UPDATE 10/25/16: If you’ve come here after reading about a petition to cancel screenings of The Red Pill, I ask you to NOT sign any such petitions. It’s just free publicity for them. Read more of my thoughts on the matter here.
Dear Cassie Jaye,
Congratulations. You surpassed your Kickstarter fundraising goal yesterday, more than two weeks before the Kickstarter campaign was scheduled to come to a close. You’ve funded the postproduction work on your long-delayed documentary on Men’s Rights activists, and then some.
But I’m not sure that the person I should be congratulating is you. Last night Paul Elam of A Voice for Men – the central subject of your film – was doing his own victory lap online. And no wonder, because he seems to be the real victor here.
In a post on his site that managed to be giddy and vindictive at once, he offered his congratulations to you, then, well, to himself. “Even though the victory goes to Ms. Jaye,” he wrote, in an awkward attempt at modesty, “I have the need to offer up some thanks.”
And then he spelled out why he thinks your “victory” is really a victory for him.
For the past six years AVFM has had mud kicked in its face by a corrupt, left-wing media. Bottom feeders like Adam Serwer, Jeff Sharlet and Mariah Blake have performed endless unscrupulous acts, directly lying to their readers in order to attack AVFM, this movement and me personally.
Their work was not just to harm me, or to damage a website but to make sure if they could that the message we carry never found its way to the larger public. Their intent was and is to paint an indelible stain on all of us so hideous that we would never be taken seriously by enough people to matter.
They have failed, and I can now predict that they have failed miserably.
In other words, Paul Elam thinks he and his friends in what he ludicrously calls the “Men’s Human Rights Movement” have bought and paid for a feature-length advertisement for them.
And it’s not hard to see why Elam – and the other manospherians who’ve rallied around your film in recent days — think this. After all, they are the ones who have rescued your film from oblivion by pouring tens of thousands of dollars into your Kickstarter.
And all it took for you to unleash this torrent of money was an interview with one of the sleaziest figures in right-wing journalism, Milo Yiannopoulos of Breitbart.
In the interview, posted on Monday, you complained that “I won’t be getting support from feminists. They want a hit piece and I won’t do that.”
There was more than a little bit of irony in the fact that you were saying this to a man infamous for his many hit pieces on so-called “Social Justice Warriors.”
You also complained about an intern on your film who, you said, “had a lot of crying attacks and emotional experiences. She claimed everything I was showing her was triggering her.”
A young feminist “triggered” and crying. This is red meat to the Breitbart crowd, and I have to assume you knew this when you told Milo this story.
To an outside observer like me, this shameful pandering looks a lot like a Hail Mary play on your part. Having failed to convince most potential funders of the film that you would present anything close to an accurate picture of the Men’s Rights movement, you told Breitbart what its readers – and the broader manosphere – wanted to hear.
And it worked. Men’s Rights activists, self-professed “Red Pillers” and other assorted antifeminists rallied around your film, and the money started flowing.
On Reddit, the moderators of the Men’s Rights subreddit “stickied” an appeal to donate to your Kickstarter to the top of their front page, urging MRAs to open their wallets in order to show skeptics that “we can take part in some actual activism and not just post stuff in here.”
Even the regulars in the violently misogynistic Red Pill subreddit agreed to help bankroll your film.
And it wasn’t just Men’s Rights and “Red Pill” Redditors who organized support for your film. One right-wing Red Pill blogger, notorious for his harassment of ideological enemies, pledged to match donations up to $10,000, describing your documentary as “the Movie SJWs Do Not Want You to See.”
Meanwhile, on her blog, AVFM’s “social media director” Andrea Hardie (an internet bully better known under her pseudonyms Janet Bloomfield and “Judgy Bitch”) not only rallied her readers around your Kickstarter but also set up a gofundme of her own, raising money in hopes that it would buy Breitbart’s Yiannopoulos a producer credit in your film. (I hope that is out of the question, even if she raises more than the paltry amount she’s raised for this purpose so far.)
And then there was Elam himself, on Twitter, calling on his followers to, in his words, “Help fund #RedPillMovie because fuck feminists!”
https://twitter.com/AVoiceForMen/status/658700057311506432
Accepting money from these people would seem to be a pretty clear violation of the principles you set forth in your own Kickstarter video, in which you declared that
in order to keep this film non-partisan, and respectfully show all sides to this debate, we won’t accept funding from organizations that inevitably have biased agendas.
Instead, you have chosen to take money from people who see your film as a chance to say “fuck you” to feminists. You have chosen to take money from the actual subjects of your film.
You are making a film about Men’s Rights Activists, funded to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars by Men’s Rights Activists. You are making a film about A Voice for Men funded in part by A Voice for Men.
Does that not trouble you at all? It should. In your interview with Breitbart, you noted that “films that support one side and act as propaganda do better than those that try to have an honest look.”
You said this, presumably, to set yourself apart from such propagandists. Now you seem to have cast your lot in with them.
Which I suppose makes sense, since the clips of your film that you’ve posted online so far look a lot more like propaganda than they do like any sort of honest look at the Men’s Rights movement,
I felt uneasy about your project from the start, concerned that you had been pulled in by the soothing but misleading rhetoric that MRAs spout when they are trying to sound more respectable than they really are, rather than on what MRAs actually say and do when the cameras are off of them.
But I knew you had a good reputation as a filmmaker, and heard good things from several feminists who knew you better than I did. So I held my tongue and tried my best to give you the benefit of the doubt, even when you posted clips from your film that portrayed AVFMers as heroic underdogs rather than the misogynists and malicious harassers that they really are.
When I wrote you a little over a week ago with some of my concerns, you assured me in the phone call that followed that the clips you had posted were only part of the story, that you were well aware that the MRAs you had interviewed were on their best behavior when talking to you, and that the real story of the Men’s Rights movement is far less rosy-hued. Against my better judgement, I continued to hold on to some kind of hope that you would live up to your reputation in the end.
And now, frankly, I feel like I’ve been played.
Unfortunately, it looks like you have been played too, much more spectacularly than I have. I suspect you are doing far more damage to your reputation than you even know.
One thing I have learned in five years of watching, and writing about, and dealing with, the Men’s Rights movement, is that if Paul Elam is happy about something, that thing is almost certainly terrible.
I suspect, sadly, that you will ultimately learn this lesson yourself, the hard way.
PS: In our phone conversation, you suggested that if you were able to fund your film, you might be able to finally film the interview with me that we originally had planned to do, but which fell through due to financial and other practical obstacles during the original filming of The Red Pill. At this point, I am sorry to say, that is completely out of the question.
Why do these guys keep coming to this thread when there are newer Cassie Jaye related threads? I don’t get it at all.
Oh yes. You’re always off to a good start when you assert that your truth bombs are just too much to handle. I’m sorry, but who are you? Why are you someone that David should debate? Do you think he’s got nothing better to do than debate every chucklehead who stops by? I doubt you’ve got anything but PRATTs to offer. David has addressed pretty much every MRA talking point at some point. Feel free to search the archives if you want his opinion.
Oh, and nice try but nobody is going to debate you on Facebook so that you can get our real names and spread them to all your manuresphere friends. We all know that MRAs are dox happy. Nobody is going to fall for this. But we always love to chomp on trolls, so feel free to come back and address us here. IF YOU DARE.
Nah. All it tells us is that there are a significant number of women who are willing to side with misogynists. Either because they think that it can buy them protection or because they are racist, classist, homophobic, Islamophobic, Transphobic etc. and their bigotry is more important to them than their own self interest. Or sometimes it’s just the “I got mine, who cares about you?” attitude that is so common, especially in the US. A lot of the most privileged women will gladly throw more marginalized women under the bus in hopes of a tax cut. Women aren’t any more immune to being selfish and short sighted than men are.
It doesn’t change the fact that Trumpism is a white male backlash movement. You need only listen to his rhetoric and the rhetoric of his most ardent supporters to see that.
Seconding the request to play the find a moderate MRA game. And you know what? The feminists that have shitty views are less likely to be man haters and more like to be TERF, SWERF, or white feminist TM. Of course, a lot of feminists recognize the need to be intersectional and are working on making the feminist movement as inclusive as possible. What MRAs are doing that?
Oh, gosh. How generous of you! I wasn’t sure if opposing misogyny was legitimate but now that you’ve come along to give us that legitimacy, the feminist movement can truly get off the ground!
Patriarchy is not merely “gender bias.” Society is set up to advantage men and disadvantage women. It goes far beyond some people just having hateful beliefs.
When you’re used to privilege, equality feels like oppression. Feminism has not in any way sought to disenfranchise men. If men feel like they are, they are simply angry at their privilege being taken away. There are no areas where men are at a disadvantage that can’t be attributed to patriarchal gender roles, white supremacy, capitalism and the like. There is no such thing as institutional or societal misandry. Men are not oppressed solely for being male. Ever.
See what I mean? You think men killing each other in action movies that are largely funded, directed by and written by other men is some sort of misandric human rights crisis? I mean, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with analyzing the media and how it reinforces oppression. In fact, it’s a good thing. I just find it telling that this is your go to topic when talking about how men are supposedly oppressed.
There are lots of violent movies. Some of them feature a lot of male victims. Some of them a lot of female victims. You never heard of damsels in distress? It’s the most prominent trope of all. And as a lifelong horror movie fan, I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen women portrayed as sex objects and targets of violence simultaneously.
Movies with female superheroes aren’t seen as progressive because some of the villains they kill are men. They’re seen as progressive because they feature female characters with agency instead of the usual role of women as sex objects, love interests or mother/nurturers. As Tizio pointed out, men get a variety of roles in cinema already.
We criticize women being portrayed as lust objects because it reinforces attitudes that already exist in our culture and have existed long before film was invented. Since men are already seen as human beings, the presence of male cannon fodder or evil villains that exist to be vanquished don’t harm men.
Seriously. Have you ever seen a movie? Ever? Or a crime procedural? Played a video game? Violence against women is presented as entertainment ALL THE TIME.
Oh, isn’t that precious? Let me guess. If your story doesn’t make you money or bring you fame, you’ll blame it on “misandry” instead of your writing abilities?
It’s also super duper precious and adorable that you think you’re the first one to write a story in which both the protagonist and the antagonist are female. It’s not like several fairy tales such as Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty or Snow White feature nice girls versus evil stepmothers, witches or queens.
It’s not like the current season of Game of Thrones centers around a war between Queen Daenerys and Queen Cersei or anything.
Seriously dude. If you’re going to criticize media, you ought to actually be familiar with media first.
The replies from Tizio and Chief Manatee are the longest pieces of angry sarcasm I’ve ever seen. Guys, we progress with reasoned debate. Try it, it doesn’t hurt. The Manatee challenges me to ‘address us’ here, if I dare, which he put in caps. If anyone wants to talk in a civilised manner, then yes, I DARE!
The tired old line that men are systemically advantaged by the mythical patriarchy… Then predictably its pointed out that men are massively behind women in every area, education, homelessness, suicides, industrial injury (98%) poorer health, shorter lifespan….Then the comeback is “the patriarchy hurts men” which makes absolutely no logical sense. It cant at the same time advantage men but at the same time every metric (official stats) shows massive disadvantage. Even back in the 60’s when the stats were better, men were still behind in all these areas (except education, were they were about 60%) so the claim that men have only recently lost their “privilege” and feel being equal with women is demeaning is another false feminist construct…………………………Then equally predictably the feminists say well we suffer from sexist airconditioning, micro-aggressions, rape culture (which no feminist can explain) mansplaining, lack of safe spaces.,,,Feminists say privileged people often don’t see their own privilege….lets apply this to females…you suck in 80% of social security, mostly paid for by mens taxes…You avoid all heavy dirty dangerous work, war, usually get off scott free for acts of domestic violence, were a man would get a long jail sentence………….Also when women are watching a stripper on a hens night or getting moist looking at a firemans calendar, or a guy is watching a pole dancer…It is all sexual objectification…By definition all sex has to be objectification as body is object. You might be attracted to someones personality, but you cant have sex with it. Women don’t dress as sex objects by accident. They put a lot of work into it as it gives them a big payoff. (if you look like Andrea Dworkin though its probably best not to put too many of your eggs in that basket.)………………….. ps I think Trump is a fool (an egotistical 15 yr old school boy) and have aggressively chased (with others) anti semites off sites as replacing man hating, with Jew hating doesn’t seem like a net gain to me. So enough with the stereotypes please.
@John
What was “uncivilized” about those replies? They used a lot of words? Do you even know the roots of so-called civilized debate? It’s quite a deal wordier, trust me. I know even the POTUS limits his communication to 140 character flurries these days, but surely if you’re requesting a debate you can spare a few minutes to actually read the responses you already received?
Aww, honey. Do you have a sad that you’re getting mocked at a misogyny mocking site?
I did actually address your points. I just didn’t do it in a “civil” tone. Since you’re tone trolling instead of actually answering them, I’m just going to go ahead and assume that you can’t refute anything I’ve said.
If you think I’m going to have a nice tone towards someone who defends a movement that thinks that because of my gender I shouldn’t get to vote or have an education, a movement that thinks that it’s okay to rape or threaten to rape women they don’t approve of, a movement that thinks a little domestic violence is necessary to keep women in line, you have another think coming.
http://i.imgur.com/IuBd3Kc.gif
A thought Manatee. You said if you post on my Facebook page people will see your name, which seems to worry you. Heck you don’t even use your name here! Well I have used my real name. If I can, then you could post on my Facebook page, and say why you think I’m wrong. IF YOU DARE. To use your fondness of caps.
Are you aware that’s a strawman? Do you know there are men who do NOT support Trump and are not misogynists who would like father’s to have an equal sway in family courts for instance? There are legitimate concerns that surpass party lines in my opinion. Cassie Jaye for instance hasn’t become a right winger because of the making of the Red Pill and she hasn’t stopped fighting for equality for women either.
Being FOR certain men’s causes doesn’t mean you are AGAINST women’s causes. It’s a false equivalency you’re pitching here and I’m not swinging. Also, I find it funny there’s as much hateful and violent talk on anti-anti-feminist sites as on many of these so-called “MRA hotbeds.”
You seriously think anyone is going to fall for that kind of bullshit, John?
GTFO out of here with that nonsense.
I see that John got scared and brought a troll friend to back him up. First of all, Jerry. Please don’t reply to specific comments as it will cause your comments to drift all around the page. Just blockquote or address your comment to specific people using the comment box. Also, ellipses should have three dots. Thanks, dear!
That’s not every area. That’s a selection of areas that you’ve specifically chosen to make your point. Men have more wealth, more seats in congress, more seats in boardrooms, are less likely to be raped, less likely to be harassed sexually, less likely to suffer from an eating disorder, have a greater voice in media, more likely to live in poverty. Etc.
Massively behind is also quite a bit of hyperbole.
Let’s see. On to your PRATTs. Education. Fewer men aren’t graduating from high school or college than in the past. It’s just that more people graduate now and more of those additional people are women. Even though women do better in school overall and have higher rates of post-secondary education they still get paid less.
Homelessness. From what I understand, homeless individuals are counted separately from homeless families. Homeless singles are more likely to be men. Homeless families are more likely to be a single mother with children. The disparity is not as large as MRAs make it out to be.
Suicide. Women attempt suicide just as much. They just use methods that are less successful.
Industrial injury. These stats don’t include injuries and deaths to sex workers. Keep that in mind. They also don’t include the less direct harm. Such as nail salon workers getting cancer from breathing in toxic fumes. Also keep in mind that men are the ones who vote for right wing politicians who oppose worker’s rights in greater numbers. You also have to take into account that men engage in risk taking behaviors more often. Also, when women do take manual labor positions, they’re often harassed into quitting. Anyway, this issue is the result of capitalism. Not misandry.
Poorer health. This one is way too vague to even address.
Shorter lifespan. Do you have any evidence that this is due to misandry? Other mammal species have similar lifespan disparities. So this might just be biological.
Patriarchy advantages men overall but privilege can come at a price.
Men who don’t fit masculine gender roles can be harmed. That doesn’t mean they don’t enjoy male privilege though.
Seriously. Why so many ellipses? What are you trying to accomplish?
No feminist can explain rape culture? Really? There’s tons of feminist writings on rape culture. It’s not our fault you won’t read or can’t understand them. And if you want to mock safe spaces, you might want to ask your fellow necro troll John why he’s clutching his pearls over my supposedly uncivil tone.
So, you admit that men have more wealth? Poor oppressed men!
I already addressed enough PRATTs in one post. Someone else will have to take these ones. I’m just getting bored.
Sexual objectification and sexual attraction are not the same thing. Seriously. You really should now what a thing is before you argue against it.
You can have sex with a person though. You’re silly.
Can you define dressing as a sex object please? How do you think women should dress if we want to be treated like human beings? Can you also let me know if men can dress as sex objects?
So, women are only sex objects if lots of men find them hot? Doesn’t that contradict your argument that women are sex objects because of their clothes? You’re admitting that women are seen as objects because men choose to see them as such, not that sexy clothes magically turn human women into non-human objects. I’m sure you thought you were oh so witty to mock a feminist for her appearance. But it just ended up being a bit of an own goal.
What sites? What do man hating and Jew hating have to do with each other? Misogyny and anti-Semitism seem to go hand in hand, but I haven’t noticed any Nazi feminist groups around. And if they did exist, why would you have the authority to chase any of them away from a misandrist website? This is just confusing.
I like how John is stuck on my IF YOU DARE remark. I guess he missed that I was making fun of his opening paragraph where he was posturing about how David was too afraid to debate him on Facebook or whatever the fuck that was.
Oh and John? The fact that you can come on a feminist website and use your real name without fear of doxxing or any other social consequences from opposing feminism should tell you something. Like how feminists don’t violently hate men the way MRAs violently hate women. Or how men tend not to get inundated with rape and death threats for years on end for expressing an MRA opinion online the way that women do for expressing a feminist opinion online. Why it’s almost like men aren’t the marginalized gender after all!
What the hell is wrong with these men? Why do they keep coming here in bad faith to troll and waste our time when it’s clear any reasonable observer is not going to be on their side?
Probably because harassing us is the closest thing they have to meaning in their pathetic lives.
If you’ll read my remarks, they’re far from trolling. I’m a journalist and recently did an interview with Cassie Jaye that I’ll be working into a story for the Inquisitr. I noticed the meanness in the comments section and the unwillingness to enter into discourse, rather hiding behind strawmen while tossing wholly off-the-mark epithets. This isn’t how progress is made, by shutting down arguments you don’t like and labelling everyone who disagrees with you a misogynist. Being for Father’s rights does NOT make me a misogynist. Ad hominems do not a rebuttal make…
Egads, the MRAs are brigading now. Why, when there’s a newer post!?
If this is true, can you explain to me why she is buddy buddy with Matt Forney? He’s admitted to rape before. He also under his previous name In Malafide wrote a post about how domestic violence against women is necessary because otherwise they act like chimps. How is this fighting for equality for women?
ETA: Didn’t refresh and just saw the journalist thing. Phillip, you should ask her about Forney’s views on women yourself!
Philip, with all due respect, unless someone addresses you directly, people aren’t talking to you.
Why would I waste any time reading your screeds? I could literally read any other troll’s vapid time-wasting bullshit for the same message. You people have no creativity or personal perspective.
Here, I’ll break it down.
Denial of the obvious, playing on the pretense of having something worth considering.
Appeal to authority, most likely false.
Casting folks who don’t wanna be raped, murdered, and abused as “mean” as if that’s remotely the same thing. Standard way trolls attempt to avoid responsibility for the hideous things they obviously support.
More misogynist troll moves, assuming a lofty position of authority apropos of nothing, trying to cast “misogynist” as a slur rather than a descriptor to discourage other people from calling spades spades.
Attempting to shift the other partys’ goalposts to make self sound reasonable when self manifestly and self-evidently is not.
Attempting to apply standard debate rules to the language of others (but not self), willful misclassification of others’ words to confuse onlookers.
It is literally like a paint-by-numbers book.
You guys are the experts on Trump and MRAs not me. I had to look up Matt Forney & rape. I am not at all familiar with this guy. This whole “men’s rights” thing is new to me. Like I said, it resonated personally because I had two daughters (not mine by blood or paper though, and that’s what matters) I haven’t seen in years and so have a first hand look at some issues that are more prevalent for males than females. From the looks of it, this guy isn’t actually a rapist. If he has admitted to something why isn’t he in jail? If someone has evidence, why don’t they come forward? Is a victim known? http://mattforney.com/challenge-feminists-accusing-rape/
that’s another thing I found very concerning. There are screencaps on this page of more of the kind of violent rhetoric that I find really troublling from the extreme ends of BOTH political spectrums.. Looks like people from WHTM have gone so far as to threaten children of men’s rights leaders. That’s definitely hitting below the belt. I never understood how it is self-styled feminist men could get their jollies attacking women and children even if the cause WAS “for women and children.”
I do know that after the Australian hit pieces (they didn’t even screen the movies and lied flat out about not receiving the screeners) she’s more careful about who she interviews with because a lot of folks are really shook up by the idea of a positive view of Men’s rights. I see no reason why certain issues men face being considered and worked on detracts from women’s issues.
If I like apples that doesn’t mean I can’t also like oranges. More and more I see these ad hominem attacks to drown out the other side. I don’t know if people want this cold culture war to turn hot or not but it’s already begun to get violent. Oddly enough it’s liberals and progressives in a lot of cases perpetuating the violence (Antifa attacking civilians at protests, Clanton, the bike lock wielding Berkeley professor, numerous cases of people in Trump hats being assaulted, the Portland stabber).
Dehumanization of the perceived enemy is NOT the answer. I miss the old days when liberals and progressives were pro-peace, love and understanding. Those were the days.
Are you a journalist, though, Philip?
There, somebody looked at your website, happy now?
Please provide a source for the suggestion anyone has ever referred to you as a genius, eccentric or otherwise.
Does anybody want to read his recent impassioned defence of William Shatner from the SJWs, or his sales pitch for “scientific” supplements and nootropics? I can’t be arsed to examine a David Avocado Wolfe wannabe any more closely.
Pretense of having something worth saying… I’d rather not have you read my “screeds” seeing as for the most part it seems no argument, cogent or otherwise is met with anything but patronizing, condescension and attacks of a personal nature. I applaud you for at least going through the motions of a logical rebuttal of my points, but your arguments themselves, shrouded in the semblance of the language of logic are not more than non sequiturs.
Casting folks who don’t wanna be raped, murdered, and abused as “mean” as if that’s remotely the same thing. Standard way trolls attempt to avoid responsibility for the hideous things they obviously support.
What are the “hideous things” I obviously support. Again you’re going to claim that I am a racist or a sexist or hate women without any evidence, without knowing me. Yes, the violent threats I’ve seen in comments at this site are pretty shocking. I don’t know why Dave seems to condone incitement to violence on his site. I guess once you’ve dehumanized the enemy and live with a “us v. them” mentality clouding your perception the ends seem to truly justify any means.
Good night, all. Hope I am not physically threatened IRL for having a separate opinion.
@Philip Fairbanks
This prose is so Purple it’d make Barney blush.
Wait, nootropics? Nootropics? “Oh let’s peddle stuff that either already widespread, ineffectual, can be given more safely by a medical professional or potentially kill a person.” And while I’m on a petty mood, Dark Text on dark background and yellow/light text over a yellow sunrise? What is this amateur hour? You know it’d be nice for you to link your articles on these sites you’re citing, and do it for all sites instead of a few? Also nice going not trying to respond to IgnoreSandra, really shows your good faith there.
If you don’t know the answer to this, than you don’t know anything about rape and are therefore not qualified to interview anyone regarding feminism or the MRM without doing a lot more research.
Citation fucking needed. We don’t tolerate that kind of thing around here.
I mean, I’m sorry that happened, but do you really think that a woman would get custody of children that aren’t biologically hers and that she doesn’t have any kind of legal guardianship of or hasn’t adopted. How is this a men’s rights issue?
Well, I didn’t have much hope that you were genuinely clueless about what the MRM is really like instead of garden variety misogynist, but this pretty much solidifies my initial instinct.
Yep. “Go step on a Lego” is totally just as bad as the detailed rape and death threats marginalized people get from the manosphere and the alt-right.
I thought you were new to all this stuff though? Now you’ve been reading shocking violent comments here? You must have been reading through a lot of threads to find a violent comment. While of course conveniently leaving out the subsequent condemnation of said comment. Cause it’s pretty rare that someone says something violent and when they do, they are called out by us and banned or put in moderation by David.
I’ll rate the flounce an extremely generous 6/10 because you’ve taken tone trolling to a level I’ve never seen in all my 3.5 years here. You didn’t get the full 10 because you’ve given away the neutral observer new to gender politics and shocked by how mean feminists are schtick by declaring yourself as someone with a separate opinion from us on the “are woman real human beings?” question.
Standard 2 point deduction applies for every failure to stick.
Seriously folks, is this Phillip dude living in some kind of matriarchal alternate reality or something? It would explain why he thought we were addressing him before he had even made his first comment.
And would anyone care to speculate as to why Cassie Jaye inspires so much of what the manosphere likes to call white knighting?
You know how misogynists always like to say that men are only feminist or feminist allies in an attempt to get laid? Projection again probably. Most FeMRAs aren’t all that conventionally attractive. Not that there’s anything wrong with that and not that it’s relevant to their arguments. I bring it up because Jaye is conventionally attractive. I think they’re so excited to finally have a young and pretty blonde woman sticking up for them that they’re all falling all over themselves to stand up for her in hopes that they’ll be the Mark Minter to her Kate.
I mean, there are plenty of GWW stans too. But I’ve never seen anything like this. Every time Jaye’s name starts trending around the internet again, this thread gets a fresh batch of necromancers. It’s kind of pathetic but it’s also pretty funny.
Philip:
1) EDIT: damn, you’ve flounced already?
2) When you do a journalism, is your process typically to go see what the subject of criticism says about it, and just believe them, like you did with Forney and Jaye?
3) where in that forney post are comments from WHTM? All the screen caps are Twitter.
4) So, you interviewed Cassie Jaye over 6 weeks ago, in the intervening period you haven’t researched the manosphere any further, by your own admission your interest in this area has only cropped up because you have a personal child access axe to grind. Sad for you dude, but not evidence of any systemic bias.
How does all this qualify you to come here and announce in a lordly tone that communication is failing because we are insufficiently conciliatory? Take a long hard look at your own effectiveness in this area, mate. Then maybe pop over to Andrew Anglin’s latest yuk – you can get the link from David’s latest post, not this ancient post here: https://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/2017/08/01/the-daily-stormer-praises-alleged-honor-killer-of-london-teen-for-defending-his-race/
And give Anglin a strong talking-to.
Female anti feminists arnt good looking???? .. Are you kidding have you seen Tomi Lauren and Lauran Southern….Put a photo of them alongside Andrea Dworkin (she’d make a steam train turn down a dirt track on a dark night)……(I love these deep intellectual discussions).
The thing with Cassie is that she had done several doco’s and had never before been turned a 180 degrees by what she had found and left in tears…Then the incredible power and aggression used to shut her down, only served to give her brilliant publicity that she couldn’t have paid for….This made her incredibly dangerous to the shaky feminist ideological edifice, that is losing adherents every time they do a pole (7% in the UK)
Gosh, Jerry, people have asked you politely to NOT post here via your email notifications – because it makes your post appear out of chronological order.
Have a little civility and click on through to the website, and give us your tedious boner updates from here. You wouldn’t want anyone to miss it because it cropped up in the middle of stuff they’d already read, would you?
Also, your Dworkin references make you sound as up to date with feminism as a music fan who only likes the Bay City Rollers.
I’m not sure who Tomi Lauren is, but Lauren Southern is more of a neo-Nazi than an feMRA. Bringing her up is a major own goal. You’re admitting that the MRM and the white supremacist movement go hand in hand. I thought the whole purpose of your whine is that how dare we lump the manosphere and Cassie Jaye’s defense of it in with Trumpism and white nationalists. You were just in your last post whining about how it’s unfair to stereotype MRAs as anti-Semites and now you’re panting over Lauren Southern? That’s hilarious.
And I could name some conventionally attractive feminists easily, but the point wasn’t to get into a pissing contest over who has more hotties. It’s not relevant to the actual issues. I was just wondering why you all lose your shit over the slightest criticism of Cassie Jaye and yeah, the extra boner notes from you pretty much confirm that if she looked like the dreaded Andrea Dworkin, you all would let her twist in the wind. It makes me fear for her more. If Jaye ever says or does anything that pisses the manosphere are, the hate will come down on her far more than it did for Wooly Bumblebee and will have a creepy sexual component.
I’m wondering. Can you name a feminist besides Andrea Dworkin? She’s been dead for 12 years. I’d never even heard of her until I came to this site and MRAs kept bringing her up because she’s on that list of stale and debunked feminist quotes that you all copy and paste all over the internet. I suspect that’s the only reason you know her too. To reiterate my question on another thread a few days ago, just once can an anti-feminist actually learn at least a little about what feminism is and what we say from a source other than anti-feminist blog posts?