Categories
a voice for men harassment misogyny MRA

DON'T protest the AVFM Conference in St. Clair Shores, say the organizers of original June 7th action

The June 7th protest. Original photo by Steve Nealing;  click on pic for more.
The June 7th protest. Original photo by Steve Nealing; click on pic for more.

Keep your distance from A Voice for Men’s conference at its new location in St. Clair Shores.

That’s the basic message the organisers of the original June 7th protest against the AVFM conference want to get out to anyone thinking of  protesting the conference this Friday and Saturday. In an open letter posted on Amanda Levitt’s Fat Body Politics, the original organizers urge would-be protesters to boycott the conference and stay out of St. Clair Shores.

While the original organizers reaffirm their opposition to the conference and to “the horrific and vile hatred that A Voice for Men spreads on their website,” they are concerned about the safety of anyone who might be considering protesting:

We have had numerous people reach out to us to let us know of the very real danger we could be in by protesting. Due to concerns for physical safety we have decided the best way to oppose the conference that is now going on in St. Clair Shores is to keep our distance. With AVFM’s history of attempting to provoke protestors, harassing individuals by following them to their cars or home, and filming or photographing them in order to release their private information online we don’t feel that protesting at the VFW hall could keep people reasonable safe.

While there may be others who decide to protest the conference, we want to make it perfectly clear that there are real concerns for safety. If you are planning to protest the conference, please make sure the people who are coming are informed enough about the kind of vicious tactics that AVFM has used to derail and trivialize the response to their own ideology.

Be in solidarity with us this weekend as we ensure the safety of our organizers and other protesters by tweeting to #NoMRA about why this conference and the beliefs of AVFM shouldn’t be tolerated.

Emphasis added.

I should say that I agree with this approach: DON’T protest AVFM’s Conference in St. Clair Shores this weekend. Speak out against AVFM’s misogyny, and against its efforts to intimidate its critics — on social media and any other way you can.

But unless you are covering the conference as a journalist, don’t go to St. Clair Shores. Not only do you risk being doxxed and harassed by AVFM and its supporters, but you also will be giving AVFM what it wants: a confrontation, and yet another excuse to play the victim.

Make no mistake: AVFM and its supporters want to see protesters at their conference this weekend. Don’t give them what they want.

You will be far more effective critic of AVFM if, instead of confronting them in person, you speak up online, through letters to the editor, and by spreading the word in other peaceful ways that don’t involve actually going to the conference.

I don’t personally oppose AVFM’s conference taking place, but I think it’s very important to show the world what AVFM, its supporters, and its invited speakers really stand for.

I urge you to do what you can to publicize the video I helped to put together in collaboration with Mancheeze.com that highlights the hatefulness of a number of those scheduled to speak at AVFM’s conference– link to it, embed it on your blog, whatever you can do.

You can also help to spread the word by posting the graphic I’ve pasted in below, after the jump, which collects together the statements quoted in the video. You can click on it for a larger version.

W1zg80i

 

185 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
tinyorc
10 years ago

@girlscientist, actually I think this is a perfect example of the kind of world they are actually hoping for: http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/a-dystopian-future-where-women-are-playthings-1.1843689

New near-future dystopia novel by an Irish writer:

O’Neill’s gripping debut novel [is] set in a terrifying future in which girls are brought up in schools where they are prepared for the only three options available to women: a companion, or totally submissive wife, to a man their own age; a concubine, who will spend her life sexually servicing men; or a chastity, who will teach the next generation of girls.

Of course, for the misters, that’s Utopia with a captial U.

Kevin Kehres
10 years ago

I’m just glad I won’t have to change my plans to ignore the conference.

Howard Bannister
10 years ago

But this goes back to their hypocrisy: soldiers and fire-fighters are oppressed as they do more dangerous jobs, which women don’t due to their lady privilege, but they’re also masculine heroes who we ought to admire for their willing courage.

Don’t forget that they want to block women from the roles of soldiers and firefighters too; the picture isn’t quite complete without that.

Fnoicby
Fnoicby
10 years ago

@Auntie Alias, that vice article is too, too much. I think it’s pretty safe to say that is what JB was bragging about running off to the phone for. *snicker*

magnesium
magnesium
10 years ago

It reminds me of their outrage over acknowledging women as victims of warfare. Interestingly, they seem shocked – shocked – that losing your husband and children might be psychologically traumatic, and feel inclined to prove that having your leg blown off is a worse fate. Personally, I think most caring individuals would sacrifice their own leg to keep their loved ones safe. And that’s before we get into the war crimes that have targeted women for centuries.

They also seem complete unaware of, you know, the (often as high or even higher than soldier casualties) number of women and children who make up civilian casualties in wars. It’s a benefit of living relatively privileged lives in the developed world, I guess, that most people seem to imagine some magical “battlefield” where all the burly men go off to fight, while the women and children are all safe at home in their beds. Rather than the reality of wars happening in heavily populated areas where civilians are maimed, killed, captured, or enslaved.

This delusion tends to go hand in hand with the whole “women and children have never worked in factories or dangerous jobs” fantasy.

Isabelle
Isabelle
10 years ago

Or they are just completely ignorant that during WW2, the ally with the highest casualties (25 millions) were the Russians and they had women in every positions in the military. That is without counting the civilian resistance as in the siege of Stalingrad. There are a lot of other historical examples of women involved actively in war, that is just the one that came to mind from the top of my head.

Argenti Aertheri
Argenti Aertheri
10 years ago

Cassandra — …but I kinda like Vice…

On topic…yep, my plan stands intact — ignore it, mock them here and with friends.

katz
10 years ago

the siege of Stalingrad

You’ve got your -grads crossed. Leningrad was under siege. Stalingrad was fought over but not besieged. /pedantry

girlscientist
girlscientist
10 years ago

@tinyorc: I know that. But if they actually believed what they say they do (i.e. compassion for men and boys), then they would applaud this woman. They won’t, because they don’t care, and they hate her for standing up to a mob of angry men. But they should.

Auntie Alias
Auntie Alias
10 years ago
Flying Mouse
Flying Mouse
10 years ago

I wonder if they put up the strands of Christmas lights and streamers themselves, or if they were already there.

Isabelle
Isabelle
10 years ago

@katz

Thanks for the correction 🙂 caught in flagrant fact checking dereliction of duty which becomes necessary as old age sets in. Oh Memory, where are thou?

Auntie Alias
Auntie Alias
10 years ago

@Flying Mouse

I suspect they were already there. I love the caption under the last photo: “Not 300 attendees.”

Flying Mouse
Flying Mouse
10 years ago

I still like the visual of the all the AVfM-ers on step ladders, trying to make everything all prettified.

Auntie Alias
Auntie Alias
10 years ago

Hehehe. From the “Things MRAs Would Never Do” file.

Isabelle
Isabelle
10 years ago

wow…no wonder they were offering free tickets. Maybe they could use the security money to pay people to attend? Next they’ll excuse the lack of attendance to protesters not showing up.

marinerachel
marinerachel
10 years ago

Are there even twenty people?

Isabelle
Isabelle
10 years ago

@auntie alias

” I love the caption under the last photo: “Not 300 attendees.”

Me too 🙂 :

http://i.imgur.com/2IKf3Hn.jpg

marinerachel
marinerachel
10 years ago

It’s really hard to take these guys seriously about anything in light of that turnout. We are to believe they relocated to accommodate more guests. Obviously, they didn’t sell enough tickets to be concerned about capacity. We are to believe there was sufficient risk to require $20,000 worth of additional security. As we see though, they were pretty secure on account of this being a very intimate gathering without any opposition present.

So what the hell did attendees and donators spend their money on? I’m pretty sure kid birthday parties are costlier to throw than that event. What will the return on their investment be?

jared
jared
10 years ago

Great so far so good. If the attendance is as dismal today and tomorrow which are full days there, Elam and Esmay will panic and do some type of damage control. Now we know all their talk for a couple of months now how all these manosphere men are going to be there, was one big lie and falsity. The lie will be confirmed by tomorrow if another pic of an empty vfw hill is shown. Keeping my fingers crossed.

Toolbox
Toolbox
10 years ago

I’m actually embarrassed for them. Let’s see how they twist it – no doubt those (unconfirmed) feminist death threats scared them away.

LBT
LBT
10 years ago

Wow, what a shock. Who could have predicted that such a poorly run con would’ve attracted so few people? Look at my shock. Look at it, I say.

RE: marinerachel

I’ll just experience what it is not to have breasts. I want to know that feel.

It was one of the smartest decisions I’ve ever made, but you know, that’s just me. *snrk* I still sometimes just pat my chest and grin because AHAHAHA NO BOOBS.

Falconer
Falconer
10 years ago

http://blogs.metrotimes.com/news-blawg/molested-mens-rights-conference/

There are pics of the near-empty hall.

From the article:

Farrell then told an anecdote where he met a man who was depressed by the fact that he couldn’t take time off from his job to be with his son — he was afraid to ask his wife if that was a possibility. It was only after talking to this man for an hour that Farrell realized he was talking to John Lennon.

One of the leaders of the MRA movement didn’t recognize a Beatle. And to think some people criticize the MRAs for being out of touch with the real world.

Does Farrell seriously expect me to believe Lennon couldn’t schedule time off to see his son? Nope, gotta get that Ono hate in there.

Falconer
Falconer
10 years ago

Oh, and if you follow the link — some guy comes up to the reporter and won’t stop petting his arms. Seriously creepy.

weirwoodtreehugger
10 years ago

I didn’t like how that blog drew a false equivalency between feminists and MRAs. Yet another writer who didn’t do his research but instead related to frustration over white cis straight men being blamed for all the world’s problems. Boo hoo. Cry me a fucking river.

It was funny to read the MRAs in the comments section. They treated the blog like an anti-MRA hit piece despite the fact that the blogger went into it pretty sympathetic to them. It was the MRAs themselves that put him off. Not the evil gynocracy. They also came to the conclusion that he was lying about being sexually harassed. Even though they claim to care about male victims and complain that they aren’t taken seriously. Given the opportunity to take a male victim seriously, they throw it away and accuse him of lying.

Sad and pathetic all around. At least one more person learned that the MRM does not care about the victims of sexual violence no matter what gender they are. What they really want is the right to sexually harass and rape without consequences.