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.
I’m having junior high school flashbacks. Such a trainwreck!
Wait, derailing? Were those comments posted in direct reply to the article in question? If so, how are they “derailing” anything?
I like the part where Grumpy Old Man is accused of using feminist tactics. The feeeeemales! š
Honestly, I think there’s a case to be made that these people are advocating crimes.
Ronan – Not spouting the party line = “derailing”.
“Derailing” = “Because shut up! That’s why!”
Agree with proxieme. Also, AVFM has a habit of spitting out words they don’t understand as form of rebuttal. For example: context, satire, misandry to name a few.
That Shrek guy made me feel ill. With opinions like his I’m not surprised he doesn’t use his real name or face on his profile. Well, on that particular profile anyway. Also, place your bets that somewhere he was written a screed about how women should say yes to analyse more often. Sigh.
I got nothin’. I was going to wonder if they kissed their mothers with those mouths, but then I figured that they probably don’t.
Anal, not analyse. Curse you, PG rated autocorrect!
@Falconer
AVFM have published two posts this week against mothers, the first one insisting that mums are nothing special and it’s dads that are central to the family, the second linking to a video on “How to divorce your mother.”
Somehow I don’t think asking them “what would your mother think?” will have much effect.
Marital rape has been a built-in feature of patriarchal marriage forever. It’s one of the main feminist objections to “traditional” marriage. Marital rape has only become a crime in western countries very recently, as far as I know, due to feminism. It’s an ancient male privilege being taken away from men, one of the real (but usually hidden) bases of their complaints that men are suffering “disadvantages” due to women being treated as human beings. This article makes their argument outright. It should be referred to every time somebody brings up MRAs in the mainstream as having “legitimate complaints”.
“Rape is bad” – “STOP CONCERN TROLLING YOU FEMINAZI WHITE KNIGHT MANGINA!”
“Masturbation is a better solution than rape” – “STOP DERAILING, YOU’RE ATTACKING WHAT WE WORK FOR, HERE!”
…
AVFM again prove they are just as bad as “ebil feminists” claim they are.
Seriously, tho; are they getting more extreme? I could be wrong, but not that long ago, this kind of horrid rape-apology and outright attack on basic human rights for women, is something they would at least pretend to not support. It’s like the lot of them are just getting increasingly rabid, hateful and vile.
On the plus side, the increased hatemongering seems to push away even people who usually are misogynists-in-good-standing. So there’s that.
My stomach turned reading that second “accepted” comment. “…forgive the perp…” Jesus Christ.
Pointing out again that the article in question said both the husband and wife have a duty to provide sex. AVFM is saying it’s okay to rape your husband. A position that is apparently okay if you really hate women.
Ugh, because forgiveness and two years in jail is totally going to reform a rapist.
Note how “Grumpy Old Man” also claims that nobody is contesting the idea that marriage does not entitle one to their partners body 24/7…dude the ENTIRE FUCKING ARTICLE IS DOING IT.
Truly these guys don’t think for even a second before they speak.
Once again, the hypocrisy is real. How many times have they criticized David for having the policy of “I can ban whoever I want”?
But of course, when they ban whoever they want, it’s totally justified.
I just looked up Kingsbury. He does seem to be quite the feminist. What is it that MRA’s always say about “listening to the other side” and “seeking common ground” again?
The SPLC did, in fact, label AVfM a hate site. They stopped short of calling the entire MRM a hate movement. AVfM deliberately obfuscates this. I think these guys honestly would pee on your leg and then tell you the matriarchy had done it.
What country is Shrek living in where rapists regularly go to jail for the rest of their lives? I’d sure like to go see this place where rapists are not only regularly convicted but punished with more than a year or two in prison.
Also, forgiving your rapist doesn’t work. I tried that because I thought that he was just confused about consent. I explained what he did wrong and let him move on. A couple months later, he got into a new relationship and kept on raping. I also have reason to believe that he raped a previous girlfriend. And ultimately, what helped me heal was being able to be mad at him and hate him. I was able about what happened instead of feeling like I had let myself down and that he’d only been able to do it because I was weak.
What country is Shrek living in where rapists regularly go to jail for the rest of their lives? I’d sure like to go see this place where rapists are not only regularly convicted but punished with more than a year or two in prison.
Also, forgiving your rapist doesn’t work. I tried that because I thought that he was just confused about consent. I explained what he did wrong and let him move on. A couple months later, he got into a new relationship and kept on raping. I also have reason to believe that he raped a previous girlfriend. And ultimately, what helped me heal was being able to be mad at him and hate him. I was able about what happened instead of feeling like I had let myself down and that he’d only been able to do it because I was weak.
Don’t know why that double posted…
Anyway, it’s incredibly telling that saying that marital rape is actually wrong is now considered excessive feminism on AVFM. And saying that men should masturbate instead of raping their wives goes against the work that they do? What are they calling the work that they do? Are they finally admitting that their main concern is getting men sex whoever they want, regardless of what women want, so that those men won’t have to masturbste?
Hypocrisy, projection, denial, deflection…old tactics used by cultlike groups to “defend” indefensible, irrational “theories”. Then trying to brainwash readers into thinking their actions are “noble” and high minded. I do not miss this merry-go-round.
So….who else is up for some baby manatee brain bleach after reading this?
http://www.riverventures.com/gallery/h-1lrg.jpg
Derailing=disagreeing, apparently. Either that or this “editor” doesn’t even read what he allows to be posted on that site as he somehow considers responding directly to a point in the article (masturbation vs. marital rape) to be off-topic.
Gosh, what I would give for a magic staff to turn these MRA men into women. Problems solved!