6 years ago

Emilygoddess — yeah, that works out to ~10% total. And everything I found in my quick search (and my memory if previous ones) was from women’s health centers, so nada on her using reproductive things to control him. All those studies though have a frighteningly high percent of women saying he’s insisted on sex without a condom // hid her pills // etc, etc, argh abusive partners are the WORST!

LBT
LBT
6 years ago

Eesh. My rapist tried to talk me into letting him fuck us without a condom. He even tried to give me tons of stats on the failure rates, insisting the pill would be way better and superior to condoms. (Never mind that I was fucking sixteen and good luck getting birth control pills at sixteen in fucking Texas without anyone noticing.)

Fortunately, THAT aspect of control, I did manage to maintain. I also managed to buy time because dude had had unprotected sex before with an untested partner and I insisted he get fucking tested.

politicalcynic
6 years ago

Funny thing about all this alleged homophobia in the MHRA.

As a gay man who is also a rape survivor, I have never had an MHRA or anyone associated with AVFM tell me to “shut up” or “stop crying” when I raise issues involving the sexual abuse of men. I’ve only had feminists do that.

As a gay man I have never had an MHRA use “gay shaming” tactics like saying “you must be a closet case” against me in any discussions. I’ve only seen feminists do that.

As a gay man, while there are individual issues I disagree with some in the MHRA on, I have NEVER been faced with the sort of doctrinal lockstep required of those who support feminism. To the contrary, I have watched as feminists and liberals alike have accused the Log Cabin republicans of being “self loathing closet cases” in an effort to silence conservative views from members of the gay community.

As a gay man, while I may disagree with some individual MHRAs on some issues, I have never had any of them attempt to silence me by insisting that I must adhere in lockstep to some monolithic ideology which seeks to silence those they disagree with. To the contrary, on the rare occasions when a commenter at AVFM has behaved in an appalling fashion, they have rapidly been corrected by Mr. Elam or Mr. Esmay.

As a gay man, the ONLY experiences I have ever had involving attempts to silence my views have come from feminists-including their ongoing efforts, like those of Mr. Futrelle, to silence the International Men’s Conference.

And for the sake of a full record, I would point out that the Twitter string Mr. Futrelle is referring to in this piece began when HE was asked if he rejected outright the statements of a large number of radical feminists who, among other things, support the castration and killing of up to 90 percent of the male population of the planet-and are on record as having said so. Mr. Futrelle responded with a diversion-asking about the Senator-and refused to answer the original question.

So at best this entire piece is nothing more than a specious attempt to divert attention from his own decision to support, at least through his silence, that part of feminism that supports committing gendercide-a proposal from which, by the by, they did NOT exempt gay men.

markxneil
6 years ago

Ones got to love the irony of a feminist who refuses to denounce their own kind spouting hateful stuff, like sheehy’s advocacy of murder as an alternative means of divorce, through use of claims of abuse, which should then not be investigated because …vagina, demanding the men’s rights group, which same said feminist attacks and slanders regularly with obvious misrepresentations, drop an influential figure in Canadian politics for to satiate same said feminist, due to same said feminists slandering that figure with obvious misrepresentations. The narcissistic self importance of such is truly astounding.

Given the frequency of the NAFALT deflection, feminists have absolutely no moral grounds to stand on in claiming anyone should denounce anyone else because they disagree on views. At least she openly denounced the anti gay rights agenda, which you claim she didn’t do. Most feminists will actively defend other feminists hateful rhetoric, while simultaneously claiming NAFALT. Double standards and hypocrisy are all you folk really have.

weirwoodtreehugger
6 years ago

Is Markxneil’s post total word salad or am I just drunk?

markxneil
6 years ago

@weirwoodtreehugger “Is Markxneil’s post total word salad or am I just drunk?”

Is this what constitutes an argument here? Let me put it is simple terms… I’m calling Futrelle a hypocrite, and you’re welcome to point me to a single article where he condemns the actions of feminist bigots, to prove me wrong. I’ve given you both the accusation AND the means of proving me wrong now. Lets see how many of you will attack me with ad homs and shaming language, when such a supposedly simple solution exists to discredit me, find me a single article where David does what he is condemning others for not doing.

kittehserf
6 years ago

What part of “mocking misogyny” do you not understand?

weirwoodtreehugger
6 years ago

Mark,
You’re going to first need to show that the level of “misandry” in feminism is equivalent to the level of misogyny in the MRM.

You’re also going to need to find us a non misogynistic MRA.

Good luck in your quest!

wewereemergencies
wewereemergencies
6 years ago

@politicalcynic I’m sorry you’ve had such terrible experiences with feminists, but I’m going to have to disagree with you on all your other points.

@mark, I’m pretty sure David did actually tweet a couple of times about denouncing the *very few* examples of hateful rhetoric by individual feminists and he certainly does it regularly on this blog. For example, all his coverage of the alleged death threats sent to the conference thingy said very explicitly that if the threats were real they were unacceptable.

More importantly, where have MRA’s denounced their *leaders’* hateful rhetoric?

Auntie Alias
Auntie Alias
6 years ago

@weirwoodtreehugger

More like anger salad. He’s an abusive, gaslighting rageaholic.

markxneil
6 years ago
Reply to  kittehserf

@Kittehserf AKA, got nothin.

@weirwoodtreehugger attempt to reverse the burden of proof. Futrelle is making an accusation against Cools and against the MRM for not denouncing her. I’m calling him a hypocrite because he doesn’t denounce feminists. What the MRM is or isn’t is irrelevant to the fact David does not do what he condemns others for not doing. I have to prove nothing about the MRM to demonstrate Futrelle for a hypocrite.

@wewereemergencies You’re pretty sure, but you offer no links. So, what, I’m supposed to take your word for it? And given the only evidence you can dig up is his denial of threats, as reported by the hotel (not the MRM), but if they did happen, not cool. Hardly a denouncement. And if a twitter assertion is sufficient, why then does judgies own denouement not count… It’s right up there in the images Futrelle posted.. she states openly: “I vigorously denounce the anti-gay rights agenda. I don’t have to agree with 100% of her beliefs”… which is way more than Futrelle has ever done.

“More importantly, where have MRA’s denounced their *leaders’* hateful rhetoric?”

Why the sudden change in criteria? Why does it now need to be “leaders” being denounced? Are you suggesting Cools is a “leader” among the men’s movement? I know that Paul himself, as well as JTO have both openly and repeatedly condemned the bigots at manhood academy (not that I consider them MRA’s, but I know you folk do). I also know they put up a bounty on information leading to the arrest of someone who allegedly assaulted a feminist (Danielle somethingorother from Queens university in Ontario). I know Paul regularly opposes MRA’s who speak about violence… you should know as much, you folk have used the very quote he used as an example of what would not be tolerated, from the very article he posted it in to assert such posts would lead to an instant ban, as an example of the hate the MRM promotes. So there are three examples of Paul himself doing what you folks seem unable to show a single example of Futrelle doing, in an article where Futrelle is condemning the men’s movement for not doing such.

I stand by my assertion that Futrelle is a hypocrite. I’m still waiting for a single link to an article where he denounces feminists for their hatred, as he expects the MRM to do (despite the fact they actually have.

Auntie Alias
Auntie Alias
6 years ago

P.S. Fuck off, Mark.

strivingally
6 years ago

Getting mad at David Futrelle for not denouncing radfemhub extremists is like getting mad at Jon Stewart for not denouncing anarchist terrorists. When someone’s position isn’t to represent a group, but to mock another group, you can’t pretend that they should be equally culpable for the extremist elements of their “side” as people who are actually held up as the faces of an organisation. That’s why we laugh at JB coming here and trading insults with David, and why Stephen Colbert gets so amused at people attacking his credibility – why are you going for the comedians and commentators?

markxneil
6 years ago

@Auntie Alias Why am I not surprised to see you here? And surprise surprise, ad hom attacks.

As to the twitter comment you linked to, seems to me he is more defending them than condemning them. In fact, if we use the same reasoning David uses, “Cools said some terrible things. She don’t deserve to be rejected and disgraced for it.” Judgy offered more condemnation when she said “I vigorously denounce the anti-gay rights agenda. I don’t have to agree with 100% of her beliefs”. Futrelle just acknowledge they said some bad things, but he didn’t denounce them, as he’s demanding of MRA’s.

Still waiting.

markxneil
6 years ago

@strivingally “Getting mad at David Futrelle for not denouncing radfemhub extremists is like getting mad at Jon Stewart for not denouncing anarchist terrorists.”

Who said anything about radfemhub? There are many prominent feminists that have said some truly horrible things… any one of which David could and should have denounced. Most of whom he has actually defended in his articles, once AVFM writes an article condemning them. Are you seriously going to try and assert that no feminist has said anything worth condemning and/or denouncing since Futrelle started this blog? Or are you just going to assert futrelle should be exempt from doing precisely what he condemns others for not doing (AKA hypocrite)?

Fibinachi
6 years ago

Sorry, that’s not how that works – you have to point out a specific instance (or general instances of) monstrous hatred by “feminists”.

I’ll give you a freebie, like, the old “kill 90 % of men” for instance.

And then you have to point out why the person in question isn’t denouncing that. If you just say “feminist hatred”, you’re being too broad, because it can’t ever be defined as something concrete. At the same time, there’s plenty of specific qoutations by actual people that people here find problematic. See the difference? Specific qoutations that someone disagrees with, versus some broad notion of “general hatred”

That’s how it works.

Oh, in any case.

https://wehuntedthemammoth.com/2011/02/15/factchecking-a-list-of-hateful-quotes-from-feminists/

Here, I’ll quote the relevant section.

It’s bizarre. How hard is it to find hair-raising quotes from Andrea Dworkin? Dworkin was so radical that most feminists disagree with her, sometimes violently. You could practically pick a sentence at random from almost any of her books and chances are good it would offend somebody — including me. A number of her writings are available online. How lazy and sloppy do you have to be to fuck up your Dworkin quotes like this?

So, yeah. That’s apparently David Futrelle pointing out he disagrees and finds offensive some words by Andrea Dworkin, noted feminist.

Are we done here now? Was there anything else?

wewereemergencies
wewereemergencies
6 years ago

@mark *poke* you’re being boring.

(also a) you’re on this website. look it up yourself & b) I wasn’t “changing the goalposts” – you’re asking David to denounce random people who identify as feminists, I’m asking why MRAs don’t denounce the people who have shaped their movement – if you can’t understand why, then you should probably stop trying to logic)

But mostly you should probably be more entertaining.

katz
6 years ago

Boooooooooooooooooooooooooooored.

Auntie Alias
Auntie Alias
6 years ago

The Twitter conversation was about RadFemHub. You know, Agent Orange and all that. If you see defense rather than condemnation, that’s your problem.

David is not the Might Feminist Gatekeeper you all make him out to be. You’re just pouting because he had a valid criticism of Anne Cools. Suck it up!

weirwoodtreehugger
6 years ago

attempt to reverse the burden of proof. Futrelle is making an accusation against Cools and against the MRM for not denouncing her. I’m calling him a hypocrite because he doesn’t denounce feminists.

Nope. You don’t get to make the claim that bigotry on the part of feminists is so self evident that we have to prove a negative. If you want to make the case that feminists are bigots, make the fucking case. Use citations. Make those citations recent and from mainstream feminist spaces.

It’s stupid for you to expect that David would denounce feminists as an entire group. Especially since he identifies as one. He has however always denounced threats of violence. No matter where they come from.

Do you really think you’re here with new arguments? Try harder.

Fibinachi
6 years ago

In case my little argument slipped by your head, I’ll be annoying now.

markxneil, how come you haven’t posted that you disagree with the politics of the Khmer Rouge? What are you, some kind of genocidal mass-murderer? And I’ve never seen you point out that you think mugging someone is wrong. That’s despicable! Your lack of a clear moral stance against mugging people randomly shows that you are nothing but a violence filled angry person. And also, I read a book at one point where someone said dragons were bad. I haven’t seen you, markxneil, ever say that dragons are good. Are you an anti-dragonist? That’s monstrous, man! Reptilian beings of awe-inspiring power are people too!
———

See how that doesn’t work at all?

Thanks. Now maybe stop playing this game. Bring something to the table. Come up with something “feminists” have said or written that is hateful, terrible or wrong (“kill 90 % of men”, “all men are nothing but animals”, “with the proper training a man can be taught to perform many basic tasks”), and then ask if David – or anyone – disagrees with this.

You’ll a), find the answer is probably yes and b) waste less of everyone’s time including your own.

Auntie Alias
Auntie Alias
6 years ago

*Mighty

cassandrakitty
cassandrakitty
6 years ago

Someone has a grudge against Auntie Alias.

I’m also a little confused as to why anyone would consider David responsible for things that were said on RadFemHub, a membership-restricted forum of which I’m pretty sure he wasn’t a member (which means he wouldn’t even have been able to read the stuff being said there until the whole Agent Orange fiasco happened).

Auntie Alias
Auntie Alias
6 years ago

@cassandrakitty

Mark and I are sworn enemies on Disqus.

markxneil
6 years ago

@Fibinachi “Sorry, that’s not how that works – you have to point out a specific instance (or general instances of) monstrous hatred by “feminists”.”

Actually, it is how it works, because I’m not asking you to point to him condemning a specific instance, I’m asking for you to demonstrate he’s ever done it, ever, even once. If I narrowed it down to a specific instance, you’d simply assert (rightfully) that he can’t be expected to go about condemning every instance of a feminist saying bad shit. See, you’re trying to set up a scenario where I would literally need to point out hundreds of examples of feminist hate, recent examples too, as of the start of his blog, at the latest, in order to cover all possible opportunities for him to have condemned a feminist, and even if I was to put is such a massive amount of work, you would simply dismiss it as tl;dr. This is really a dishonest tactic, and very transparent.

But you succeeded, more or less, in finding an example of what I’m talking about… of course, it is Dworkin, a feminist whose condemnation is feminist approved, and who is long dead, and thus, no threat to Futrelle himself. It’s a cowardly easy example to point to (and to listen to many feminists, not even a real feminist), but I’ll concede, you found a single example of him doing what he demands of others. Congrats. But I’ve listed 3 examples of Paul doing the same in actual articles (not in some snide remark in an FAQ). I’m curious, can you find the same?

As an aside, I point you to the comments of your fellow commentors… seriously, read them. Tell me their responses aren’t those of religious zealots defending their religious leader with unwavering devotion, completely immune to reason or any kind of opposing view. Only one even tried to meet the challenge, and failed misserably.

cassandrakitty
cassandrakitty
6 years ago

(Points up)

This comment is extra funny given the fact that some of us called David out for responding less than perfectly to sexist trolls, what, a week ago? And then he apologized, and made plans to handle similar situations differently in the future.

It’s almost like Mark has no idea what he’s babbling about.

markxneil
6 years ago

Auntie Alias “Mark and I are sworn enemies on Disqus.”

WOW. You view me as an “enemy”? That’s a bit disturbing. “Enemy” seems a rather emotionally invested, don’t you think? You’re just not that important to me, cupcake. You just post so much it’s almost impossible not to reply to you occasionally.

Auntie Alias
Auntie Alias
6 years ago

So, Mark, are you attending the Greatest Human Rights Conference of All Time?

weirwoodtreehugger
6 years ago

Ffs Mark. If you are so certain feminists are saying hateful things, why can’t you come up with an example?

Fibinachi
6 years ago

@markxneil:

Sorry, I just still don’t understand what this particular exercise is supposed to accomplish.

s this what constitutes an argument here? Let me put it is simple terms… I’m calling Futrelle a hypocrite, and you’re welcome to point me to a single article where he condemns the actions of feminist bigots, to prove me wrong. I’ve given you both the accusation AND the means of proving me wrong now. Lets see how many of you will attack me with ad homs and shaming language, when such a supposedly simple solution exists to discredit me, find me a single article where David does what he is condemning others for not doing.

and

Ones got to love the irony of a feminist who refuses to denounce their own kind spouting hateful stuff, like sheehy’s advocacy of murder as an alternative means of divorce, through use of claims of abuse, which should then not be investigated because …vagina, demanding the men’s rights group, which same said feminist attacks and slanders regularly with obvious misrepresentations, drop an influential figure in Canadian politics for to satiate same said feminist, due to same said feminists slandering that figure with obvious misrepresentations. The narcissistic self importance of such is truly astounding.

Given the frequency of the NAFALT deflection, feminists have absolutely no moral grounds to stand on in claiming anyone should denounce anyone else because they disagree on views. At least she openly denounced the anti gay rights agenda, which you claim she didn’t do. Most feminists will actively defend other feminists hateful rhetoric, while simultaneously claiming NAFALT. Double standards and hypocrisy are all you folk really have.

but

Actually, it is how it works, because I’m not asking you to point to him condemning a specific instance, I’m asking for you to demonstrate he’s ever done it, ever, even once. If I narrowed it down to a specific instance, you’d simply assert (rightfully) that he can’t be expected to go about condemning every instance of a feminist saying bad shit. See, you’re trying to set up a scenario where I would literally need to point out hundreds of examples of feminist hate, recent examples too, as of the start of his blog, at the latest, in order to cover all possible opportunities for him to have condemned a feminist, and even if I was to put is such a massive amount of work, you would simply dismiss it as tl;dr. This is really a dishonest tactic, and very transparent.

But you succeeded, more or less, in finding an example of what I’m talking about… of course, it is Dworkin, a feminist whose condemnation is feminist approved, and who is long dead, and thus, no threat to Futrelle himself. It’s a cowardly easy example to point to (and to listen to many feminists, not even a real feminist), but I’ll concede, you found a single example of him doing what he demands of others. Congrats. But I’ve listed 3 examples of Paul doing the same in actual articles (not in some snide remark in an FAQ). I’m curious, can you find the same?

As an aside, I point you to the comments of your fellow commentors… seriously, read them. Tell me their responses aren’t those of religious zealots defending their religious leader with unwavering devotion, completely immune to reason or any kind of opposing view. Only one even tried to meet the challenge, and failed misserably.

But I’ve just demonstrated he did it. So… are we done here?

I mean, I wasn’t trying to coyly manipulate you into giving me a list and then be able to go “But of course you can’t expect everyone to know this list!” – I just literally thought this was how this kind of thing was done, that if you said someone hadn’t said a word against hatred you had to point out what hatred it was they hadn’t spoken against.

I apologize if that’s not how that works. And then, if that’s not how that works, I want to know why you’re not speaking out against anti-dragonists or the Khmer Rouge. :b

Anyway, I won’t play your game. You can’t move the goal post after the goal has been accomplished. There’s an example of the person in question speaking out against “feminist hatred” by voicing disagreement with another feminists, and that’s it. Asking me to find more examples now that I’ve found one just means you’re trying to bait me into playing an endless game of catching up to your changing standards of acceptability. Which is, what was that, dishonest and somewhat transparent.

Anyway! Was there something else you wanted or want to talk about?

Oh, and finally, my opinion on the religiousity of my “fellow” commentators is hardly relevant to the point at hand.

strivingally
6 years ago

Circular reasoning 101: we cite an example of a feminist who we don’t agree with and renounce the views of. Mark claims that person’s condemnation is “feminist approved”. No True Feminist?

@Mark: pick a feminist thought leader. Seriously, pick one. Who’s a current, mainstream feminist who is anywhere near as extreme as the hateful jerks who put out bounties on women’s personal information and boast about how they want to hurt women? Trying to hedge by assuming we’ll claim they’re a special case is dodging the issue. Holding yourself and us to differing standards of argument is the worst kind of intellectual dishonesty.

brooked
brooked
6 years ago

@politicalcynic

And for the sake of a full record, I would point out that the Twitter string Mr. Futrelle is referring to in this piece began when HE was asked if he rejected outright the statements of a large number of radical feminists who, among other things, support the castration and killing of up to 90 percent of the male population of the planet-and are on record as having said so. Mr. Futrelle responded with a diversion-asking about the Senator-and refused to answer the original question.

I’m going to disagree with your claim that it’s David who is the one using the diversion since the Agent Orange file has been around for a lot longer than this conference, so it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to suddenly demand that David immediately make a comment about it now. How long has Cools been an announced speaker of the upcoming conference? AVFM is paying Cools and are featuring her at their conference while David doesn’t know those Radfem Hub posters at all.

Also, gave you seen the ridiculous amount of unorganized screen shots that the Agent a Orange guy threw at David? David was able to highlight the homophobic statements of Cools in a readable, straight forward manner, probably because he’s a journalist and not a rage-fueled crank.

markxneil
6 years ago

“If you are so certain feminists are saying hateful things, why can’t you come up with an example?”

I did. I pointed to Sheehy’s advocating murder as an alternative to divorce, based purely on an accusation of abuse which would then remove any need for an investigation.

I’ve also pointed out why demanding I point to such examples is a dishonest tactic, and exactly how you’ll respond, IE, that Futrelle can’t be expected to police the entire feminist movement. It is for that reason that I was willing to accept ANY example of him doing such. It’s telling that you feminists so frequently are willing to use the NAFALT deflection (but when men use it, you point to poisoned bowls of M&M’s), but demand MRA’s openly condemn ever other MRA YOU don’t personally agree with. Even when those you don’t agree with aren’t even MRA’s (PUA’s aren’t MRA, nor is manhood Academy, yet you lump us all together and demand we take responsibility for each others actions, while flinging the NAFALT at any criticism of feminism.). You hold others to a higher standard than you hold yourselves, and that double standard and self importance is obvious to everyone outside your hive mind. It’s why the MRM is growing exponentially, and feminism is sinking like the rat infested ship it is. And you lot know it, it’s why your all huddled around futrelle’s propaganda machine, hoping it will save you. I’m done here. Enjoy your echo chamber.