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.
I think part of the issue is that I am being confused by your wording. By attractive, I think you mean “viewed as a prospective sexual partner”.
But doesn’t this also boil down to what I said earlier, about how being mainly cishet, I have not given my permission to all men to fuck me? If you were a cishet male, you wouldn’t know ahead of time whether I was interested sexually in you or not. I’m not seeing how this type of signifier defines precisely what people others are interested in having sex with.
Depending on the acts. but getting to the intercourse phase involves a lot of other tick boxes as well, not just bloody genitals. Or, being mainly cishet, have I given my permission to all men with penises to fuck me?
On the issue of exclusion – so, I’m bi. Do you know how many lesbians refuse to date women who’re bi? Lots and lots. Even when they think we’re pretty and charming and all that jazz. Is that unfair of them? Well, no, because they get to set their own boundaries and have their own preferences. It may hurt my feelings (and sometimes has), but hey, that’s my shit to deal with, not a sign that they need to change their preferences.
Also, on “attractive”, that’s not necessarily the same thing as “want to have sex with”?
coffee, this entire side of the conversation comes from the bullshit notion that lesbians have to be willing to consider women-with-penises as sexual partners. Not “It doesn’t bother me that X is trans, but she’s the exception” but as a goddamn general rule. That shit is out there, there are people who are violently angry that lesbians don’t want to fuck penises.
Pushing this is so fucking close to “who do you believe, me or your lying eyes?” for me. It’s never going to be my personal issue, because I’m not bi or lesbian, but I’ve had the “You should consider X, Y or Z sexually, even if it’s only theoretical” shit over the years, and it fucking sickens me. Regardless of whether it’s coming from men or trans women, it screams of entitlement. FFS, sexual access is not a human rights issue. It’s not any sort of right.
Totally missed the previous conversation on the other thread, and don’t have much to add other than what’s already been said about no-one’s sexual preferences should be up for debate, for any reason, ever. My trans women friends are straight so no insight there, other than no-one is pressuring straight cis guys to examine their preferences (as has been astutely pointed out by others), especially not trans women for obvious reasons.
And just because it seems ok to do so now, what kittehs said:
is why I was bothered, and what I thought the initial tiff was about… that ppl were just fed up with it.
I read and lurk far more than I participate so never wanted to say anything – but as much as I like Ally, lately this was more and more the case and it was really frustrating, to the point I’d skip most of her posts and/or decide not to contribute, just in case I set something off. I chalked it up to her being hyper-focused on her own issues right now (we’ve all been there)… but her responses in this thread, that disagreement with her implied subconscious transphobia, was IMO not ok.
Anyway, just wanted to let cassandra and others who felt ‘evil’ that they weren’t alone, and I’m sorry I didn’t back you up more. I was pissed off and felt like I didn’t have the right to since I’m not a regular, and also that (at the time) it was pretty pointless to even bother… it was a bit intimidating to me, which surprised me.
Also – glad you’re all staying, hope Ally decides to come back eventually, and am very sad if LBT doesn’t come back. This has really sucked. Glad that open discussion about the issue at hand is happening now though (and I’ll go back to lurking, since I have nothing useful to add to it that hasn’t already been said!)
[quote]I read and lurk far more than I participate so never wanted to say anything – but as much as I like Ally, lately this was more and more the case and it was really frustrating, to the point I’d skip most of her posts and/or decide not to contribute, just in case I set something off. I chalked it up to her being hyper-focused on her own issues right now (we’ve all been there)… but her responses in this thread, that disagreement with her implied subconscious transphobia, was IMO not ok.
Anyway, just wanted to let cassandra and others who felt ‘evil’ that they weren’t alone, and I’m sorry I didn’t back you up more. I was pissed off and felt like I didn’t have the right to since I’m not a regular, and also that (at the time) it was pretty pointless to even bother… it was a bit intimidating to me, which surprised me.[/quote]
QFT
the blockquote monster sabotaged Firefox formatting bar on purpose, *shakes fist at sky*
OK, so, calmer now and with some food in my belly – coffee, do you think that reframing things the way I pulled out of your comment and then added some commentary to would work, from the trans side of things? Does that de-escalate this mess and give people a way to talk to each other without everyone getting stressed and hurt and angry? Because what I’m seeing from lesbians on the other side of this conflict is that they don’t hate trans women, or think they’re men, it’s just that when they say they’re lesbians they’re describing an attraction to sex, not gender.
I think you are fundamentally correct here, but I don’t think you will find what seems like the perfectly logical response very satisfying.
Yes, sex is partially about genitals, but it is not solely about genitals, and for that reason, though I see what you were trying to do, I really reject your definition of me (a bisexual woman) as simply “ambiphilic” (attracted to both male and female genitals). I’m not. There are plenty of people I’m not attracted to, whole hoards of people, and quite often that distinction is based on secondary characteristics which you are correct are not *strictly* sexual but which still have bearing on sexuality.
I guess what I am saying is that I fundamentally reject the idea that I could, or should be expected to separate attraction of gender and attraction of sex. That is not and has never been my experience, which is why (if I weren’t on guard for just such a reaction on my part), as a bisexual woman (though not the particular one you were addressing) I would find the statement
really offensive, as not only does it carry an implicit judgement that my use of ‘bisexual’ as a self identity is incorrect (since you construct it to mean that I am attracted to both standard sets of genital equipment* and therefore should be equally sexually available to anyone, regardless of genitals) it also carries with it a sense that you are trying to catch me (well, not me specifically, but you know) out on something you see as hypocrisy. “You SAY you are bisexual, but you still make a distinction which I find unjustifiable and which is incompatible with my understanding of a bisexual person as being willing to engage in sex with either set of genitals” is how this reads to me, even when I am trying mightily to give you the benefit of scant doubt.
*I’m not comfortable with the binarism that I’m resorting to here, but I need it for shorthand in this case, otherwise these comments are going to get even longer
No. It is unreasonable for you to expect everyone else to walk on eggshells because you are doing enough self examination so is you act the misogynist thats just something for you to work on not for anyone else to mention.
The same argument is made regarding allowances being made for certain people speaking “from pain” while the rest of us are assumed to be speaking from, what was it, malice. No, bitter pettiness. Nope.
THIS. I’ve had it too, and I nor anyone else has to justify their sexual preferences to anyone.
*back to lurk mode*
And also, yeah, secondary sexual characteristics, overall body type, and a whole bunch of other stuff also has an impact on this, so bisexual also does not mean open to all comers (and in fact that’s a very nasty stereotype that most bi women in particular take exception to because it’s often part of the justification given for sexually assaulting us).
Nail, meet Head.
Data vampires ate my response again grumble grumble
Okay, I’m still confused. Why are TERF and “forbidding of male/female” getting thrown around again? When I was recounting my experiences of lesbian exclusion, it wasn’t from being considered incompatible, it was that lesbian was being used to refer to “attraction-to-sex”, which by definition, excludes trans lesbians, on account of being AMAB. How is that “you need to question your preferences”? To me it looks more like “you need to question the outcomes of your language.”
TERF and forbiddance of male/female have not been brought up by me once. I get that this has been your past experience with this issue, but that is not what I’m arguing, especially since the first step in that entire post was about the acknowledgement that ANYONE CAN REFUSE CONSENT FOR ANY REASON AT ANY TIME. It’s not about *sexual* rejection, it’s that the terms are causing unintentional harm by being erasive of trans lesbians, as long as the term “lesbian” is used to refer to “attraction-by-sex” without a gender variant equivalent to exist beside it.
Seriously. I have Never. Once. Said. that a person’s anatomy is an unacceptable reason to deem them incompatible. Where are you getting this from? How many times do I have to say this? I don’t give a fucking shit about what people on tumblr are arguing — that is not what I am saying, or if it looks like that’s what I’m saying, you’re going to have to show me *where* you’re reading that, or else I will never identify these implicit assumptions that are “evidently” intrinsic to an argument about language.
OK, so, what would you like the gender-variant term to be? If that’s the chosen solution than it’s not my place to choose that term, since it doesn’t apply to me.
THIS.
And all the yesses to what cassandra said about lesbians not wanting to date us bi women. Rejection sucks, but there’s not a lot you can do about it.
The reason that male/female being forbidden came up is that earlier in this thread that was described as misgendering.
@gillyrosebee Argh, no, I was pointing out that ambiphilic is inadequate word, but it’s the running development for descriptions of gender variant sexuality. The point is that they DON’T work. I’m not advocating for its use, and you’re right to be offended by it.
@thebewilderness So cassandra gets a free pass for weaponizing a nearly universal insecurity of transfolk, but she gets to use the exploitation of her friends’ insecurities about being trans-positive allies as an excuse to be angry about the initial discussion?
You’ll forgive me if I find that obtuse, coming from a community that exists to expose those kinds of tactics in antifeminists.
And is that probably partially socially constructed to? Yeah, probably, but in any given situation that doesn’t really matter, because if she doesn’t want to date us, then she doesn’t want to date us. End of story.
Ambiphilic makes it sound like we’re attracted to frogs, so yeah, let’s not use that term.
@coffee: I don’t really read Tumblr (apart from three things, one of which is Confused Cats Against Feminism) so I still don’t follow the Tumblr references which you make.
When you now say:
Isn’t this what you meant by:
I’m really confused about what you’re trying to argue. Is it:
A. it would be great if we could have some more specific terms so that trans women lesbians and cis women lesbians don’t have mixed message conversations that otherwise might have led to sex
or is it:
B. all lesbians should be attracted to lesbian trans women?
Because I can’t follow what you’re actually trying to argue.
If it is A, then I think there is still the issue that just because Person C is generally interested in a particular type, that doesn’t mean Person C will be interested in Person D who happens to fall into that particular type. Because I don’t think that sexual interest can be defined on generalities due to the volume of cases that are incorrectly classified.
Excuse me? Her friends insecurities–do you by any chance mean the friends who coerced into sex/raped?
@pallygirl In the second quote, I am stating a fact: “the sexual interest is withdrawn.” This was an extension of the long post I made earlier, in which I follow up that statement of fact, like three or four times, with “that’s their right.”
I have always been championing sexual autonomy, and I have been *trying* to argue that the issue of exclusion is coming from different implications when a word is used one way versus another, NOT that trans lesbians are entitled to sex from cis lesbians. I probably could’ve shaved a few inches off my post today if I didn’t keep repeating that.
I am arguing A.
Also, in terms of the the topic of male socialization, the reason that came up the way it did is that Ally has been very firmly instructing the people on this blog that trans women did not and could not have received any male socialization for quite some time. Actually a lot of the stuff where you’re going “wait, huh, I never said that” is probably a reaction to things that she said.
“… only, we’d still have some humans who would be firmly convinced that budding off your left stalk was morally inferior, or something.”
*dies* I am slain! But yeah, I think you’re saying the same thing with less words, gods know pithy and I are not cozy bedfellows!
Axolotl update! My tank held at 26°C without the fan or bubbler going, so hopefully with the extra evaporation it’ll go down a couple degrees and then it’s axolotl time! Plus, the CO2 for the plants isn’t hooked up yet, so that’ll cause more gas exchange, and thus, hopefully, cooler water!