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.
Actually that horse is kind of looking back at the rider going “What the hell are you wearing?”, isn’t it?
Cavalry horses think all this pageantry is a bunch of nonsense.
I thought the horse was asking “What have you done with my rockers?”
Cavalry horses are probably just relieved when it’s the riders wearing the silly outfits instead of them.
Wearing all the finery led to the replacement of goat steeds by horse steeds. The goats kept trying to eat the finery. It is known.
Good thing nobody ever tried large dogs as steeds, they’d have eaten the metal parts of the accessories too.
How on Earth would anyone think that Paul Elam lost this debate? If anything, Paul was far more collected and prepared than Matt, and was able to soundly defend his stance without faltering, often providing clarification and explanation in response to Matt’s poorly spun accusations. It seemed that Matt (or the agency he represents) were clearly searching the haystack for things that weren’t even there.
Often times it seemed that Matt would try to make a point in contrast to something Paul had stated, but would find himself agreeing with Paul’s point and not even realizing it. It’s clear that Matt is young and has a lot to learn about the big bad world we live in, so we can’t really blame him (he’s just the public face for a larger demographic).
Matt did make a few valid suggestions at the end though on where MRA’s and the like could be more productive in expanding and standing up for certain other rights than the ones that they’re currently focused on.
XD
Lurking suspicion: artists took advantage of mounts in paintings to express their true opinion of the sitter and or the sitter’s attire.
There are just too many horses in those paintings with the “are you serious?” face…
My cats often give me an “are you serious” face, normally when I ask them to shift. However, why would a painter paint that expression when they would have other options is a good point.
I assumed that actual cavalry horses were like cavalry horses in Disney movies.
Relevant to this thread’s interests!
A. I love you, awesome cat-training man, but B. why have you chosen to groom your facial hair like Anton LeVey? Please not that this is not an attempt to accuse cat training dude of oppression, I’m just confused by the pointy beard.
http://matafari.tumblr.com/post/91487190434
That’s Jackson Galaxy. I’ve seen him speak. He’s pretty cool.
He seems like a great guy, which is why having him look like LeVey is a bit disconcerting.
Robinric: How on Earth would anyone think that Paul Elam lost this debate? If anything, Paul was far more collected and prepared than Matt, and was able to soundly defend his stance without faltering
If by, “defend his stance” you mean, “read his talking points without responding to his interlocutor” It’s really easy to “not get flustered” when one doesn’t engage.
But if you want debate, as in examine a question and respond to critique, Elam didn’t. When challenged he didn’t address the issue raised but rather pretended it didn’t happen: for example the Molyneux quotation, where rather than try to explain how the two might differ in some way, rather said, “I suppose you got me with that one” and blew it off.
Now the thing is that it wasn’t a “gotcha”. One of Elam’s complaints was that Binder had compared Rodger to the MRM. Elam said this was ridiculous, the two had nothing in common. Binder showed that Elam was willing to say that one of the speakers he featured at his International Conference used rhetoric which was so much like Rodger’s that Elam (the trained therapist) was willing to condemn it as being from someone who was “disturbed”.
To make that worse, the quotation used was from Molyneux’s writings on the subject he spoke about at the ICMI. Elam, however, just treated it as immaterial, and went back to his script.
The entire event went like that. Binder engaged, and Elam retreated to the script; even when his script was at odds with what Binder said (e.g. the tail end, where Binder listed the things men could use help with, and Elam said, “but you deny men have problems…”. That was farcial).
The best one can say is Elam didn’t listen to Binder carefully enough to get thrown off his script. Which is pretty damning, all things considered.
That beard … O_O
See, and you like beards, so it isn’t just me being facial hair-averse*.
*With a special exemption for Kaneshiro, because for some reason he looks ridiculously hot with one.
Because we listened to it. Acutally listened.
So how on earth can you be this stupid?
Bullshit. Paul had written speeches he was determined to give, regardless of what Matt said. Just like you, he didn’t listen,. Matt made multiple interesting & valid points & Paul just tried to ignore him. Yes, Paul was calmly reading his pre-written script while Matt was showing emotion and passion about social justice. Being the unemotional one doesn’t mean you won. It means you weren’t engaged.
Matt’s accusations were not “poorly spun”, they were accurate and utterly unanswered by Elam. And you are really really stupid. Did I mention that before?
cassandra, LOL, I like some beards, not just any ol’ beards! Smaller the better, usually, but there must be a moustache as well. Moustache without beard, fine – beard without moustache, *hurl*.
Kaneshiro looks ridiculously hot pretty much whatever he does in the facial hair department. He could probably get away with that cat guy’s dire look (though I hope to Ceiling Cat he never tries it).
@Save the Queen
Re: epic comment
You are magnificent. That is the word for you today. And probably tomorrow. And probably all days after that.
Oh, look. Robenric999 is demonstrating what Woody would be like if he were more articulate, but still an Elam fanboy living in his own version of reality.
nthing the admiration for @Save the Queen’s epic comment.
@TitanBlue, @pecunium – I actually watched the whole video too, and more than likely, from a more unbiased point of view then either of you have (I have no allegiance to either Paul Elam or Matt Binder), and in this particular interview, I’m sorry to say it, Matt got his own ass handed to him.
Look, I admire Matt’s courage to be able to put himself in the public eye like this and if he really does believe in what he’s talking about, stand up for these topics. I personally doubt that Matt has much real world experience outside of academia, though. That being said though, Matt is an intelligent guy who is quick to respond. He does however lack one thing that Paul has (most likely given Paul’s age, and real world experience): Wisdom, which can only be acquired by trial, error, failure, success, and actual engrained knowledge of the topics being discussed in the video… and because he lacks this at the given time, he lost this ‘debate’. I’m sure he’ll acquire it though in the future.
Going back to the pin up pictures, yeah, uncanny valley all the way. Doesn’t look remotely healthy.
Sure, Robenric999, whatever you say. By the way, what agency does Matt represent? His online station? He’s the public face of what demographic specifically?
Re: attractiveness
I have to say, it looks like I tend to find weedy guys quite attractive. That being said, I have been attracted once to someone who started off a bit weedy, did weights and calorie counting, and was body building himself out of my generally preferred size range. He liked going to the gym and it made him happy so of course i didnt mind. Actually, the reason I was attracted to that guy was he had a really nice relaxed smile, was very respectful of my personal space and we had a lot in common, so could have long coffee chats.
Apart from weediness (excluding weights guy), everyone else I have found attractive, don’t really look similar, and it was generally some aspect of their personality that triggered attraction in the first place. I generally find particular expressions attractive, but it differs, for example, one of my first crushes was on a guy who had really curly hair. He was very enthusiastic and ran everywhere and I really liked the way it bounced around as I recall.
Also, I find shoulders and the upper part of the back very attractive. They don’t have to be muscly shoulders or anything, just present.
I can’t really add to the outfits discussion, except to say I totally approve.