So, that happened.
The debate between Matt Binder (from the Majority Report) and Paul Elam (from A Pile of Money for Paul Elam) went off yesterday. I can’t say it went off without a hitch, because it was actually quite hitch-full. Indeed, it was kind of a disaster — at least for one Paul Elam.
Paul’s the one who wanted the debate. He chose the topic, he chose the format, he controlled the venue. And he lost the debate rather spectacularly, grimly reading a succession of prepared statements while Binder shot down his arguments with common-sensical one-lines and raised issues that Elam didn’t or couldn’t address.
Binder rattled Elam early by presenting him with an unattributed quote that sounded virtually identical to Elliot Rodger’s misogynistic rants and which Elam dismissed as something that no MRA would ever say; Binder then revealed that it was a quote from Stefan Molyneux, the MRA “philosopher” who was one of the featured speakers at AVFM’s recent conference. (Indeed, it was a quote that I highlighted in my first Misogyny Theater videos on Mr. M.)
Then, after Elam read off a list of all the various women who have associated themselves in some way with AVFM, Binder knocked the wind out of him by asking, quite simply, so what?
The most surreal moment, in a debate full of surreal moments, came 39 minutes into the debate. Binder had spent much of his previous two segments discussing an assortment of issues that the Men’s Rights movement largely ignores, even though they primarily affect men, and men of color in particular — from stop and frisk policies in major cities to the deaths of American soldiers in wars overseas.
But instead of answering Binder’s question –why hasn’t the Men’s Rights movement actually tried to do something about these problems? — Elam instead read his prepared “closing statement,” responding not to anything Binder had argued but to the arguments Elam, writing the statement before the debate, had assumed he would make.
And so, after hearing Binder passionately argue that the MRM needs to fight for the rights of men in prison and for the lives of men sent to fight and possibly die in wars, we heard Elam beating away on a straw man, declaring — after calling him a bigot — that Binder
has been led to believe, quite falsely, that gender justice mandates the summary rejection of all men’s problems in favor of a view that can only see men as the problem.
The debate, such as it was, lurched to its conclusion in an assortment of miscues and technical glitches a few minutes later. Dean Esmay, the incompetent and often ineffectual “moderator” of the debate, rocking back and forth on his chair in a darkened room, eyes mostly closed, plaintively asked Binder to send him “that particular story” on stop and frisk in New York city that Binder had referred to earlier in the debate. Esmay, defensive and exasperated, explained that
we are an all-volunteer organization and we don’t see every story. I’d like to see that story from Matt, please do send it to me.
Binder, incredulous, pointed out that stop and frisk has been in the headlines for years, as Esmay, visible in a small box at the bottom of the screen, rubbed his head as though he were developing a migraine. Esmay repeated his request, saying that
we cover a lot of stories; I’m just asking for you to send me that.
There were then a few uncomfortable moments as Esmay and Elam tried to figure out how to close down the Google Hangout that was hosting the debate.
Esmay: “Are we off?”
Binder: “Still says ‘live’ for me.”
Esmay: “Paul?”
Elam: “Yeah, I’m still having problem with the button.”
Esmay laughs.
Elam: “Isn’t that wonderful?”
Long silence. Esmay rocks back and forth on his chair.
Esmay: “Just close the window.”
A few moments later, he did.
I think we may need to have another AVFM graphics contest, incorporating what I think should be AVFM’s new slogans:
“I’m still having problem with the button.”
“We are an all-volunteer organization and we don’t see every story.”
A Voice for Men is clearly not ready for its closeup.
Or its wide-shot. Or its audio-only recording. Or its transcript. Or its cave-wall paintings.
Bahahahaha!!! Sweet, sweet schadenfreude.
I thought MB would be terrible, but he turned out to be pretty good. Elam was ridiculous even by Elam standards, which is saying a lot.
Elam: “How come feminazis get all teh fundings and coverage and monies and attenshuns?”
Matt: “What are you doing about the issues that affect men?”
Elam: “I am unprepared for your off-the-cuff accusations and misandry! Gynocracy! Gynocracy! *pulls church bells*”
Thanks to Dave for the recap and to all who commented during and after the proceedings. I’ve only skimmed the video myself–had other things on my plate, for one thing, but mostly it was just *so* difficult to watch for reasons clearly laid out above. The disconnect and lack of actual communication and give-and-take…wow. I’d have expected more ire and vitriol, but that would have required considerably more in-the-moment engagement on the part of the first part.
*party of the first part.
I have to say, I never watch MRA videos, but this one was worth it. Binder was pretty good — not perfect, by any means, just pretty good. And he annihilated Elam.
At this point, I think my cats could probably debate Elam into a corner.
Dean Esmay totally missed Interviewing 101: KNOW THE NAME OF YOUR INTERVIEWEE
Oh my god this was even a bigger trainwreck than I was expecting. I was expecting Elam to make an idiot of himself, just not to this extent. God bless.
“Esmay: ‘Are we off?’
Binder: ‘Still says ‘live’ for me.’
Esmay: ‘Paul?’
Elam: ‘Yeah, I’m still having problem with the button.’
Esmay laughs.
Elam: ‘Isn’t that wonderful?’
Long silence. Esmay rocks back and forth on his chair.
Esmay: ‘Just close the window.’”
These are the same guys who are always making fun of women* for not being at the forefront of technology. Can you imagine the fullness of their tergiversations** if something similar or comparable had happened at a site like this one and if they’d been alert enough to notice? Endless wallpaper would have ensued, wallpaper scrawled over with scribblings about how dudes are fearless astronauts hobbled by women from the cave days and about how women don’t properly contribute to civilization and about how female materialism holds male transcendency at bay.*** (And after that the real silliness would start.)
*as best they can, which is not very well
**if you read enough of their stuff you start to sound like them; sorry
***but only if they didn’t get sidetracked by a passing marmot and forget to go after the wonted mammoth
Just loading the AVFM page on my phone, the front page stories break down like this:
Promotion/Fundraising: 3 articles
Men’s Issues: 9 articles
Attacking Feminists/Critics: 18 articles
“We don’t see every story, but when we do see stories, most of them aren’t actually about Men’s Issues.”
@bekabot
Techincal tests previous to going live are MISANDRY!!!!
The thing that really struck me was the fact that Esmay was wearing a shirt with visible stains. If they’re trying to be taken as a serious, professional movement, shouldn’t the second in command at least wear a clean shirt for public appearances?
Luzbeltix, I suspect he did that on purpose. Either as a gotcha revenge for Binder mispronouncing people’s names, or as a subtle way to put Binder in his place.
“We are an all-volunteer organization and we don’t see every story.”
I’m pretty sure taking people’s donation money to pay yourself doesn’t actually count as volunteering.
@Sarah
I hadn’t thought about it, but it makes sense as well. On the other hand, Esmay did seem a bit apologetic for mispronouncing it.
Oh, the inscrutable mysteries of A Pile of Money for Paul Elam!
I’m wondering how apmfpe (a Pile of Money for Paul Elam – I love it!) will try to skew this into a win for themselves. You know they’ll try, and many of their followers will sadly probably believe them
I’ll guess that AVfM will say Binder played “out of context” gotcha, with the quotation. that he “quote-mined, and misrepresented” Bash -a-b!t@# Month”, and, “failed to actually address any of the points Paul raised”, as such he lost terribly.
And something which has been all over the news, and was a pivotal issue in the New York Mayoral campaign… not important, because it only affects some men in one part of the country (and they are either thugs, or manginae).
I loved Binder’s ‘so what’ to all the women listed as supporting them. It’s such a regular argument…..no, I’m going to say ‘argument’ to any women’s rights issue, ‘but MY (always ‘my’), wife, girlfriend, female pet tarantula, doesn’t think there’s anything wrong with….. (insert example of out and out sexism).
What amuses me is that some of the commentariat at A Vund fur elaM, actually predicted what Binder would do, and Elam wasn’t prepared.
At the same time, they also said in advance that Elam couldn’t lose (which,I will note we didn’t say. We said we were afraid Binder wouldn’t do his homework, and so be buried with specious stats, and credulous claims).
*unless it is a news story covering #ICMI24$$!, in which case we see evey story and proceed to launch specific attack articles and doxxing campaigns based on those stories.
Watermelon Sugar: But those are IMPORTANT! If AVfM is made to look bad, the entirety of The Most Important Human Rights Movement of the Twenty-first Century could be derailed!!!!!
That’s a lot more important than stifling the civil rights of some PoC in New York City!
From the PE standpoint he can never, ever lose because he can always just scream, “Misandry!” or “Matriarchy!” even in the face of facts (such as that men still hold the majority of influential government positions). Is there really any point in debating someone whose response to everything is that he is the only one who sees “the truth?”
After filtering through a little over a year and a half of this blog and related links, sites, materials, etc, I can only come to the conclusion that it’s a fool’s errand to engage with people who willfully ignore the world as it is in favor of nursing some perceived injustice to themselves.
That said, I stay for the mocking and kitties.
🙂
“The thing that really struck me was the fact that Esmay was wearing a shirt with visible stains.”
Yep. That, Elam’s decorating (either his website is no indication of his design skills, or the woman who somehow tolerates him did that decor), and Binder’s apparent dorm room (or maybe not, looked like one, and I kept expecting a cat to wander in). “I can’t be arsed to put on a clean shirt”, “my decorating makes me look way more put together than I am”, and “yeah, I’m a college student, but I have a cool mic”…appearance alone I guess could go to Elam, if you were somehow viewing the video on AVfM and didn’t notice that there’s no way that the person who signed off on that website’s design did the table behind Elam’s desk.
Honestly, I was more distracted by wondering how his GF had talked him into letting her decorate than I was interested in Elam’s monologuing. Cuz sure, some men can handle design just fine, but none of them are MRAs.
Binder was in the studio for the podcast. It looks like a lot of radio-stations I’ve been in, esp. those which are also filmed. It’s, “edgey” or something.
Elam has had that background for as long as I can remember.
Not even a joke, but is esmay ok? Like seriously? He looked pained all the way through and at the end how he desperately sucked at his e-cig(?) Or was it faux-weariness at the terribleness of feminists?
Maybe he was sat in the dark because he heard our mocking of his absurd curtains from that other thread. I want to laugh but he just doesn’t look happy or well…