Heh. I’m on my annual semi-vacation this week, and was planning on keeping my postings here fairly light. But the news waits for no one. And by “news” I mean the daily parade of ridiculousness coming from the Men’s “Human Rights” camp. So here’s a quick report on the latest bit of high irony involving A Voice for Men.
Well, I was wrong. I’ve often noted that the Men’s Rights movement in general, and A Voice for Men in particular, doesn’t actually provide any real help for any real men. Sure, as far as I can tell, precisely zero of the hundreds of thousands of dollars A Voice for Men has raised from donors over the years has gone into providing actual services for men — say, funding a hotline for troubled men or some other practical program that doesn’t primarily involve yelling at women online. But never let it be said that none of this money gods to help men.
Because, it turns out, that money has been going to help men. Or at least that subset of men that consists of one Paul Elam of Houston Texas.
After being pressed for details about A Voice for Men’s finances by anonymous commenters on Reddit, a certain Twitterer named @DavidFutrelle and a journalist from MSNBC, Elam has finally fessed up and admitted that all the money donated to his website goes directly to him. But don’t take my word for it. Here’s what Elam had to say in a post from yesterday:
Every dollar donated goes right into my pocket. I spend that money on this website and on activist efforts at my own discretion, considering the opinions of the AVFM management team that volunteers to help run this place. … I depend on the site for my living, and to do as much FTSU as possible while I am at it.
In the past, of course, Elam was a bit more, well, elusive about where the money was going, talking about the costs of paying for web hosting and stock images rather than, say, the costs of paying the mortgage of one Paul Elam. Maybe “elusive” isn’t the correct word. “Deceptive” might be more like it.
You may also recall this pitch he once made for donations (I’ve put the best parts in bold):
I am tired of seeing a comparative handful of men and women cough up the lion’s share of financial assistance when most, even some who come here every day to read and cheer on FTSU, won’t cough up five fucking dollars to help us out; who are just fine as long as none of the burden, even a trivial part of it, is on them. …
[T]he longer I am at this, the less patience I have with dead weight, those who think AVFM is a fucking source of entertainment, or a life preserver for when the tables finally, inevitably turn against them.
In a way, I feel even worse now for most of the men who will make contact with AVfM looking for that lifeline. Unless their story is one that has the potential for me to exploit and gain media attention to THE CAUSE, then all I will have for them is a link to this article.
Well, and perhaps this piece of advice.
If the system has ruined your life, join the club. You are now in the ranks of men you have ignored your whole life. My advice to you is simple. Take your fucking quietly and with grace. Expect the same compassion you have always extended to those men who wore the shoes you are now wearing.
If you want things to change, then stock up on Ramen, get cozy in your studio apartment and join us in the fight to fix this shit. Don’t ask us to help you, but rather give your life the only meaning it may have left, as someone ready and willing to turn your meager existence into helping others who have been similarly screwed over.
In other words, Elam told troubled men turning to his site for help that they should stock up on Ramen noodles — and pay his bills. Oh, and on several occasions he’s boasted about taking donations from people taking the money from their unemployment checks.
As for the other people who put in so much time and energy at his site? As far as I can figure it from Elam’s evasive post yesterday, they earn nothing but a “thanks.”
At the end of each day, even with the incredible levels of help I get from people like Dean Esmay, David King, Al Martin and every one of the incredible people who work at AVFM, I am still target number one. I am a target for feminists posing as concerned MHRAs, yellow hacks like David Futrelle, and a target for many in the media who would love nothing better than to publish my personal financial information after putting their disgusting spin on it.
As you might have gathered from that quote, Elam remains indignant that anyone would even ask where the money goes.
And that goes for the money he recently raised that was supposedly earmarked to pay the security costs of AVFM’s conference. About that, he says only:
we hired four police officials (three officers and one supervisor) for coverage of the entire event and also hired a local attorney, paying his retainer in advance. We also had to engage our regular attorney, and have not yet been billed for their services.
In effect, we spent the money raised on precisely what we said we would spend it on, and have set aside what little remained for the next conference.
Really? According to costhelper.com, off-duty police officers generally cost $40-60 an hour; this Sheriff’s department puts the costs at $27-$31 an hour for each of its officers, including administrative fees. Even assuming that AVFM paid at the top of this range — $60 an hour — it would have cost them only $7200 to pay for four officers working ten hours each of the three days of the conference.
The amount that AVFM might have paid for legal fees depends on how much their lawyers charge per hour, and how many hours they worked. Assuming each lawyer charged $200 per hour and worked thirty hours over the three days of the conference — which I highly doubt — the cost for their legal assistance would have added up to $12,000. If AVFM actually paid even half that for legal fees I will eat my cats.
Even with these extremely generous assumptions, AVFM would have paid out only a little over $19,000 for security and legal fees. AVFM raised more than $30,000 for “security.”
In the interest of full disclosure, I should note that I also ask readers for donations. But I’ve always made clear that aside from donations specifically earmarked for other things the money goes to me. (And the cats.) And I don’t demand that donors pay me $20,000 per quarter — $80,000 a year — on top of whatever donations come in between the quarterly fundraisers, not to mention special “security” fundraisers.
I’m very grateful to those who donate to me — and indeed to everyone who’s contributed time and effort and knowledge and artistic skills to help the site — but I take in only a fraction of what Elam evidently takes in. And I don’t ask for money from those who are themselves broke.
In the comments on AVFM, the regulars are of course rallying around Elam. Then again, I can’t imagine anyone critical of what he does with the money would remain unbanned there for long.
I feel like the problems that women often encounter with being treated disrespectfully, having their preferences ignored, and so on during birth in hospitals happen not because birth being treated as a potential medical emergency is bad, but because our culture is saturated with misogyny and therefore, unsurprisingly, so are some of the people who work in hospitals. It’s not the fact that this process is taking place in a medical context that’s causing the problems, it’s the fact that the culture in general encourages treating women like idiots whose silly little girl feelings aren’t important.
Nthing Cassandrakitty.
That’s why midwives snd doulas aren’t always more willing to listen also.
The entire problem can be attributed to misogyny.
Lea, I have no idea, but it’s extremely aggravating that so many do.
I also find the idea that using drugs to manage pain during birth is “unnatural” deeply misogynistic and anti-feminist.
I disagree. The problem can be attributed to an intersection of misogyny and disablism perpetuated by medical institutions. Dominant models of patient care encourage practitioners to view the patient as an object to diagnose and treat rather than a suffering human being who needs to be taken care of. That is why so many people are traumatized by hospital visits, especially if they are forcibly institutionalized.
The supposed excessive medicalisation of pregnancy and delivery is what’s resulting in the births in hospitals, vaginal or c-section, becoming safer and safer for the mother and baby. Rejection of the extraordinary health ramifications of pregnancy and birth ie: natural childbirth advocates, anyone discouraging prenatal care results in increased morbidity. It’s studied extensively. There’s not a discussion to be had on the matter.
Doctors sometimes ignore patients’ wishes. There’s no support for the notion this is more prevalent within the context or labour and delivery. The idea doctors perform c-sections because they pay more or because they want to get to their golf game is not supported by any evidence.
My experience, having worked in the administrative side of obstetrics and gynaecology, is while physicians make mistakes and have shitty days there is no such thing as the unnecessary c-section. The most common scenario when someone had a c-section they didn’t want goes thusly: The doctor attempted a forceps and vaccuum delivery despite knowing efforts were futile and that vaginal delivery was going to result in brain damage to the fetus. After confirming delivering the baby vaginally simply was not safe to the baby, an emergency c-section was performed. Now the patient is screaming YOU RUINED MY CHILDBIRTH EXPERIENCE because they feel completely threatened and vulnerable having not successfully pushed the baby out themselves and refuse to accept their child’s brain if not life was saved by the surgical procedure they endured.
If people stopped shaming women who don’t deliver their babies vaginally there really wouldn’t be a problem but people are so profoundly ashamed at having not had a vaginal delivery they refuse to accept the health benefit their c-section had to either themself or their child and blame the very people who protected them. Yes, the babies they deliver via c-section often could have been pushed out but the resulting health complications would be worse than those of a c-section for the patient, the baby or both. No one denies these babies almost always would have eventually been pushed out. Doesn’t make it safe.
I’ve seen every documentary on the matter. They’re all fucking stupid and completely neglect the surgeon’s perspective and the various nuanced reasons we perform c-sections. And for god’s sakes, if a delivery is taking ages and the doctor has a prior engagement, they leave and a colleague takes over. We don’t have enough ORs in Canada to support this supposed conspiracy against women’s deliveries. We literally don’t have the resources to perform c-sections to save time. Do you know how much it costs and how long it takes to turn over an OR anyways?
Wanting to manage pain during delivery is as natural as it comes. Hygiene’s unnatural too but we don’t shout “OH NO THAT’S UNNATURAL” when the delivering physician washes their hands. Who cares if it’s unnatural? It’s safe and effective and makes life more pleasant for everyone involved. It’s much nicer for the doctor and patient when the person having the baby isn’t suffering in extraordinary pain, begging for relief.
Pain relief during dental work is “unnatural” too, and I don’t see the people who advocate for women to eschew pain relief during birth suggesting that we stop numbing people’s mouths before they get their teeth drilled into.
I’ve been gaslighted by doctors and other people in the health care industry numerous times. That doesn’t mean modern medicine is bad. It means the people who work in medicine are human beings. Not saints who are completely immune from our culture and its problems.
My mother gives autocratic doctors tons of shit. She refused to have a hysterectomy for years and years, she felt her doctor was acting like it was no biggie for a post-menopausal women, but she didn’t agree to have one until it was medically necessary. She friends with this doctor, but gave him the nickname “Genghis” Kahn which, much to his chagrin, caught on with the other doctors because they thought it was hilariously spot-on.
She also gave an epic takedown to a doctor who told her during her first physical with him that she should get gastric bypass surgery because that worked well for “women like her”. (She did not become friends with that doctor.). My mom is awesome.
I agree with you. I hope I didn’t imply I thought it was. I do feel this attitude affects women more than men in general though. Ally is probably right about disablism having an impact as well, but I think that might be not quite as strong. Also, again not all doctors are like this and many folks outside the healthcare or medical fields can ignore “the little woman. ” (see recent video on male politicians in US arguing about reproductive health ignore the female senator who tries to interject for twenty minutes)
I’m really not OK with people ignoring the misogyny to focus entirely on disablism, especially on a blog like this. There’s a very clear narrative within medicine where female bodies are framed as inherently dysfunctional and in need of constant intervention in a way that male bodies are not, and it echoes misogyny in the general culture. Again, this isn’t because people in the medical field are uniquely evil, it’s because they’re the products of a misogynistic culture.
Agreed with Cassandra. There’s also no reason they should be mutually exclusive, either. Both of them together can add up to horrible shit.
Disablism is found medical institutions, regardless of whether all people in the medical field are disablist assholes. Pointing this out is not the same as saying that the problem boils down to nothing but disablism. I made my point in response to someone who was saying that the entire problem could be attributed to misogyny. That’s totally false.
I’m not even saying that people always need to bring up disablism when discussing the unique problems that women face in medical institutions. I just don’t want people to think that disablism in medical institutions is somehow entirely unrelated. It’s like how talking about classism alone is acceptable, but explicitly saying that classism is the only form of oppression isn’t.
When we’re talking specifically about how birth is handled, as we are in this thread, misogyny actually is the main issue, and should be treated as such.
(Even though people who’re disabled will obviously get yet another layer of bullshit piled on them when giving birth that abled people won’t have to deal with).
Of course. I wasn’t even going to bring up disablism until Skye said that the problem is nothing but misogyny. And now that they have now amended their position, there’s no reason for me to bring up disablism anymore.
I didn’t say it was “wrong”. I said there are plenty of people who would object to the term “medical condition” being used for pregnancy, and plenty who would take offense to that. And there are. Get over it. Move on.
You brought that up because? If you don’t care, and people here don’t care… why do you care enough to tell us some people object?
And the thing not gotten over isn’t the use of the term, nor your attempt to inform us of something we already knew, but rather your method of engagement/non-engagement to such issues.
It’s your behaviour, which is the issue, not the subject you choose to discuss.
Here we go again. Apples and
orangesapples. The thing is both those are true statements.And the issue of what Elam is/isn’t allowed to do with money given to him is directly relevant to the question of SNAP Benefits (since you object to the common usage term). Money given to him isn’t constrained, so it’s not your place to say he buys the wrong, or too much food.
Nothing I have said is flat out unjustifiably wrong and you have not proven that in any way.
When you say Elam ought be allowed to buy the food he chooses to buy, because you think his girth calls his decision making into question… that’s flat out wrong.
When you say that we, who didn’t provide any of that money have such a right of oversight, that’s flat out wrong.
But please, be so kind as to explain how those aren’t things which are wrong.
While you’re at it you can explain how quoting you, addressing my complaints with your statements and justifications while detailing my arguments against them is “dishonest” as opposed to your Reaganesque, “there you go agains” with no further support for your position.
What I see, actually, is that you got your feelings hurt when I insulted you. Which doesn’t bother me. It’s my intent when I insult peope that it should bother them.
I don’t agree that there’s no such thing as a bad c-section. At all. And I have been through the L&D process 3 time and there is much more misogyny there than at other places. Disablism does play a role too.
I was told by the first obgyn that I visited that I am too small to ever deliver a baby naturally so we should just book a c-section. He refused to even let me do a trail of labour, even though having the baby vaginally was very, very important to me. He belittled me for my wish to have as natural a birth as possible and was just generally dismissive, much like marinerachel was doing in her comment.
That is not OK. Until that baby is out and drawing their first breath, the person whose body is on the line is the one who makes the calls. I don’t believe in judging or shaming women’s choices wrt their birth, but that includes not rolling my eyes because someone wants an unmedicated birth. They have their reasons, and they should be the ones calling the shots.
I discussed my needs with my second ob for my first baby. I told him straight up that I would never, ever consent to an episiotomy, that I’d rather have the worst tears and shit out of my vagina for the rest of my life because I have a history of abuse in that regard. He said sure, of course. He at least was willing to give me a trail of labour – until it became almost 7oclock and time for the shift change. I was strapped to a delivery table, screaming at the doctor “No episiotomy”, held down by nurses and the doctor just went ahead and cut one any way.
That is not okay. In no way is that okay. And that sort of thing happens a lot. A lot a lot.
So don’t tell me that there’s no such thing as a bad c-section or that it’s only women judging women for not giving birth in a certain way that leaves people fucked up after giving birth.
I can assure you, the rank misogyny often plays a huge part in that.
I just wanted to say, things being done to people like what happened to me is part of the reason why people choose to have unassissted births, like I did with my third. Now that I’m further away from the trauma I might choose differently if I chose again now, but at the time I would literally have rather died and the baby with me than go through something like that again.
Здравствуй, Пекюниум, я учусь Росский язык.
Yeah, I have to say, marinerachel, I get that you’re feeling defensive about your profession, but there are lots and lots of women who’ve had horrible experiences with labor and birth where they were treated very badly by the medical staff they were working with (there are several in my own family, actually), and some of your comments are coming across as if you think those women are just making it up, or somehow misunderstanding what happened to them.
Also let’s not forget that we’re not all living in the same places and this stuff can vary a lot depending on the specific healthcare system you’re dealing with, as well as when you gave birth (putting women into twilight sleep really was a thing that happened at one point, and women who gave birth during that time period will have had a very different experience from women who gave birth in the exact same hospital last week).
@Gen
That is just horrific. =[ I’m so sorry you had to go through all of that traumatizing medical abuse. :: hugs ::
Yeah, that’s why despite being on welfare (sorry, SAGA, state administered general assistance) the fact I live with my parents meant my mother and I had to go for an extremely degrading interview to prove I was expected to feed myself before I got food stamps. Not EBT, food stamps. SAGA is also an EBT benefit! (Which is fucking useless btw, give me a dollar amount not ending in a round number that I can only spend where places accept EBT? Yeah I can totally feed my fish just fine having to withdraw the amount ATMs will let me >.< )
It seems like the various welfare systems (in pretty much every country) are usually built in such a way that any official within the system who feels like making the application process humiliating for the applicant can do so pretty easily.
Actually I wonder how that works with the farmers markets here that accept EBT cards. There are usually some stalls that sell prepared food, so can people only use the cards at the ones that sell produce rather than say the stall that sells samosas?