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.
Gussie Jives
Wow, very r/thathappened. I remember reading that Pizzey has waffled considerably and admitted in thee past that the dog may have not even been murdered, much less publicly offed by pet-threatening feminists. I’d argue that unsubstantiated claims about a dog that died decades ago is a non-issue unworthy of discussion, much less active research. MRAs are free to treat this like it’s the Kennedy assassination, but that doesn’t mean we have to care or take their claims seriously.
I hope you and others mercilessly mock Esmay’s absurd and offensive misappropriation of the American Black Civil Rights Movement. They sure do love making fools of themselves.
contrapangloss – did anyone actually worship Apep/Apophis?
Not solely, I think.
He fist showed up idle Kingdomish, I think, and was essentially the spirit of darkness. Later on, he kind of got merged with Set, and was more general chaos-god-ish.
If someone still worships ancient Egyptian deities, he would get some mention, because he was a god, just not a god of hugs and kittens. He likely had some cultish followings, as well.
Egyptology and theology really aren’t my strong suits. I know just enough to appreciate what SG-1 pulled right, and know at least some of what they got wrong… But I’m the furthest thing from an expert that there could possibly be.
It might be a reference to the asteroid Apophis that might kill us all one day.
contrapangloss, yeah, looks like we’re at about the same level of familiarity with his background.
Binjabreel – I thought of that. Mindless lump of rock seems apt, too, but I bet trollboy is either referring to the Stargate character or a great big SNAKE gosh where’s old Freud when you need him.
I used to have a link to her reddit AMA where Pizzey admitted that (a) she didn’t know who shot at her dog, and (b) her dog didn’t die. Sadly, I’m on a new computer and I can’t find it– though if you have the energy to dig through her reddit AMA you can no doubt find it again.
I do wonder why they disavow all the internet trolls who spout MRA talking points and subscribe to MRA video channels while lobbying death threats at people like “Big Red” but at the same time they expect us to take responsibility for anonymous phone callers from decades ago. Classic MRA hypoagency, I guess.
“Re: Esmay’s unshaven face”
How very inclusive of you guys to imply that being unshaven makes you ugly or dirty. You do know that there are people who keep beards for religious reasons, right? I hope you guys realize that Fox News recently did the same thing: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/04/jon-stewart-fox-news-bergdahl_n_5443282.html
“That would actually require you to understand what male privilege is. Here, my son, have a nice handy link. Hint: just because you have male privilege doesn’t mean bad shit can’t happen to you. I’m a dude. I’ve been homeless, and poor, and all that jazz. I still got male privilege.”
I never said that males don’t have any privilege. I said that contrary to cassandra’s nonsensical belief that MRAs are oppressing women by being slobs (seriously, what the hell? Our personal appearances are oppressing you now?) mens’ appearance does matter. That’s very different from claiming that male privilege doesn’t exist.
“Dude. DUDE. On behalf of my working class relatives, go fuck a cactus.”
I’m pretty sure that your sisters in arms were the first to attack lower class men for looking like slobs. Why are they getting a pussy pass from you again?
“Is Apophis trying to claim that women don’t get scrutinized for our appearances? What world is he living in? What a clueless idiot.”
Way to attack me because of your willful failure to properly comprehend what I actually said, lol. I said that men are also scrutinized for their appearance, not that women aren’t scrutinized. I don’t understand why the two have to be mutually exclusive. That’s the other problem with you guys. You think that if something happens to women, it can’t happen to men. Why? Is it because then it wouldn’t be a gender problem and you couldn’t play victim?
“Fashion policing doesn’t affect men the way it affects women, regardless of class. Men, while not immune to fashion policing, are faced with far more lenient standards of beauty and modesty. Beauty and modesty are pushed on women to a far greater extent, and so they face worse fashion policing than men.”
This is utterly false. All a woman has to do to be considered conventionally attractive is be thin. Men have to go on ridiculous diets (who the hell can eat over 3000 calories a day? I feel fat when I eat over 1500) and exert incredible efforts to get six-packs and bulging muscles to look hot. It requires such an incredible amount of time and planning that none of my friends are capable of doing it even though we all want to.
Also I don’t think you guys have ever sat at a high school table with boys. I can promise that there’s plenty of complaining about our bodies and not feeling adequate. The difference is that you guys can get away with complaining openly in public. When you guys complain, a thousand white knights’ hearts melt and they rush to your aid to make sure your fee fees aren’t hurt. When we complain, the world laughs at us, emasculates us, and hangs us from the nearest flagpole.
“in general men get away with being total slobs in comparison with the standards women are held to”
Those are men who have given up on attracting women. I know this because whenever I feel like I’ve given up on women I kind of dress like a slob (and consequently get criticized).
Also, if you think women have it harder than men in terms of attracting someone, consider this woman, who had two disabilities and is overweight and is older, but still managed to get married. If she had been a man, forget about it. Nobody would have even looked at him once: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rb6PO_zBIGk
So to recap, what does a woman have to do to attract someone? Have a vagina. What does a man have to do? Look like Ryan Gosling or have George Clooney’s charisma or have lots of money.
@ Toddles Manboob esq:
I went back through the thread, and it seems to me that you went, hey, Esmay seems to be doing things I do, I wonder if he has the same diagnosis as me.
And then cherubkeats said, hey, I’m autistic and I do the rocking thing, can we not make fun of rocking?
And then we launched into an earnest discussion about when, if ever, it’s appropriate to assign behaviours to a particular condition, disorder, or diagnosis. Cassandrakitty encapsulated it nicely:
tl;dr: I don’t think any accusation was aimed at you, you just partly triggered a discussion.
‘Binjabreel – I thought of that. Mindless lump of rock seems apt, too, but I bet trollboy is either referring to the Stargate character or a great big SNAKE gosh where’s old Freud when you need him”
It’s a reference to the my favorite Egyptian pre-god, who was attacked by Ra and Ma’at. Ra and Ma’at believed that they had a right to harm Apep just because diety pass. It’s kind of like how feminists think they can beat, rob, rape, and loot men just because vagina.
Link to Erin Pizzey’s AMA about her dog.
http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1cbrbs/hi_im_erin_pizzey_ask_me_anything/c9f25vy
Toddles,
What Unimaginative said! I don’t think anyone thought you were being an asshole or anything. You just sparked a conversation about how hard it is to know when it’s appropriate to suspect someone of having the same disorder as yourself. I don’t think we even arrived at an answer. It’s a very grey area. I hope you don’t feel too attacked because I doubt that was anyone’s intent.
I think “it depends on the situation and your motives” is as close to a consensus as we got.
Part 2
Also on your prior relationship with the person you see those things in. Like, say I spotted what looked like a familiar behavioral pattern in one of the honey badgers (perish the thought, but work with me here) and felt like I wanted to reach out and say, hey, that thing you’re doing looks awfully familiar, are you OK and if not can I help? How well do you think that would go? Chances of them trusting me – very low. So even if I genuinely wanted to help, they might not take an attempt to reach out that way.
“What does a man have to do? Look like Ryan Gosling or have George Clooney’s charisma or have lots of money.”
Tell me something – when was the last time you saw a woman in a romantic leading role, the size of Jonah Hill in “Get him to the Greek” or Marlon Brando in ‘Don Juan deMarco”? (or as ‘differently handsome’ as either of those men?)
When was the last time you saw front page news articles about a male makeup ‘failure’ like we saw with Angelina Jolie in May?
When was the last time you saw an article about any male actor’s cellulite? Or failed/suspected/undone boob job? (yes men have them too)
You act like girls are the only ones making a choice about who to date, in a world where Esquire now thinks it’s worth noting the amazing fact that 42 year old women are now considered ‘fuckable’
Get over yourself. Men are held to standards, yes, and things like male eating disorders and body dysphoria are real and growing problems, but women are held to *impossible* standards and always have been – must be pretty (but not be wearing visible makeup), must not be too old, or too heavy, must be duly submissive, etc. In fact, everything on this list to be considered ‘beautiful’.
Ugly, unpleasant and abusive men like Geoffrey Edelstein or Donald Trump can still catch a pretty woman because of their money. A rich woman wouldn’t dare treat a man like rich men treat women – and guess what, rich women who date younger are mocked for it. Men are envied.
I’m short, plain and fat. Always have been. You don’t get to lecture women like me how we are too picky. Men treated me like a joke date, and the kind of girl only a loser could want – to my face. Men who, objectively, were about as attractive as rat turds, personality wise. But all that matter was I was considered too ugly for them.
Oh, and lower class people often dress *better* than high class people (however you define it, I’m using economically), because they *don’t* get a pass because of their lack of wealth. Rich people can and do wear whatever shit they want to. Brad Pitt, famous actor. can get away with this shabby crap because of his status.
Brad Pittman, unknown bloke on unemployment benefits looking for work? Not so much
Duh genius, we already knew it was a reference to Apep/Apophis – why do you think I posted the picture of Bast giving him what-for?
As for your idiocy, hello, Apep was the demon, not the hero. He was the one trying to screw things up. Take your martyr complex elsewhere.
Oh, and citation needed for the shit about feminism promoting rape and looting of men. That’s so stupid it’s funny.
Ann Somerville – gah, Geoffrey Edelsten. ::hurl::
“::hurl::”
Yes, I *know*. Chundering along with you 🙁
Saw a picture of him in the paper yesterday … he seems to think he’s a 25-year-old bikie. Imagine if a woman his age dressed like that? He gets laughed at, yes, but the press would do a metaphorical evisceration if he were female.
I just wish he’d either lose the hair dye, shave his head, or maybe go halves with Donald on that rug.
What’s a diety pass? Is it a pass that you can only fit through after you’ve been on a diet?
“He gets laughed at, yes, but the press would do a metaphorical evisceration if he were female.”
You mean like they did Kim Novak this year?
Seriously, who’s grosser? Kim or Geoffrey?
But I bet Apeppyphos can’t guess which of the two people in this picture the press attacked over their appearance (hint, it’s the one with big breasts)
Actress in doesn’t look like she did 60 years ago shocker!
When did Cassandra say you were oppressing her by being a slob? What are you even talking about?
Nice attempt at backpedalling. No sale. You said that “low class” women get away with looking like slobs and men can’t do that. You did actually say men were scrutinized more than women which is complete bullshit as Ann Somerville already demonstrated.
As someone who was only thin when I had an eating disorder and was surviving on 200 calories a day, you really to need to fuck right off. You think it’s just so easy for all women to just be thin and pretty? Fuck you. This statement was extremely offensive to me.
This is so wrong it hurts. For years body image issues was considered a stupid girls problem. A sign of weakness and vanity.
This is changing now. Why? Because in the past few years male standards of beauty have become as rigid and unattainable as female standards. Now guys feel just as shitty as we do so now it’s suddenly a real and important topic. Trust me, I did not have white knights rushing to coddle my feelings 10 or 15 years. I was gaslighted and made to feel stupid and crazy for letting media images get to me.
Once again, fuck off. You have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about. I’m sorry that you’re experiencing body image issues. But don’t come here and blame us for that. We aren’t the ones promoting rigid beauty standards and we aren’t the ones promoting materialism.
Hah, I missed his specifically whining at me earlier. Learn to read, dummy.
Shall I piss him off even more by letting him know that I’m watching videos of a hot guy dancing right now? I’m the last person who’d ever say that being super attractive isn’t useful for men too, it’s just that not being attractive doesn’t carry the same penalties for men as it does for women at all (even in professions where looks count for a reason, like acting or music). For men being pretty is a bonus, for women it’s required. Anyone who’s failed to notice this fact until now – hello and welcome to our planet, please enjoy your stay.
(Trying to avoid finishing something for work because I’ve listened to way too many new albums in a row and my brain has reached maximum absorption capacity. Pretty boys in tight pants make great brain bleach.)
Shall I further piss troll boy off by recommending Google image searching for hot guys in kilts?
See, I can’t do sexy plus kilts because the person I most associate kilts with is my dad, and that’s just weird.