In his must-read GQ story on A Voice for Men’s conference last summer, Jeff Sharlet detailed an unsettling encounter between his friend Blair and AVFM’s “collegiate activism director” Sage Gerard, who, Blair told Sharlet, crudely propositioned her and gave her “the most unconsensual hug I have ever known.” (I wrote about it here.)
Now Gerard has offered a rebuttal of sorts to Sharlet’s article and, well, it’s nearly as creepy as the incident itself. Gerard admits that he was indeed flirting with her and that, yes, “[m]y talking to her included a reassuring knee pat and a hug.”
He also claims that Blair was literally hired by GQ in order to flirt with men at the conference and lure one or more of them into raping her.
Gerard starts off by declaring, with no evidence whatsoever, that Blair was a “plant hired specifically to flirt with men and get GQ a story.”
Then his accusations get even uglier:
Blair’s job was to get raped.
Jeff [Sharlet] wanted that to happen, not MHRAs [Men’s Human Rights Activists]. Blair would play Seven Minutes in Heaven if it got Jeff a rape story. She was there to confirm a presumption that MHRAs, MGTOWs or other red-pill folk are incapable of self-control and are ready to rape at a moment’s notice.
Happily for Gerard, he writes, he was able to see through this subterfuge in time, I guess, to keep from raping her.
Unfortunately for Jeff, I have an ability to detect manipulation, and I do not think with my dick. He calibrated his bear trap to clamp shut on a hug-trigger, which meant he could try to make me look like a pervert even with totally appropriate physical contact. Since he was obviously desperate to catch prey, his trap misfired and merely ripped my jeans without biting me to a standstill. Having narrowly evaded pseudo-journalistic “capture,” I can easily show you that Blair was, indeed, a trap.
He then proceeds to “show us” absolutely nothing that backs up this accusation. After briefly describing his conversation with Blair, which (aside from the “reassuring knee pat” and unconsensual hug) dealt with a friend of Blair’s who claims he’s been falsely accused of rape, he wrote.
I never intend to sleep with strangers, but Jeff framed this interaction as me using Blair’s pain as an excuse to eat her out.
I have no idea where that last bit came from either.
He follows this with a bunch of rape jokes I won’t bother to quote.
I’m not quite sure how Gerard expects that writing this creepy-as-hell post will somehow make him seem like less of a creep.
That strumpet Blair! How dare she go out in public and speak to other humans while female?! We must not stand for such overt manipulation!!
So who else has had that experience being the female in a male-dominated space who gets hugged all the time by straight dudes who don’t hug their close male friends?
I like hugs, and I’m happy to hug decent people I’ve just met if I felt a connection with them, and if they also like hugs. But when a straight guy hugs me and then turns and gives all his bros whom he’s known way longer a fist bump, that makes it retroactively creepy. It’s telling me either “I expect your gender to provide me an extra level of emotional and physical intimacy on principle because I can’t get it from my real friends” or “that wasn’t a platonic hug.”
Long before I really understood WHY it was creepy, I’d sometimes get annoyed and order them to hug their male friends too, only to be told off because I was “making it weird.” Other times I’d be too hesitant to say anything. I get that navigating bro code and homophobia is no walk in the park, but it’s humiliating and othering to be automatically responsible for near-strangers’ emotional well-being, and at the same time get the sense that you might never really get to count as a friend.
It’s all part of this entitlement to women’s time, energy, and bodies. It’s not that a hug from an actual male friend isn’t sweet, but I’ve gotten a lot of hugs from guys who definitely wanted a hug more than they wanted to be my friend.
This goes for cheek kisses too, which in most of the Anglosphere have to involve at least one woman or else they’re weird and gay, which makes you wonder whether that makes all those cheek kisses from your uncle “straight.” Blleeaaggccchh.
GhostBird – I think that’s the look he’s going for. If you click through (it’s a DNL) take a look at his banner.
It doubles down on the vibe.
AVFM were presented with two open goals here. They could have acted appropriately around Blair, and their “collegiate activism director” could have offered useful practical advice about what to do about a false rape accusation – an issue which is right up their street. They could have come out of this looking, if not exactly good, at least like a serious and respectable organisation dedicated to rights. But no, all they could manage was rape jokes, creepy touching, and, good grief, a poem. Massive fail.
Oh my. I wonder how many skulls he owns?
Thanks, boogerghost. I’m glad I refreshed before I posted my last screed, because you summed everything up much better. For whatever reasons I haven’t been catcalled or propositioned much in my life. But boy howdy, am I every man’s surrogate mom/girlfriend/therapist/emotional dumping ground. I’ve ended up listening to tales of unappreciative wives and children after I simply asked someone for help finding the mole repellent in Home Depot. I usually fix a mix of pity – how sad is it to have to turn to strangers for sympathy? – and irritation because seriously dude, why do you think I owe you this? And some of these fellas act like they’re merely collecting their due. I can’t figure out if that’s better or worse than the guys who seem to know that they’re imposing, but sheepishly do it anyway.
This is awesome brain bleach, Kat, as good as the kitten/cat pictures. I can’t stop giggling at the thought of a determined cat, heroically digging her way out of her fluffy confinement like a climber caught in an avalanche. I imagine it’s probably more painful than cute IRL, though.
http://i374.photobucket.com/albums/oo188/dhag85/a0a9ed83-fb6b-451c-a5c1-4440e82441d4_zpsjj6mflxu.jpg
Angry angel cat says shut up, Woody.
This is a rebuttal?
The mind. She boggles.
It sure looks like the fantasy of a none too bright sexual predator who is so used to the manosphere that he has no idea how he sounds to the rest of the world. So creepy.
@Flying Mouse Exactly. It may not be their fault they’re emotionally stunted, we all are in a way and gender rigidity certainly doesn’t help, but you should never be expected to drain your own emotional resources to make up for that. I say we cut down on pro bono consoling and encourage dude pals to shoulder a bit more. Better for everyone.
He’s so vile.
She made a face, not she looked sad. He’s making believe that she was out to get him by feigning sadness. Still, the look on her face meant he could touch her.
He was “flirting” with the sad stranger (Whom he knew was a duplicitous spy all along) but at the same time, touching her had nothing at all to do with him “flirting”.
He completely waves away the fact she is a professional with an established career to accuse her of prostituting herself in an attempt to get another writer a story that vilifies the MRM.
He calls rape, possibly gang rape “seven minutes in heaven”. I suppose he’s suggesting that she was willing to let a bunch of rather unappealing strangers run a train on her so that she could lie about it afterwards. (No doubt she would steal all the condoms on her way out too for that sweet, sweet child support.)
How much does he suppose she was paid? Because DAMN.
His evidence? She was existing while female and spoke up about his touching being unconsensual.
This is the second ‘rebuttal’ that I’ve seen that insists that the GQ journalists laid a trap but the AVFMers were too smart to fall for it…
Then why didn’t we hear about this sleazy corrupt journalist and his ‘honey pot’ ‘bear trap’ friend right after the conference? Why did they wait until after the article was released to confront the supposed set up?
Hmm…
Is it because AVFMers are full of crap? All Very Fabricated Malarky?
Gosh, talking about giving a guy enough rope to hang himself.
I mean, did the GQ article anywhere, at any point, equate Sage Gerard’s behavior towards Blair as rape? It just said he hugged her without her wanting him to, in other words completely ignoring her body language. I’ve been on the receiving end of a few unwanted hugs over the years (one was a Greek Orthodox priest, that was bloody awkward) and while I’d never equate it with assault, it isn’t very nice. Why is Gerard so angry that Blair didn’t enjoy his physical attentions? Oh yes, because he’s a rapey little shit. Not a rapist,as far as we know, but a rapey little shit none the less.
And what is with that demonic photo he’s put at the top of the article? Is he trying to be ironic or something? I like the way his selection of undoctored photos look just as scary as the weird GQ one.
I also think it odd that someone who wants to defend men against false rape accusations is throwing Blair’s friend under the bus by revealing more details about him than the GQ article did.
I bet Kennesaw State University is thinking that they made a good call taking action against him…even though it was barely enough to curb his “activism”.
Holy crap, this.
If he pulls the “I’m on the autism spectrum, I can’t read other people’s face-signals” card as I suspect he will, this ought to be proof that he’s lying, he can damn well SO read other people’s faces, and he just chooses to “misinterpret” the situation in his own favor anyway. (Note the quotes, there for a reason.) First the “don’t touch a guy on the leg unless you WANT him”, then he goes right ahead and does that very thing to her? How much more transparent about his intentions could he get? He certainly can’t claim to be a bad reader of social cues, because that was some straight-up PUA kino right there.
Plus the whole “I just had to” excuse for pulling her away from her friends and then getting all touchy on her (and trying to show what a “poet” he is!) is also wrong as fuck. Maybe it’s my Nice Girl Training talking, but I was always taught that other people’s emotional needs are, at the very least, on a par with one’s own, and in social situations where you just met someone, you put their needs ahead of yours for politeness’ sake. If you want to go someplace more private, you don’t drag them there, you ask first if it’s okay. When you see someone looking uncomfortable at what you say/do, you stop. He didn’t. At the very least, he is horrifically rude and ill-mannered for pushing through her obvious discomfort and imposing his “needs” on her. More likely, though, he DID have an ulterior motive, and is pissed as hell that everyone saw through it and that it didn’t get left out of the piece.
He has no right to complain that they went out of their way to made him look bad. They did nothing of the sort. He did that himself, and has no one but himself to blame.
So what I got from reading the snippets above is that Gerard, upon detecting a trap, decides to get closer rather than avoid. Doesn’t sound like a smart move.
I also have to agree about how the manospherians can’t get their narrative straight. If Gerard is spotted with Blair, it must be so easy for her to cry rape. /s So would he really be avoiding the trap if she accuses him anyway?
The other thing is how they think that flirting leads to rape, not sex, but rape. So they think that’s the logical outcome? If so, they all better avoid flirting with women in case they trick the menz into raping them and then falsely(?) accuse men of rape. I’m really confused too about whether the Gerard would consider that a false rape charge, especially since he admits he could have raped her if he hadn’t seen through the trap.
And then there’s the unintended implication that if he didn’t think Blair was baiting him for GQ, he would have raped her. So what’s stopping him from rape isn’t human decency but bad publicity, which he’s not helping with his “rebuttal.”
You guys really need to check out this article. It references this very post by David, the rebuttal by Elam, the “honey trap” accusation from Gerard, and is just an all round good article. The URL pretty much says it all.
http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2015/02/27/mens-rights-movement-hilariously-self-defeating/
It really is.
Especially since Elam said this to the conference goers:
AND THEY STILL FUCKED UP.
Nthing the opinion that Sage Gerard isn’t socially unaware, he’s deliberately creepy. It sounds to me like he was using the sad look on her face as an in. An excuse to touch her with consoling and reassuring her as his cover story. Keep in mind from Atilla’s detailed description of Blair, she was wearing shorts. So Sage not only touched her leg,he touched her bare leg. That is an extremely intimate gesture and he knew it. Or he wouldn’t have said that it’s flirting for a woman to touch a man’s leg.
How creepy is it when men see a woman who is upset and in need of comforting and rather than empathize and listen to her,they see her as a prime candidate for flirting because she’s in a vulnerable state. Ick.
There is definitely a subset of humanity that enjoys the power and dominance of pushing boundaries as far as possible. The target is always someone perceived as vulnerable, marginalized or in some way lesser. It happens to women in general but you see it even more with pregnant women experience unwanted belly touching or black women experiencing unwanted hair touching.
Of course the comment section of that RH article is swarming with them. I mean swarming. Esmay and even Elam is there. Elam’s biggest issue is that Marcotte cited a third party source instead of straight to his AVFM post – repeat after me, kiddies: “CONTEXT!!” Not linking straight to his site means the whole post is bunkum, of course.
The rest are all “LOJIK AND FACKTS WILL WIN!” And a lot of deleted posts. I think they’re starting to cotton on that the more they talk the deeper they dig themselves…only a little though.
Sunny,
Why did I read the comments? A bunch of MRA brigading. The comments had to be closed. Of course, they’re all whining about how misrepresented and smeared they are without ever actually denying that any of the creepy shit happened. Never once did I see an MRA say”of course we don’t advocate the position that men should be able to rape 12 year olds.” Never did they say they actually think it’s wrong for a father to mock his daughter for being a rape victim. All they can do is call feminists bigots and complain about the UN not working to stop the circumcision of boys (what that has to do with their creepy behavior, I don’t know).
Oops. Should have refreshed before posting!
Ugh, there’s also the seriously disturbing implication that the only reason he *didn’t* go farther than what he did is because he “sensed a trap”, so if he had thought she *was* just a random woman with no ulterior motives he would have….what, exactly? ACK.
@sunnysombrera and WWTH And that’s why the internet can’t have nice things. I’m really getting tired of seeingthe same band of pitchfork-wielding waah-waah-waah idiots pooping all over every.single.freaking.comment.section, claiming that the FACTS! and the EVIDENCE! are on their side. And yet they never actually produce any facts or evidence. We’re just supposed to take their word for it that they’re right and feminists are wrong.
Another point re: Gerard’s ridiculous “rebuttal”, no reputable magazine would ever hire someone and tell them to put themselves in danger just for the sake of a story. It’s about ethics in journalism.
Well, I guess we can safely assume that the talk about “sensing a trap” is post facto rationalization. The real reason he limited himself to brief sexual harassment is that it was a public event where extensive harassment would have been kinda against social rules, the boyfriend was a potential obstacle, and he was being kinda busy with the con anyway.
@Buttercup You can make a bingo card out of every thing they say. Every time.
1) This is out of context/not the full picture of what happened.
2) This is a vicious attempt at slander because the author hates men/feminism is dying/feminism is about hating men.
3) TRUTH WILL WIN!
4) If feminism is about equality then why aren’t feminists fighting men’s battles for them?
5) False equivalencies ad infinitum.
6) The author is deliberately ignoring facts and logic.
7) We know all the facts and logic.
8) [Never provides any facts and logic]
9) False “facts” and twisted statistics to “prove” women are the main perps of DV/male rape.
10) Media propaganda by the feminist overlords.
Oh and “We’re not misogynists”.
To be clear, I don’t think Gerard just barely avoided raping raping Blair at the con. It’s more like that in slightly different circumstances he might have harassed her all night, trying to pester her for a date and, if that succeeded, eventually for sex.
He might or might not personally think of it as “rape”, but he’s pretty aware that feminists would call it rape if it happened, and he’d have some trouble explaining it as consensual. Of course, since it didn’t happen, he sees no problem in admitting that it might have happened.
As it is, he only needs to excuse a little harassment as totally normal friendly interaction. Or was it flirting with an aggressively sexual woman? Whatever.