So I was wondering if any of A Voice for Men’s readers had spoken up in the comments there about a rather sensitive subject: the fact that theĀ supposed “human rights” site recentlyĀ published aĀ postĀ that was not onlyĀ 1)Ā an apologia for marital rapeĀ but also,Ā 2) written by a Holocaust denier and Hitler fan.
When I took at look at the comments there this morning, theĀ answer was (of course) no: there was no mention of AVFM contributorĀ Amartya Talukdar’s numerous Tweets describing the Holocaust as a hoax, Hitler as a great man, and Hillary Clinton as a “Jewess.”
Instead, I found that those who challengedĀ Talukdar’s postĀ (archived here) — which defended the Indian government’s refusal to see marital rape as rape — got harsh rebukes from other AVFM commenters and the site’s moderators, who went so far as to actually banĀ two commenters unhappy with Talukdar’s rape apologia.
No, really.
Take a look at the response one Donald J. Kingsbury got when he challenged Talukdar’s post.
It didn’t take long for Kingsbury’sĀ prediction to come true.
![donald j kingsbury ā¢ 2 days ago This page is shifty comedy. Just because you are married to someone doesn't mean they owe you sex, or even have to have kids with you. If she doesn't want to have sex, she doesn't want to have sex. She is not an object to be controlled, or something that is owned. And just because yr married doesn't mean she owes you sex when you want, go masturbate and get over yourselves. 1 ā¢ Replyā¢Share āŗ Avatar Grumpy Old Man Mod donald j kingsbury ā¢ 2 days ago You have been banned because of a serious and direct violation of Comment Policy (derailing and trolling). [Ref: 4895] Additional remarks: Yup,and no one is contesting that here.](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/avfmcommentbannedmarrape.png?resize=580%2C231&ssl=1)
This is what happens if you challenge the consensus at AVFM. Even if what you are challenging is an article by a Holocaust denier arguing that marital rape doesn’t exist because “marriage is consent.”
One commenter was unhappy with Grumpy Old Man’sĀ response:
His candid comment earned him this rebuke from AVFM’s top mod:
Never mind that the article in question defended the “right” of men to sex-on-demand from their wives by lamenting that if women in India were allowed to say no to their husbands, these poor fellows might have to resort to masturbation. Because inĀ Talukdar’s view, evidently, it’s better for men to rape their wives than for them to be “forced” to masturbate.
There’s a lot more terribleness in the comments there, but to me the worst comes from a regularĀ AVFM commenter who calls himself Shrek6, who has evidently convinced himself that “rape is not that bad a crime against a woman or human being.”
“A woman or human being.” That’s actually what he wrote.
Heck, he explains in another comment, vaginas are tough, so most women don’t really suffer all that much from rape. As he sees it, most women can get over rape pretty easily if they can be convincedĀ to forgive their rapists.
No, that’s what he really thinks:
These two comments are considered acceptable discourse at AVFM. Comments bluntly challenging an apologia for marital rape aren’t.
Hugs to everyone who needs them.
Happy Birthday Paradox!
Thanks for the birthday wishes everyone! I had a pretty good birthday, all this shit aside. I got to try new sushis!
And my uncle took me to an awesome place where sushi’s half off after five PM!
Happy birthday Paradoxical!
Rape is so much worse when it’s done to men – or it is if you’ve never experienced rape, don’t live under the constant fear it might happen to you if you aren’t ‘careful’, can’t or won’t even imagine what it would be like to have it happen to you and want to be able to rape women with impunity.
These people have no empathy. “I don’t mind being raped” said no-one, ever.
I don’t want them to be raped, but I can’t help feeling that everyone would benefit from them experiencing that sense of powerlessness, invasion and violation. Then the self doubt, recriminations, accusations of lying, fear of it being repeated or follow-up violence to keep them from telling etc.
Or they could just listen to what women are telling them about how it’s bad and don’t do it.
@Paradox
http://www.plentygifts.nl/1872-large_gifts/geluidskaart-happy-birthday-kat.jpg
Aw, thank you Spindrift! š
“are tough, so most women donāt really suffer all that much from rape.”
From the same who religiously believes vaginas gets stretched and women are “used” by too much sex, lol!
@Quartzok-43
Good point. They think an “untouched vagina” is the only value a woman will ever have. So.. rape (of a virgin) takes away the only value a woman can have, but it’s totally not a big deal.
Another contradiction in the narrative. How many are we up to now?
Umm, in my previous comment I didn’t mean to imply that only vaginal rape is rape, or anything like that. Sorry.
“Hey, the mugger only took $3.00 from you. It’s not like he stole a hundred. Now THAT would be a crime.”
What a fucking idiot Shrek6 is. Essentially, he’s trying to argue that rape should only be prosecuted if another crime is committed alongside it, like assault. And then, the rapist should only be punished for that secondary crime. Rape? What’s that?
You have to wonder why he and his ilk are so heavily invested in defining rape out of existence. The fact that they don’t even think marital rape exists, while simultaneously rushing to defend it….they get so, so angry at the idea that marriage isn’t an ironclad contract guaranteeing them 24/7 access to someone else’s body. They act like it’s a huge betrayal of manhood not to have at least one socially/legally sanctioned arrangement in life where they get to have sex on tap, and never have to worry about consent.
Yeesh. If that’s their idea of marriage, then they need to go their own way. Far, far away. Preferably to a planet made entirely of Lego, with Lego oceans and a Lego atmosphere, which gets bombarded regularly by Lego meteorites.
Oh, and apparently, telling rape victims to “get over their injury and move on with their lives” is sound advice, but telling men to “get over yourselves and go masturbate” is unforgivably insulting and results in an immediate ban for trolling and derailing.
But they’re not a hate site, no sirree.
And, of course, “Violent non-white stranger” is literally the only situation where MRAs will call it rape. Victims just can’t win for losing.
Hilarious that he thinks rapists get locked up for life! In what universe? ???? The US average is 8 or 9 years, but I doubt they all stay the whole time. I’ve heard prison is worse for child rapists, but I doubt the other prisoners are like, “that guy violated a woman’s body! Get him!” I guess if his mission is to keep convicted rapists from being locked up for life… mission accomplished?
Sadly I know someone who uses the ‘get over it, it isn’t a big deal’ line’. My mother – who is not exactly anti feminist, but obviously not feminist. She conceded that if the victim was a virgin it would be a big deal. I was young at the time, so I did not argue with her like I would now.
I will admit that I also believe no one should go to prison for rape, but that’s just because I’m a very hardcore prison abolitionist. I don’t believe people should go to prison for murder, either.
I have a feeling that MRA objections to imprisonment for rape are not based on an ideological distaste for the prison-industrial complex, though.
I hate it when pages do this crap. I got banned from “MUH men’s rights activism” when they said it’s okay to fear all men if your hurt by one man and I asked “so if I’m hurt by feminists I can dislike feminism?”. It was a honest question.
Irony is their the page that shared this link, funny.
I don’t wonder. The majority are very likely rapists excusing their own behavior and trying to place their shame onto their victims. Guilt is a hell of a thing to live with. It will eat you up. It makes it easier for them to sleep at night to pretend they aren’t “really” rapists.
The rest just want to be rapists and likely will be if ever given the chance. They say as much with their rape apology.
Rapists and abusers support rape and abuse. That’s who MRAs are.
pita,
I can agree that prisons need drastic reform yesterday and many, many people do not belong in prison. But, no. Rapists should not be free to rape again. The effect they have on the world is too toxic. It is not only the victims of the rape that are harmed but every little girl who has to walk the world in constant fear.
@pita
Instead of prison, what do you think should happen when someone commits a crime? Some form of restorative justice, perhaps? I also think our prison system is badly broken and needs to be fixed.
Regarding the thing about rape survivors being told to forgive their attackers:
I watched a movie a few years ago called “Forgiving the Bad Man.” It was from some small (conservative, in my opinion) Christian film company, the type that’s trying to make alternatives to ebil Hollywood films.
Basically, a 20-year-old virgin (who is living at home and working a menial job, despite obviously being middle-class?) gets raped by a stranger, turns him in (the film really glosses over the legal part), has the baby and /brings him to the jail to meet his father/, who gets reformed in jail before getting killed protecting his baby mama and son. It seemed like the movie promoted the idea that survivors of rape are expected to forgive their rapists; if the rapist had lived, I wonder if she would have been expected to marry him.
Anyway, I’ve never been in that kind of situation, so when I saw the movie, my thought process was roughly “Oh… forgiving people is good… so it’s good that she forgave him,” but this thread has really made me rethink things.
Thoughts?
Well, that’s the most nauseatingly misogynistic film summary I’ve read since
MRA Conspiracy Theories: The MovieGone Girl.Restorative justice has some problems. I am not an expert on it, but from what I’ve seen there is too high of a pressure for victims to enter into a dialogue with perpetrators and forgive them at the end of the process. That is two problematic pressures and neither of them are good. There is also the problem of: how exactly is someone who has been sexually assaulted to be “restored”? I really don’t understand how restorative justice is supposed to work for a rape victim who never wants to see the rapist again and is re-traumatized if forced to interact with the rapist.
If you know more about it, I would certainly welcome more information.