If the Men’s Rights movement is looking for a celebrity endorser, I think I’ve found just the guy for them: the mixed martial arts fighter, and erstwhile porn actor, War Machine, currently sitting in jail on charges of brutally beating and attempting to kill his ex-girlfriend, porn star Christy Mack.
Men’s Rights activists should be able to look past these criminal charges; after all, as they remind us all the time, women are forever falsely accusing innocent men of all sorts of terrible things.
And in so many ways War Machine is perfect for them. An MMA fighter, he’s already only one letter away from being an MRA. A misogynistic asshole with rage issues, he’ll have no trouble fitting in with the Men’s Rights crowd. And, especialy important for a movement that has a lot of trouble getting any good PR, he’s a bit more comfortable on camera than the Paul Elams and Dean Esmays of the world, with experience on television (on the reality show The Ultimate Fighter: Team Hughes vs. Team Serra), and in seven films (albeit pornographic ones).
Best of all: he’ll need no ideological education from what A Voice for Men likes to call Fuck Shit Up University. War Machine – real name Jonathan Koppenhaver – is already an outspoken proponent of many of the Men’s Rights Movement’s core beliefs.
Consider these selections from a little Men’s Rights manifesto War Machine wrote a few years ago during a previous stint behind bars, serving time for felony assault after two bloody bar fights. His rant, which a friend posted to the internet, would fit right in with the sort of stuff we’ve seen regularly posted on the Men’s Rights subreddit, or The Spearhead, or A Voice for Men. I’ve bolded some of the Men’s Rightsiest bits:
The oppression of MEN is worse than oppression of Jews in Nazi germany, worse than the slavery of Blacks in early America…
There has always been the oppressor and always the oppressed. Before, it was blatant … NOW the oppressor has learned to disguise his evil. You can see man, but you can not see MEN. How easy it is to oppress a minority that is invisible to the eye! How genius of the oppressor! And what a better target too! …
Men challenge injustice from Government, MEN fight for their Constitutional rights, that are slowly being taken away every year. …
And they don’t just oppress us by making more laws and taking away more freedom, they are far more clever than that! Ask yourself what your REAL dream was?? If you gave up on this dream, why? Because of the brainwashing of the Government, that’s why! They taught you to “play it safe.” They told us a responsible man has ONE wife, a house, good credit, good job, and kids. How are you supposed to chase your dreams while maintaining all of that!?
Men are supposed to take risks and be aggressive! What accomplishments have ever come of a man scared to risk it all!? None!? Where would the world be? Still ‘flat!’ Still ‘Earth at the center of the universe!’
If any of you have your Men’s Rights Bingo cards out, I’m guessing you might already be close to scoring a bingo. We’ve got a comparison to slavery that could have come straight from the pages of A Voice for Men, a marriage-is-death-to-male-dreams rant that could have been borrowed from any MGTOW forum, and an evo-psych-esque argument that men are the true risk-takers and the world’s real innovators.
And I don’t think War Machine would have much trouble with Paul Elam’s “Bash a Violent Bitch Month,” either.
[I]t’s Christmas day and I’m laying in my bunk wondering “Why in the hell do American men get married!?” … If your wife is being a bitch you can’t slap her, if your wife is yelling at you, God forbid you yell back … Next thing you know it will be illegal to fuck your wife! LMAO! Maybe then, MEN in this country will get the fucking hint and MOVE! This country forces you to be a bitch!
In another online posting, War Machine touched on another Men’s Rights hobbyhorse, the notion that the justice system is stacked against men:
[L]ook at the prisons, they are FULL of MEN, not women. Are men “evil” and women not? Or do the laws target and attempt to restrict NATURAL MEN’S BEHAVIOR? How many of the HEROES in American history would avoid prison if they lived today? Davey Crockett? Thomas Jefferson? David Bowie? General Grant & General Lee? Shit, George Washington. … Laws target MEN and men’s behavior. Women want to bitch and cry about their rights and equality… LMAO! MEN are the ones locked away like animals, while women run free!
Someone might have to explain to War Machine that David Bowie is not actually a famous American HERO but a famously androgynous British musician who once recorded an album called “Heroes.” (Mr. Machine may be thinking of James Bowie, a well-known 19th century American frontiersman and slave trader, and the guy the Bowie Knife is named after.)
But other than that, he seems ready to go.
There is, of course, that whole attempted murder charge to deal with.
It’s true the Men’s Rights Movement has had few problems in the past rallying behind men with histories of violence. But War Machine might be a harder sell as a Men’s Rights hero. His alleged attack on Mack left her with a cracked rib, a ruptured liver, numerous broken bones, missing teeth and her eyes swollen shut. (See here for photos of her injuries; obviously this link is NSFW and could be triggering.)
While Mr. Machine denies attacking Mack, he joked to a TV host last year that if she were to leave him “I would just kill her” and get a tattoo saying “Rest In Peace” above the tattoo of her name he has on his neck.
And several hours after allegedly trying to murder her, War Machine tweeted this lovely message about his ex:
https://twitter.com/WarMachine170/statuses/497663075831787521
War Machine does seem to be at a low point in his life. Even aside from the charges he faces, and the time he seems likely to serve, his career in porn is almost certainly over. The “Alpha Male” clothing line he helped start wants nothing to do with him. Nobody but the prison system seems to want this guy.
In other words: Men’s Rights activists, this is your chance! War Machine may not be the, er, hero you want. But he’s certainly the hero you deserve.
…When I was a young person, I didn’t understand my own sexuality.
Lesbians telling me I had to be a lesbian because I liked females and was butch made me think I was a dyke.
Naah. Boo on bullshit suggestions.
I’ve not gotten the exclusion of transwomen, even before I figured out my genderqueeritudeness…
I mean, this was my old thought on the matter:
Trans women change how they look, change how they act, get hormones, may get all their body hair painfully zapped off, possibly go on to have major surgery, possibly spend huge amounts of money, put themselves at risk of severe violence, put themselves at the intersection of several discrimination categories (woman, queer, trans), and put themselves at grave risk of being unemployed.
If someone’s willing to do all that, it’s gotta be pretty freaking important to that someone, right?
All this before I met my ex and saw how painful it was for her to be misgendered when we were out and about.
I saw that as a legit reading on what Cassandrakitty said. But note that both parties were very likely in a highly triggered state.
@AllyS I mean, you and I evidently have a lot in common, and that wasn’t immediately apparent to me until now because people, for the most part, aren’t wearing their identities on their wrist (so to speak). But you showed me I’ve internalized some transmisogyny, even though I thought I had rooted it out. That’s a valuable thing you did for me.
I absolutely understand if you need to take a break–been there, done that, too. And certainly, after battling an unfair comparison to assailants in cassandrakitty’s life, you deserve a rest. But you’re a hell of a soldier, and I’m willing to bet I’m not the only one who learned because of you.
So, thanks. <3
As for cassandra, I'm sorry your friends had to experience that, and I'm sorry for the pain that has caused you. But I hope you see that Ally has never argued against the sexual autonomy of lesbians (or anyone).
I’ve read some of the ‘cotton ceiling’ commentary online. The problem I have with the concept is that TERFs take the view “you, transwoman, are not a woman. I, lesbian, only desire sex with women. Go to hell and die.” Non-TERF radfems take the view of “you, transwoman, are a woman with a penis. I, lesbian, desire sex with women who do not have penises. Thank you, but no.” Or, depending on circumstances, yes, thank you.
I have not read anything by Ally that suggests she is in favor of any woman, under any circumstances, being bullied, intimidated or forced into sex with anyone. Period. Given everything I have read about her life, I suspect that being refused sex by a cis lesbian is somewhere between Atlantis rising and an invasion of alien space bats on her list of concerns.
Cassandra, I am sorry that people you knew were raped by a transwoman. Nothing anyone has said here, as far as I can see, is a defense of that.
Cassandra is pointing out that she personally knows of a sexual predator who vilely twisted the argument, saying it would be transmisogynistic to not sleep with them in order to coerce women to sleep with them. It shouldn’t be seen as vilifying transwomen, it’s pointing out that leftist circles has sexual predators who mask their gaslighting with pseudo-progressive bullshit. Unfortunately, they’re always have been and you don’t betray a cause by pointing them out.
There are sexual predators in the kink community and pointing that out doesn’t vilify kinksters, it’s an attempt to protect potential victims.
Also, cassandrakitty, I don’t know if you are lurking this thread, but I am very sorry that what I said was triggering to you and that even my presence here was triggering. I have PTSD due to sexual trauma and so I can relate. While I found your words highly offensive, I did not mean to exacerbate any trauma you have or sound utterly dismissive of what you have gone through.
@brooked
Of course, pointing out the various ways in which abusers justify their abuse is important. But that’s not what Cassandra did – she attacked us with a straw man argument and basically lumped us together with rape apologists. She represented our argument as “Cis queer women not wanting to fuck trans women is transmisogynistic” even though it was really just “Cis queer women are capable of being transmisogynistic in their attraction preferences.”
In case it’s not clear, here’s where she misrepresented our position:
I never made that argument she claims I made. Nor did I ever deny that abusers can twist social justice principles for their own benefit. I sure as fucking hell did not ever say that a cis lesbian refusing to have sex with a trans woman is bigoted and therefore doesn’t have the right to refuse. People can look at this very thread to verify my claim.
Can we please, please, please stop talking about this? I’d really rather not try to label peoples attraction preferences as anything, because that’s highly personal and variable for everyone.
Trying to label peoples preferences feels all to much like “If you don’t have the right preferences, you’re bad/misogynistic/transmisogynistic/misandric/fatophobic/whatever”
I’d really rather we stuck to the reasoning that “Trying to make someone else share your preferences or tell other people their preferences are wrong is bad”, i. e. “How can you possibly think (insert trait here) is attractive”.
I’m not making any sense.
I’m going to go back to the happy threads.
This is way too intense for me.
Cassandrakitty, I’ll miss you. A lot. You introduced me to sockdars and helped me refine mine. Hellkell, I’ll miss you, too.
Ally, I’ll miss you when you’re lurking, but I’m glad you aren’t disappearing completely.
Anyone else who runs away, or is thinking about it, if it helps you, my best wishes.
I think cis queer women can be transmisogynistic, but not in their “attraction preferences”. I don’t think “attraction preferences”, like gender preferences, are up for public debate. I know lesbians who have been sexually assaulted for “attraction preferences”, luckily I’m not one of them, so I have strong feeling on the subject.
Perhaps a different term is more appropriate. In any case, there is absolutely no denying that there are various factors in attraction, one of those being your views of other people in general. That doesn’t mean that people should have public debates about other people’s preferences. I never advocated that, nor is anyone else in this thread doing that. People’s preferences are their own business, and I have never stated otherwise.
@contrapangloss and everyone else
You’re right, I don’t think I’m helping things by furthering this debate and will stop pouring gasoline on the fire. I don’t enjoy it and can’t imagine anyone else does. I will read and respect all responses however, I’m not trying to shut down anyone else.
I’m just bummed and a little stunned by Cassandra leaving. I hope she’ll reconsider purely for selfish reasons, she’s an awesome poster, but she’s obviously got to do what’s best for her. As does Ally. Oh well.
I hope I’ve at least made it clear that none of us talking about the cotton ceiling are actually saying that people’s attraction preferences are everyone’s business. The cotton ceilling discourse is about bias against trans lesbians that cis lesbians never face due to cis privilege. It’s not about telling people that they have to change their preferences or else they are bad people.
With that said, I am done arguing in this thread.
I don’t want anyone to leave ::whimpers:: but I wish you all the very best and maybe we can see each other on the feminist borg where we can have fun or something.
::tries not to cry…does anyway:: I love you guys ::sniff:: here’s a video for all of you
http://youtu.be/96gLbxMO93s
Well, I can’t say anything that hasn’t already been said. I haven’t known AllyS for nearly as long as I have Cassandrakitty and hellkell. I’m pretty upset that Cassandra’s leaving. I read hellkell’s message as saying she was out of the thread rather than the site in general, so I hope I’m right about that. Obviously you all have to do what’s best for you; I just wish this thread hadn’t happened. I wouldn’t mind knowing where else you guys post. I guess I’ll just leave my email in case anyone wants to drop me a line? [email protected]
Maybe it’s because my kids have insisted on binge watching Buffy this weekend. But this seems relevant:
I don’t want this crew to not have difficult conversations if we’re all in and willing to have them, but I don’t like to see any of you hurting. Not every conversation is worth having as sometimes no resolution can be found and some of us get very weary because we’ve had convos like this before so many times. (I have friends who are Michfesters, so…yeah. Enough is enough.) It’s hard to know where boundaries are when you only know people through text. I think we reached and breached some and I don’t want to keep pushing, but these disagreements can take on a life of their own. Maybe it has to be had out here and now. Maybe it doesn’t. I don’t have much to add. I can’t put the brakes on this thing or pretend it never happened. I’d still like us to consider a time out. I value every voice in this discussion, even if I disagree with some of them. I would like to suggest that we ease off and maybe return to this subject another time. I think people need time to reflect and heal.
Feel free to tell me to fuck off or just disregard, because I don’t always get how people work things out or the layers at play in certain conversations and my first reaction to most uncomfortable conflicts is to back away from them. That doesn’t work for everyone.
Ally,
I think you were clear and I never thought you were disrespecting other people’s preferences.
So I’ve been giving this some thought and I’m just going to say that I’m a bit of an odd ball here. I don’t see what was so threatening about the cotton ceiling thing. I can’t speak for all cis lesbians, but trans women are some of the least threatening people to me. I don’t understand why we are considering the opinions of TERFs as relevant, since they seem to be the only ones who lost their shit over this. I understand not wanting to go down the road of ‘problematic sexual preferences’ because we might enter territory where we tell women who to fuck and that is fucking wrong. I’ll make it clear that I’m not opposed to having sex with a trans woman, and that this makes me no less of a lesbian. Do I have certain boundaries that can’t be crossed? Absolutely. I will never consent to penetration (unless it’s a pap smear, damn you pap smears) and I would not consent to penetration if it was sex toy or a sexual organ. But I don’t see how sleeping with a trans woman means I have to consent to penetration, regardless of her genitalia. We could make love in other ways. I’m not seeing where cis lesbians are being forced to be penetrated.
I’m also focusing on penetration, because the issue seems to be with penises. Or that is what I’m getting from this discussion. I’m not sure if their were other objections. I also like to end with that I understand this conversation is difficult and makes people uncomfortable. I can drop it now, if I’m triggering anyone or bothering anyone. I understand that not everyone here is a lesbian or trans and has a vested interest in this topic.
Yeah, I wouldn’t want this place to have a “don’t rock the boat” policy where we just avoid disagreement, but these big arguments don’t accomplish anything. Everyone just gets angry and then someone leaves in a huff.
I know I said I would stop arguing, and I have stopped, but I want to bring up one thing that will hopefully clarify my position even further:
The issue here is that, when the focus is on individual’s preferences, many people here are afraid of the possibility that it will end up being a discussion wherein some people say that they have to be attracted to X or else they are horrible people. In other words, this discussion becomes one wherein personal preferences are politicized to the point of encouraging coercive shaming. And that’s wrong, misguided, and deeply contrary to the feminist/womanist principle of sexual and bodily autonomy. No one should be shamed into doing sexual things that they don’t want to do.
I provided examples of individuals and their preferences to make a general statement about how attraction is influenced by privileged subjectivity and oppressive attitudes that the person has. But I understand how this can easily be interpreted as debating people’s attraction preferences, which is inappropriate. All I aimed to demonstrate, in the greater scheme of things, is that oppression (be it transmisogyny, disablism, white supremacy, or whatever) shapes beauty norms. And I don’t think anyone has an issue with that point. It is a discussion that can happen without any risk of crossing people’s boundaries.
I’ve been just lurking on this thread because I don’t even know what to say.
Yeesh. Did it again; hail the blockquote monster!