Categories
"ethics" $MONEY$ a voice for men antifeminism evil SJWs harassment men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA oppressed men paul elam red pill reddit

An Open Letter to Cassie Jaye, director of The Red Pill

Paul Elam: Subject of, and fundraiser for, Cassie Jaye's The Red Pill, in a shot from a preview of the film
Paul Elam: Subject of, and fundraiser for, Cassie Jaye’s The Red Pill, in a shot from a preview of the documentary

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.

1.9K Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Brony, Social Justice Cenobite

Possibilities: a person can’t or won’t quote another. Fear is very likely. This is where I look for evidence that they have even read what they feel about. This is of a set of phenomena involving identification and reference.

PeeVee the (Perpetually Ignored, Invisible but Noice) Sarcastic
PeeVee the (Perpetually Ignored, Invisible but Noice) Sarcastic
7 years ago

WWTH,

Have mercy. Ô.Ô

kupo
kupo
7 years ago

First citing a shortage of male politicians, top CEO’s etc is rubbish as they are a tiny percentage of society and women refuse to commit to the workaholic lifestyles necessary.

Oh, so when I worked crunch so hard I was putting in 80+ hours per week (100 was my record!) no days off, dedicated to getting the job done while the dude they hired on instead of promoting me half-assed everything, showed up a few minutes late every day and left a few minutes early, and I still didn’t get the promotion after delivering my work and his, while another dude got promoted for putting in the same dedicated, long hours of work on the same project, that was…what, exactly?

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

Oh, and that thing about women spending 80% of the money, that’s an internet urban myth. It’s spread around so much that people assume it’s true. But no one can find a good source for it.

Also, I’m pretty sure that women make up the majority of law and med school graduates now. Jerry’s just Gish galloping so unless he wants to focus his argument, I’m not going to run around locating citations all night, but I’m 95% sure I’m correct on this. This is probably why misogynists never bring up law and medicine as things women would study if they actually wanted to make money instead of sitting around and eating bonbons. Even though doctor and lawyer are the classic high status jobs.

I must say, I do find it endlessly amusing that trolls always seem to think that most women major in gender studies. A quick Google search suggests that only about 2500 degrees were granted in the US in 2015.

https://datausa.io/profile/cip/050207/

Out of nearly 2 million degrees expected to be awarded this year

https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=372

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

that was…what, exactly?

You probably said something in a sarcastic tone. Everyone knows that invalidates everything else you do.

John Devalle
John Devalle
7 years ago

@Brony Social Justice Cenobite

Until you comment substantively addresses David’s reasons for not debating Cassia you opinion on the matter is purely subjective and useless. Point to an object to be useful

Please quote the section where David mentions Trump and support by angry white males. Again I would like to be as objective as possible.

There is a difference between violence by women towards people that are male/men, and violence directed because they are men/male. You do not make this distinction.

First point, it was David’s declining an interview with Cassie was the point I was making.

Second point. From the home page of WHTM, will this do?

We Hunted the Mammoth tracks and mocks the white male rage underlying the rise of Trump and Trumpism. 

Third point. I haven’t?

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

What a shock. The troll addressed only the points of the commenter who identified himself as a man.

kupo
kupo
7 years ago

@wwth
Quelle surprise.

John Devalle
John Devalle
7 years ago

@Manatee

Quoting from a site set up to counter such barmy theories as, I give an example,

 a conspiracy theory claiming that NASA is attempting to implement a New Age religion with the Antichrist at its head and start a New World Order, via a technologically-simulated Second Coming.

and saying that has some relevance here is beyond me.

kupo
kupo
7 years ago

@John
So if a website counters a blatantly false “theory” with actual facts that makes them no longer relevant? What?

Brony, Social Justice Cenobite

David has written why he declined the interview, unless this is an implicit argument about declined interviews? Go get that. Put the words down here.

And how s the title relevant to what you were going in about?

And no, you did not. Feel free to show me where missed I it.

John Devalle
John Devalle
7 years ago

@manatee

I bet they drew straws to see which one would do the tone trolling and which one would do the Gish gallopin

I’d not heard of Jerry before joining this forum, and have never corresponded with him. As I was saying about sarcastic mocking!

Brony, Social Justice Cenobite

Fear. I’m interested in them taking others seriously, and I ask relevant questions. The rest is practice.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

I have never seen someone work so hard to avoid addressing my arguments before. It’s really weird. At least he stopped trying to get us to post on his FB with our real names though.

John Devalle
John Devalle
7 years ago

@Brony, Social Justice Cenobite

David has written why he declined the interview, unless this is an implicit argument about declined interviews? Go get that. Put the words down here.

And how s the title relevant to what you were going in about?

And no, you did not. Feel free to show me where missed I it

David should have been prepared to discuss with Cassie rather than only attack her online.

You asked me to quote where David “mentions Trump and support by angry white males.” I did.

Last point. Read what I wrote.

PeeVee the (Perpetually Ignored, Invisible but Noice) Sarcastic
PeeVee the (Perpetually Ignored, Invisible but Noice) Sarcastic
7 years ago

How utterly shocking that a blog that tracks and makes fun of misogyny would have sarcastic commenters replying to shit that has been covered 95,463 times.

Brony, Social Justice Cenobite

Notice the assumption that David should do something without saying why?

Also the link dropping, they still fear properly representing the words of a percieved social opponent. I will not go hunting for another person’s gossip. If they want someone else to change behavior they should be prepared to explain why.

We don’t have to do anything. They are black lines on a white background and someone tapping away somewhere.

Brony, Social Justice Cenobite

And yes, I am knowingly using impersonal, objective language. Object lessons and all.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

The OP is not an attack on Cassie Jaye. It doesn’t go after her personally. It’s a criticism of her methods.

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.

This part in particular is devastating. But it’s fair and it’s not an attack.

How are we supposed to take anyone seriously who apparently thinks that filmmakers shouldn’t ever be criticized? Especially from someone who was criticizing the media in his very first post here.

Jerry Donohue
Jerry Donohue
7 years ago

@ chief manatee

Correct. Bodies are animate objects unless you stand very very still…whats your point?…You are not sexually attracted to a dirty old homeless person, but to youth and health…I rest my case.
And yes I could handle slightly more street attention from females with no problem, but I did have a stunning girlfriend years ago who would not wear makeup and dress down, as she got too much attention, guys drooling and starting fights, it drove her nuts. So I think it depends on individual circumstances.

Men are more visual and women are designed to be more visually attractive, but to contradict my own argument slightly women are attracted partially to a mans sense of humour and personality.

@Rhuu

No I was talking about discretionary spending, not staples. Once a man is married the marketers focus totally on the female.

And with stem its the exact opposite some Unis cover half the course costs and companies hire females 2 to 1 but females prefer areas that have a large communication or social component HR, media, etc

And safety gear is mandatory now, or you are off the site immediately (except the US where workers are forced to use dangerous practices)

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

women are designed to be more visually attractive,

Designed by who?

No I was talking about discretionary spending, not staples. Once a man is married the marketers focus totally on the female.

Well, look at that.

dr. ej
dr. ej
7 years ago

@Jerry

No I was talking about discretionary spending, not staples. Once a man is married the marketers focus totally on the female.

And with stem its the exact opposite some Unis cover half the course costs and companies hire females 2 to 1 but females prefer areas that have a large communication or social component HR, media, etc

And safety gear is mandatory now, or you are off the site immediately (except the US where workers are forced to use dangerous practices)

Do you have citations for any of these claims or should I just assume you made them up?

ETA: @WWTH, I noticed that too!

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

The fact that advertisers target women for things like groceries, cleaning supplies, kitchen appliances and products, laundry appliances and products and children’s apparel and products isn’t really evidence that men are disadvantaged. It’s evidence that even though most wives and mothers work outside the home, they still do the majority of the domestic chores.

isidore13
isidore13
7 years ago

Once a man is married the marketers focus totally on the female.

Citation needed.

And with stem its the exact opposite some Unis cover half the course costs

Citation needed.

and companies hire females 2 to 1

Citation needed.

but females prefer areas that have a large communication or social component HR, media, etc

Citation needed.

1 36 37 38 39 40 78