Categories
antifeminism creepy evil fat fatties irony alert men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA red pill sex workers sexual exploitation

A Voice for Men fights for the rights of men by fat-shaming women — and men

From AVFM's Facebook page.
From AVFM’s Facebook page.

Men’s Rights hate site A Voice for Men has a long history of fat shaming: apparently, like Roosh V and assorted other Red Pill douchebags, the good folks at AVFM consider the existence of fat women to be an assault on manhood, and possibly civilization itself.

Because that’s just the sort of human rights activists they are.

But even by AVFM’s low standards for logic, their latest little meme campaign against the evil fatties is a bit puzzling. Take the meme at the top of the page, found on AVFM’s Facebook page.

As an assault on “double standards” it’s a little odd, assuming that people find male employment and female thinness to be similarly sexually attractive. As an antifeminist “gotcha” — as I imagine its creator intended it to be — it makes even less sense. Feminists aren’t the ones telling men to “man up” and provide for women like the patriarchs of some imaginary golden age.

And if MRAs don’t want women to look to men for financial support, well, they could stop handwaving away the very real gender wage gap. And give up their endless attacks on child support as well as their fantasy of “financial abortions.” It’s hard to blame single mothers trying to raise kids on their own, often with inadequate or even non-existent support from the fathers in question, for thinking twice about dating guys who could end up demanding financial support themselves.

What makes the meme even weirder is that AVFMers don’t really want to give up fat shaming. So the overall effect of this meme is to … justify throwing shade at men who fail to live up to the traditional provider role that AVFM ostensibly opposes.

The meme below is an even more ironic variation on the theme.

Source: AVFM's Facebook page.
Source: AVFM’s Facebook page.

Why is it more ironic? Because there actually are men out there interested in “dating” homeless women — and by “dating” I mean exploiting the desperation of young women living on the streets who are willing to trade sex for food, shelter, or drugs.

How do I know this? Well, aside from having heard stories from several women who were themselves exploited in this way, I know because guys aspiring to exploit homeless women keep showing up on this blog.

Several years ago, you see, I wrote about an incredibly skeevy post on Matt Forney’s old blog In Mala Fide touting homeless girls as a frugal alternative to pricey prostitutes. The author of the post, calling himself Advocatus Diaboli, suggested focusing on “freshly homeless young girls” with hippie inclinations, reporting that

a decent round of drinks, snacks, money for pot, a small necessary item of clothing, decent dinner with booze will almost guarantee you a good lay (or at least a couple of BJs).

Ever since I wrote that post, my blog has gotten a small but steady trickle of visitors who’ve found the site through Google searches for things like “homeless girl paid to have sex,” “homeless prostitutes,” and “how to get the homeless to have sex eith [sic] you.” These are all real examples from the past week; I see a handful of queries like this every time I take a look at my stats.

So congratulations, skeezy dudes, you’ve managed to overcome the prejudice against homeless people, with your boners.

Meanwhile, back on Facebook, AVFM is expanding its fat shaming crusade to include men as well.

Source: AVFM's Facebook page
Source: AVFM’s Facebook page

In the United States, we should note, more than two-thirds of men (70%) are classified as “overweight” or “obese” — a rate even higher than that for women (57.6%). Apparently AVFM’s much vaunted “compassion for men and boys” only applies to 30% of them.

I don’t mean to be rude, but there are a number of AVFM staffers — male and female — who are themselves, well, “overweight” or “obese.” I wonder how they feel about volunteering for a site that regularly portrays people like them as little more than walking punchlines for unfunny memes.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

125 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Lea
Lea
5 years ago

Pelagic,
No. Just, no.

Lea
Lea
5 years ago

Francis Roy,
Bwahahahahahahaaaaaa!
You’re silly.

Lea
Lea
5 years ago

Oh, gross. A lying, dimwitted MRAsshole has appeared.

Dood,
Women being fat is like men being fat.

Men being homeless is like women being homeless.

Stop comparing apples to orangutans.

Homelessness is a social problem society needs to solve and other people’s bodies are none of your fucking business. See the dif?

Using a men’s suffering as a way to shame women’s bodies is pathetic. Where did you learn to be such an asshole?

mcjuliek
mcjuliek
5 years ago

Francis, there’s something you don’t seem to understand about memes. The whole point of them is supposed to be that they are “mimetic,” in that they catch on and are shared widely across the Internet. A “meme” that you don’t want shared on other people’s websites isn’t actually a meme. It’s… I don’t even know what it is.

Also, “You do not have leave to call me by pet names”? Seriously?

Did you just emerge from your mountain compound and get on the Internet for the first time? Because that would explain everything.

Lea
Lea
5 years ago

Francis,
A woman’s body is analogous to a man’s body.
A woman’s paycheck is like a man’s paycheck.

My body is me the way your body is you. You can’t see that because you’re a stupid fucking bigot.

..and, dude? You’re bald as a cue ball with a gray beard. What right do you have to mock anyone’s appearance? You ain’t making People’s Sexiest list either. Maybe you should slow your roll until you get a little self awareness?

brooked
brooked
5 years ago

You do not have leave to call me by pet names.

https://youtu.be/h4em8_iu-Tw

brooked
brooked
5 years ago

I’ve been addressing such things for a while. Note the date on this image.

I don’t know why fixing on this particular false equivalency for eight years is a point of pride for you, but whatever.

WWTH asks:

Got any evidence that the women who are speaking out against fat shaming are making fun of low income men?

Francis opines:

Your question is a catch-22. Are you looking for governmental statistics? If I present one or a dozen example, you’ll dismiss it them as extreme, fringe or too-small a sample size. If I point out my experience with a life-time of speaking to large women who make the claim that she won’t date someone because he isn’t prosperous enough, you’ll likely assert that it’s anecdotal evidence. If I were to hold a poll, you’d accuse me of loading it with MRAs.

I assume that as an honest person, you’ve likely met more than one woman who is both less than a fitness model and simultaneously holds men to some a standard of ambition or prosperity, greater than her own, and that the request for evidence is a poor choice of words.

You realize there’s a difference between not wanting to date someone and wanting to humiliate and shame someone, right? I guess not.

Lea
Lea
5 years ago

Check out Francis’s blog. It’s a laugh riot. He has no idea what racism even is, but he sure has opinions about it.

Lea
Lea
5 years ago

If I present one or a dozen example, you’ll dismiss it them as extreme, fringe or too-small a sample size.

One of these things is not like the other. One of these things just isn’t the same.

You can’t show us what you don’t have, Francis.

Lea
Lea
5 years ago

it’s anecdotal evidence.

lulz.

That is what an anecdote is. Yes, we will state facts. I’m not even sorry you feel that is unfair.

Lea
Lea
5 years ago

I thought Catch 22 was that a pilot could not be declared unfit to fly if he claimed he was unfit to fly? How is that like being expected to provide evidence that supports your claim?

weirwoodtreehugger
5 years ago

Lea,
I could only stomach the first page of his blog but it was funny. He won’t tolerate racism against him for being white? Lol.

Judging from the images he has posted, he seems to be more into sharing his boner feelings for models he doesn’t have a chance of dating (and not surprisingly, they’re all white) than he is concerned about classism against low income men.

Francis Roy
5 years ago

Francis, you do understand that if people are looking at your meme and going “huh?”, that means your meme has failed, right?

This is a fair enough response that I’m happy to accept. I’m happy to discuss ideas, to improve my skills, and to revise my point of view when presented with a better opinion.

What this comment is not, is a knowing distortion of what is intended as, David Futrelle is wont to do.

Francis Roy
5 years ago

2aimai said:

First of all: aesthetic and personal sexual preferences change all the time. Which you would know if you had spent ten seconds studying the topic from an anthropological or historical point of view. Fat women have traditionally been seen as extremely sexually desirable as partners–the current vogue for supermodel types is extremely unusual and ahistorical.

A slight precision to this: cultural aesthetics preferences change over time and region, and yes, I agree that cultures can have different visions of what is beautiful, and at different times, and, accordingly, at times the ideals lay on some scale of Greek to Rubinesque. Personal sexual preferences typically remain the same after an imprinting period.

But, in any event, fat acceptance/health at any size isn’t really about changing any particular individual person’s aesthetic preferences. Its about enabling people to feel good (male or female) about their own bodies.

Yet, it is used as the bludgeon of a moral accusation on a regular basis. I use my memes as an exercise to condense an idea to it’s core. I’ll accept that I’m not always as successful as I’d like to be at the task, this will not stop me from practicing. Let me then revise. What I’m addressing is a hypocritical fat-shaming shaming. It is a very common and promiscuous use of an accusation as a blundgeon against someone’s dignity used by left/Feminist/SJWs. “You only find thin people attractive? You are a morally defective Fat-shamer! But yes, I am attracted to tall prosperous men, how dare you question my personal tastes, misogynist!” Maybe I could have used “short-shaming” if what we’re looking for is as close a parallel as possible, but I find that prosperity seems to be a better equivalent. In short, what I’m addressing is a very common hypocrisy by the aforementioned group, not people who are fat. But humans being what they are, I suspect that more people here recognize this that would immediately acknowledge it.

So in that sense the only thing it has to do with unemployment or poverty is that it is a form of group consciousness raising that is intended to help many people who temporarily or permanently share a characteristic work together to resolve issues relating to their own lives. You could see it as a kind of union crossed with support group.

If it were in fact limited to this, I’d have no issue with it, and for no deeper reason than I believe that people should be treated with dignity–but that should apply to all parties, in all directions, at all times.

Finally: its not your job to police the world or explain to other people (male or female) that they should accept shaming or second class status.

I’ve done none of the above. Turn about is fair-play: it’s not anyone’s job to police the world or explain to other people that they should accept any idea or point of view that they should accept assaults upon their dignity or status.

Discussing an idea is not policing. Attempting to thoughtfully persuade someone is not policing. Berating someone for holding an idea, is.

No one has to listen to you

No one has to listen to anyone.

and no one should because your viewpoint is so meanspirited, vicious and uninteresting.

You would do much better to approach me as a good-willed person; there’s not an ounce of meanspiritededness in what I am, say, or do. If you are unwilling to accept this, walk away. If you find it uninteresting, that’s fair enough, too: walk away.

You have nothing to say on the topic in a literal sense because your work is vapid and tedious, and you have nothing to say on the topic because you don’t have standing to address other people’s lives and interests.

This comment is just silly. You are conflating your interest in what I say, with everyone else’s interest. Based on the standard that you’ve just offered, none may speak to any issue that is not uniquely applicable to them. By that standard, women may not speak of men’s issues, or men themselves and vice-versa. Not an MRA? You get no say. You have essentially said “You should not be listened to because I don’t like what you have to say.”

I don’t agree.

Francis Roy
5 years ago

weirwoodtreehugger said:

What do you mean by large women not wanting to date men who aren’t prosperous enough? Because anti feminists are constantly making the claim that women care about money more than anything and that’s not reflective of anyone I’ve known at any point in my life.

As a man, I am as acutely aware of a woman’s assessment of my prosperity as a woman might be of a man’s assessment of her attractiveness. The point is not that women, large or otherwise, won’t date men of lesser status or prosperity, but that there are two standards at work. On one hand, we have the notion that one’s attractiveness should not be judged based on appearance, or at least on fat, and on the other, that it is quite normalized to judge men on criteria such as height, wealth or status.

If all the women you know only value money and all the men you know only value physical appearance,

One does not need to be absolute.

maybe you’re just hanging around terrible people. Like MRAs.

This is just rude and prejudiced. Would it be acceptable for me to accept that Feminists qua Feminists are terrible people? May I recommend that you address ideas and behaviours rather than the moral value of a group?

However, you haven’t defined prosperity so for all I know you’re talking about women who don’t find it attractive when a man is too irresponsible to hold down a job and prefers to live off the money and unpaid labor of the women in his life.

I also haven’t defined “fit.” Consider the following statement: “I don’t know if you’re talking about men who don’t find it attractive when a woman is too irresponsible to stay fit, and just prefers to live off of men’s income and the unpaid labour of the men in her life.”

You know, like Paul Elam.

I would not know, and I suspect that you don’t either.

You could also be talking about conservative, traditionalist women who want to be homemakers. Those sorts of women want a prosperous man because they believe that it’s a man’s duty to provide financially.

The trend goes beyond traditionalism, it is as close to a universal as I’ve seen in human behaviour. Now let’s reverse the roles again. “These sort of men want a trim, fit and attractive woman because they believe that it’s a woman’s duty to appear in a certain way.” Do you accept this as a valid argument?

You guys are very inconsistent and hypocritical. You claim to like traditionalist women and think feminism is bad, you resent the trappings of traditionalism such as men being expected to be providers.

You err in that you refer to “you guys” as though men, or even men’s rights advocates are a uniform group. Shall I refer to you as “you girls” or “you Feminists?” Wouldn’t it be better to refer to the group who hold specific beliefs? I’ve never been interested in a traditionalist woman. In my experience, it is traditionalist men who want such a woman, and these kind are quite happy to foot the bill to keep a woman at home.

As for statistics, sure provide them. Provide a good study. Why not?

Apparently you’ve missed my point.

I’m not denying that many men show a preference for conventionally attractive women and many women show a preference for men with a money or status.

So we agree on this.

What I’m denying is that women who believe that appearance should be less emphasized in our culture are the ones who are materialistic and money obsessed.

I haven’t made that claim either. I’m claiming that it is hypocritical to hold men to one standard, and women to another.

If you think our culture should place less value on money, just say that. I’m not sure why that requires taking issue with fat acceptance.

See above.

BTW, that last meme you posted is also terrible. I have very large breasts. I don’t have them at you, it’s just my genes. I have cleavage in practically every shirt. That doesn’t mean it’s absurd to be expected to be treated like a human being. When it’s hot and humid outside I’d rather go outside in a tank top than my puffy winter coat. That doesn’t mean I’m asking for sexual harassment. Although maybe I’m missing something because I have no idea what’s going on with the check above the cleavage picture.

To quote you: “I’m not denying that many men show a preference for conventionally attractive women and many women show a preference for men with a money or status.” If it is acceptable for a woman to have a preference for men with money or status, then it should be equally acceptable for a man to find what he finds attractive as well. If it is reprehensible that men makes choices based on a woman’s appearance, it should be equally so that a woman make choices based on a man’s wealth, or status. To use a very blunt example: accusing men of being fat-shamers for their preference is the equivalent of accusing women of being gold-diggers for their preferences. Are either fair? I think not. Is it fair to make the accusation in only one direction? I think not, yet, when men make comments as to their preferences, they are accused of objectifying women, but umbrage is taken when the reverse is made.

That’s enough for me, for today.

sunnysombrera
5 years ago

What I’m addressing is a hypocritical fat-shaming shaming. It is a very common and promiscuous use of an accusation as a blundgeon against someone’s dignity used by left/Feminist/SJWs. “You only find thin people attractive? You are a morally defective Fat-shamer! But yes, I am attracted to tall prosperous men, how dare you question my personal tastes, misogynist!”

Prove that that happens please, as ‘commonly’ as you claim it does, and while you’re at it we’re still waiting for that evidence that women who speak out against fat shaming are mocking low income men. The longer you stall and make excuses, the more likely we’re going to think that you have nothing to support your point with.

Lanariel
Lanariel
5 years ago

@dhag85
Yeah

contrapangloss
5 years ago

Takes issue with being lumped in with MRAs and having the notion that “Women only like men for their paycheck and men only like women for attractiveness” attributed to said group, and claims he only focuses on ideas…

… then attributes a strangely specific sentence to leftists, feminists, and Social Justice Warriors.

Something seems off there.

sparky
sparky
5 years ago

Francis Roy: You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about and what you are arguing against. You have missed the point of this article and the comments by such a wide margin that we’re not even in the same orbit here. How do I know that? Because of this:

What I’m addressing is a hypocritical fat-shaming shaming. It is a very common and promiscuous use of an accusation as a blundgeon against someone’s dignity used by left/Feminist/SJWs. You only find thin people attractive? You are a morally defective Fat-shamer!

This statement broadcasts to the world that you have absolutely no idea what fat-shaming is and what feminists mean when they talk about fat-shaming. Please, please, please; before you attempt to engage in an argument here, please Google fat-shaming. Because what your saying here is not in any way, shape or form what feminists mean when they talk about fat-shaming.

One would almost think, Francis, that you’re creating some kind of straw-feminist out of thin air and knee-jerk hatred.

You only find thin people attractive? You are a morally defective Fat-shamer! But yes, I am attracted to tall prosperous men, how dare you question my personal tastes, misogynist!”

Yep. Pure straw.

Maybe I could have used “short-shaming” if what we’re looking for is as close a parallel as possible, but I find that prosperity seems to be a better equivalent.

It is not. It is completely unrelated. If you wanted to make the case that people shouldn’t be shamed because of their income or employment status, then by all means, go do that. But that’s not what you’re doing here. What you’re doing here is making confusing, indecipherable memes because you have absolutely no understanding or grasp of the relevant concepts. Or you do understand, and you don’t care, and are just looking for an excuse to bash feminists, logic and reality be damned.

In short, what I’m addressing is a very common hypocrisy by the aforementioned group, not people who are fat. But humans being what they are, I suspect that more people here recognize this that would immediately acknowledge it.

You have been asked – repeatedly – to provide evidence that feminists and/or fat-acceptance activists engage in shaming men about their financial or employment status. You have yet to provide…anything. The only logical conclusion to that is you got nothing.

BTW, what exactly is the point of the last meme? The one with cheerful gentleman with the tape measure? What exactly are you trying about that man, hmmm?

Lanariel
Lanariel
5 years ago

@Francis Roy
The main point is that it is all okay for anyone to not want to date anyone else, for whatever reason or reasons. But when you start to spend time telling said person, even before you know them, that they should be ashamed for various reasons related to looks and or success in life, thats crossing the line.

To recap:
Man finds woman to fat and decides to not sleep with her. OK.
Woman finds man to fat and decides to not sleep with him. OK.

Man finds woman to unemployed and decides to not sleep with her. OK
Woman finds man to unemployed and decides to not sleep with him. OK

Man finds woman to fat and decides to ridicule her. NOT OK.
Woman finds man to fat and decides to ridicule her. NOT OK.

Man finds woman to unemployed and decides to ridicule her. NOT OK.
Woman finds man to unemployed and decides to ridicule her. NOT OK.

A group of men/women trying to encourage each other and telling each other that they are human beings even though they are fat and/or unemployed. OK

A group of men/women trying to encourage each other and telling others that they are not human beings for being fat and/or unemployed. NOT OK.

Shaming people for being either unemployed and/or poor is not ok, no matter, and even more so because, it is so common in modern society.

On the issue of fat shaming:
When me and my flatmate last traveled together, when we where waiting for our train, an older woman came up to us out of nowhere and argued that we should join biggest loser, since she thought that was a good show, and that it would be good for us to loose some weight. My flatmate already suffered from anxiety from his weight, and where at the time, and are still, trying to loose enough to do a gastric bypass.

weirwoodtreehugger
5 years ago

Francis,
The point that you are consistently missing is that fat shaming isn’t about sexual preferences. If a man happens to like thinner women, fine. It becomes shaming when they say a fat woman is disgusting, unlovable, etc.

I don’t care what anybody finds attractive as long as it involves consenting adults. Just don’t univeralize your own preferences. There are women out there who like men that are rich, tall, fit, whatever. But I don’t see anywhere near as many women treat men that they don’t personally desire as disgusting subhuman objects of ridicule. It is however, very common for men to do this to women. In fact, it’s common for men to use you’re fat/ugly as an argument against what women say even when it’s an anonymous internet comment section and they can’t see you.

Oh, and btw, you can cut out that pearl clutching about how mean it is to think badly of MRAs. There is not a single one who isn’t awful and misogynistic. If you look at the recent posts here you’ll see that AVFM just posted a rant from an actual Nazi about how feminism is terrible because we don’t think marital rape is a good thing.

So which MRA is not terrible? You can’t pick yourself because you just said that objecting to being sexually harassed for going outside while having boobs is somehow unfairly judging men for their sexual preferences.

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
5 years ago

As a man, I am as acutely aware of a woman’s assessment of my prosperity as a woman might be of a man’s assessment of her attractiveness.

You’re acutely aware of your assumption that women are assessing your net worth. I will assure you, although I know you won’t believe it, that 90% of the women you meet could not give even the first shit about your “prosperity.”

Poor men, unemployed men, and men who can’t support themselves for whatever reason get into relationships every day. Every. Day. Stay-at-home dads, who do not work and are fully supported by their female partners, are a thing, an ever-more-common thing. You assume that women are judging you by your bank account, or what you present as a representation of your bank account, like your clothes and car and whatnot, but lots and lots and lots of men get laid, get girlfriends, and get married without any money at all.

Here is a truth: if all the women you encounter are gold-diggers, it means that the only women willing to be around you are those who are willing to accept some kind of monetary compensation for it. It means your personality is so repulsive, you literally have to pay a woman to share your space. It means that that 90% of women who don’t care about your money and would be happy to pay for a date themselves are repulsed by you, and aren’t willing to share your space for any amount of remuneration.

That’s what you’re revealing about yourself with statements like this. Just FYI.

kirbywarp
kirbywarp
5 years ago

You know, if someone has a preference for some quality of their future partner, that isn’t shaming. That’s just a preference. A woman saying that she would only date a man with lots of money isn’t shaming in an of itself, nor is a man saying that he would only date a woman with a particular body type.

Both preferences can be problematic as hell, but they aren’t automatically shaming.

Francis, you’re equating “preference” with “shaming.” That’s why your crusade is so dang bizarre and misguided. Shaming poor people does happen, and it is a huge issue, but it’s an issue that’s completely unrelated to dating and sexual attraction, and therefore the connection you keep pushing doesn’t actually exist.

Now, in the dating realm, if a man were saying that he would only date thin women and every other man should do the same because heavier women are bad, that’s the shaming part. When there’s a culture-wide notion that heavier women are lesser, that’s the where the problem lies.

Now, if you want to limit your discussion solely to the dating realm and try to find evidence that looks and money are the male and female versions of sexual attraction, you could always ask single folks what they’re looking for in a partner.

Oh, well, would you look at that. Survey says that while men rate physical attraction highly, women do not rate income highly. Huh, weird.

Banana Jackie Cake, the Best Jackie and Cake! Yum! (^v^)
Banana Jackie Cake, the Best Jackie and Cake! Yum! (^v^)
5 years ago

@Francis

What gets me is that you have no idea what the hell double standards are.

The point is not that women, large or otherwise, won’t date men of lesser status or prosperity, but that there are two standards at work.

Yes, being fat and being rich are two different standards, thus your memes do not portray “double standards”. Double standards are when one standard is applied differently to different people, not when two different variables that are used to determine someone’s attractiveness, worth or whatever when applied to different people.

A recent example from the news: When John McCain ran for president back in 2008, there were no republican-leaning news outlets that said whether or not he’s too old to run the country, even though he was born in 1936. (Admittedly, many liberal media did discuss and state he was.) However when Hillary Clinton runs for president, she’s suddenly “too old” or “too tired” to even think of running for presidency, according many news outlets, both liberal and conservative, even though she was born in 1947. She’s a few years younger than McCain was when he ran for president (McCain was around 72, Hilairy is around 69). That is a double standard. People of the same relative age but different genders being judged on whether or not they can do something.

At the very least, get the definition of what “double standards” right. You’ve been doing these memes waaay too long to be getting a definition wrong.

Hellyeah
Hellyeah
5 years ago

Oh and for all the Francis’ of the world: what men have started doing lately is not only discriminating against looks in women but on top of that her job and career. A triple standard if you will.
My brother who has a steady job but no remarkable education or career is complaining the only type of women he only ever gets are hairdressers. They are “attractive” but the job title seems to be a problem. (Btw a hairdresser still has more education under their belt than him) Whereas before it was about finding a hot girl, now that all of us have to adult they have yet found another way to exploit women. The guy who was to cool for school feels entitled to a woman with a career or at least a high income. Can’t show of the hairdresser to the friends.

What they’re thinking is “oh so women bring home the bacon now, I want one who brings home a lot of bacon”. What makes them think such a woman is going to look at him, especially after finding out that he’s all talk and no action. Give a man an inch and they take a mile.