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

@Scildfrega
I knew I would see places where I was unclear (I think) after I posted. That is unfortunately something I’m still grappling with.

The most important part is the means of conveying what feeling is and how it acts like an addressing system for valance and intensity. The theories of emotion I ascribe to attach urges to action as implicit parts of emotion as a process. So movements away and negative feeling are fear, movements to expel for disgust, urge to destroy/negate anger, it’s become very useful in arguments and I’m hoping I can make it clear and useful.

So has a feel for the structure of the stream if consciousness, and as a bonus I think the embodied character of language is relevant to many current conflicts, but how precisely I know I don’t have the perspective to figure out on my own. I’m hoping if I can introduce the system to others we can figure out the fit guided by the most relevant perspectives.

I didn’t even fully present the way I’m trying to represent social affordances. I realized how long it was getting. Don’t feel obligated.

Scildfreja Unnýðnes
Scildfreja Unnýðnes
7 years ago

Hm. @Brony, do you know set theory?

Brony, Social Justice Cenobite

@Scildfrega
It was mentioned to me by you and others in the past and I’m embarrassed to type that I got distracted by work and promptly forgot about it.

John Devalle
John Devalle
7 years ago

Hello manatee,

I have never seen someone work so hard to avoid addressing my arguments before.

Don’t worry, it takes no effort at all.

John Devalle
John Devalle
7 years ago

Hi Brony,

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.

Agreed. If you want to convince others you have to engage with them. A few here could do with learning that.

Scildfreja Unnyðnes
Scildfreja Unnyðnes
7 years ago

peheeeheeeheee

he thinks that’s an insult to wwth and not himself

comment image

Brony, Social Justice Cenobite

They forget that like many others they came here. They came to us.

They clearly don’t like the behavior of many here and we don’t have to do a damn thing. People don’t come to places like that unless they don’t like something that is. I’m fine doing what I’m doing around such as them.

Viscaria the Cheese Hog
Viscaria the Cheese Hog
7 years ago

I have never seen someone work so hard to avoid addressing my arguments before.

Don’t worry, it takes no effort at all.

Beautiful.

mildlymagnificent
mildlymagnificent
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.

O reely?

What about all the advertising for power tools, gyms (and all those drinks and powders), electronics and phones, bikes (and associated lycra paraphernalia), cars, boats and motorbikes, fishing and camping gear?

These things are either entirely discretionary or the amount spent over and above utilitarian necessity is not merely discretionary, but self-indulgent or downright extravagant.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

I am wondering what John is trying to accomplish coming here every day to tell us how he won’t talk to us.

Scildfreja Unnýðnes
Scildfreja Unnýðnes
7 years ago

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

Trucks. Big trucks with duallies and rubber testicles hanging off the hitch. Trucks plastered with playboy bunny cut-outs. Trucks with after-market headlights and a jacked-up suspension to put them right at eye level. Trucks with after-market mufflers that do anything but muffle. Trucks, choking up parking lots. Trucks guzzling down far more fuel than needed, for extra power that goes unused. Trucks bulldozing their way through traffic.

Men spend enormous amounts of discretionary money. The difference is that their purchases are coded as status-raising, where women’s purchases are coded as status-lowering. Trucks are sensible, or practical, or just plain old cool. A nice dress, though? Vanity and frivolity.

Sure, get that window decal with the stripper and matching mud flaps – gotta have mud flaps. Get the light bar and the ridiculous reinforced bumper. It’s practical! Who knows when the Mad Max apocalypse is coming, after all. But jees, woman, did you have to go buy another pair of shoes? A hundred bucks for those things? You already have shoes! What a waste.

Excuse me, I appear to be getting angry.

http://i.imgur.com/4OS3ucF.jpg

(I really need to edit this pic to be more appropriate to how I’ve been using it…)

Jerry Donohue
Jerry Donohue
7 years ago

@ chief manatee

First please don’t compare me to pell. I was raised as a catholic and rejected that Medieval gobbledygook very early on. The RE teachers lived in fear of me asking questions they couldn’t answer. Its just another silly hats and frocks club. Of course I was having a giggle with the patrician bit. Just playing along with YOUR stereotype.

Second. When I say men don’t complain, I mean until recently. Allowing feminists particularly in Oz to live in an amazing echo chamber were you only heard your own voices to a toxic degree. All descriptions of how fantastic it was to be a man came from women. Aussie men seriously need to learn how to communicate and complain (constructively) as the squeaky wheel gets the grease and Oz women are world class squeakers.

Can anyone honestly say they disagree with free, open and honest communication between men and women like we had back in the 70’s that’s been replaced by a violent gender apartheid system, were control and censorship shuts down dissenting voices…As exemplified by the attempts to destroy Cassies career…Fear control and bullying is never OK and marks out the people misusing that power as illegitimate, as they are showing that they don’t believe in their own paradigms. As they cant defend them without thuggery.

The feminists only fall back position then is that men are so intrinsically evil and women so intrinsically perfect (a construct set up by feminists for 40 yrs through propaganda in the main stream media) that men and women shouldn’t have equal voices…Men have become de facto Unterrmenchen like the Jews or blacks in Alabama….that’s why safe spaces are needed so we don’t get contaminated by the inferior evil people.

Laugher at Bigots, Full Blown Future Heretical Frankist Whistleblower Neo-Hippie Resurgent

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

O reely?

What about all the advertising for power tools, gyms (and all those drinks and powders), electronics and phones, bikes (and associated lycra paraphernalia), cars, boats and motorbikes, fishing and camping gear?

These things are either entirely discretionary or the amount spent over and above utilitarian necessity is not merely discretionary, but self-indulgent or downright extravagant.

Not to mention that a lot of this stuff is said by its advertisers to increase its customers’ sex appeal to their wives, especially all the drinks and powders and pills and other such things. They’re supposed to “increase your testosterone” and “improve your sex life”. I heard so many ads for this stuff when I listened to conservative talk radio.

Jerry Donohue
Jerry Donohue
7 years ago

@ Sverige Frau

Yes you are right 100%. I was going to say that. That single men will spend a fortune on a pick up truck or motorcycle, but thought I would save the space….But once they are married that stuff goes unless they want to suffer endless GBH of the earhole from their better half. Recent research here in Oz shows women have the final say on family cars and household appliances.

Sorry last post went several up for some reason.

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

First please don’t compare me to pell.

Interesting.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

If you don’t want to be compared to Pell, don’t act like Pell.

(((VioletBeauregarde))): Crooked Nasty Social Justice Necromancer
(((VioletBeauregarde))): Crooked Nasty Social Justice Necromancer
7 years ago

Holy…looks like I missed quite a bit! Shall I break out the Troll Bingo?

Feline
Feline
7 years ago

@ Sverige Frau

Huh? I suppose you’re trying to look clever, but mashing up two different languages and trying to… I don’t even know what you’re trying here, you’re all too dumb.
It’s got the appearance of responding to somebody, but that’s not anybody’s name. And that nonsense you wrote wasn’t anything near an actual response to anything uniquely said in response to your desperate bleatings. So communicating like an actual adult is another thing to cross off the list of expected basic skills of yours.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

I don’t get why household expenses after marriage are all the fault of women.

Catalpa
Catalpa
7 years ago

^It’s because EVERYTHING is the fault of women. Because women’s purchases are frivolous bullshit while men’s purchases are cool necessities or near-necessities. And women’s grievances are whiny complaints while men’s grievances are serious fucking problems and not complaints at all. And issues that predominantly affect men are because of oppressive outside forces, but issues the predominantly affect women are because females are just so damn flawed and useless, and not caused by any kind of oppression at all. Obviously. /sarcasm

Scildfreja Unnýðnes
Scildfreja Unnýðnes
7 years ago

@ Jerry,

Hello! My name is not Sverige frau, nor does it translate to Sverige frau. If you’d like to translate it into modern Swedish, you’re looking for Sköldkvinna (to my understanding), which is a lovely word!

However, my nick is Old English, not Swedish. Similar part of the world, but a couple centuries off! It is Scildfreja Unnýðnes. Scildfreja the Unangered.

Yes you are right 100%. I was going to say that. That single men will spend a fortune on a pick up truck or motorcycle, but thought I would save the space….But once they are married that stuff goes unless they want to suffer endless GBH of the earhole from their better half. Recent research here in Oz shows women have the final say on family cars and household appliances.

You would likely be referring to the 2015 Australian National Bank study showing that women control more of the household budget? It made the rounds on news sites, since it’s mildly controversial so will sell print. Anything to get those angry boys a bit of red meat!

Did you read it? Or just the headline?

Because it says that women make the major decisions for the household in regards to children, education, and health care. The boring staples that women have always been required to manage. They’re just doing it a bit more thoroughly; the home sphere is expanding. They’re not just using the mixmaster, they’re choosing and buying it.

The same study says that men continue to be the dominant factor in large expenditures. Property, vehicles, finances. Just like always.

This study is talking about women taking greater control of daily financial decisions. It also says that the greater increase in women taking financial control is linked to more women being the primary earners in homes.

It also says that younger couples tend to split responsibilities and control evenly.

http://www.news.com.au/finance/new-research-reveals-females-control-the-household-budget/news-story/d4541bb54e632192f30ba3968b108198

Is that the one you’re talking about? 2015 or so? That one? The one that says exactly not what you are suggesting it says?

If not, please feel free to give me your mystery source and I’ll give it a look!

Anarchonist
Anarchonist
7 years ago

This thread is one of the reasons why the “don’t feed the troll” mantra I’ve seen on many other sites is such bullshit. All the responses to Jerry, be they snarky or thoughtful or both, have contributed to him pretty much admitting that he’s just making things up as he goes along. And that’s hilarious.

I’ve run all out of patience with trolls (which is why I had to take a lengthy break from this site), but I’m happy to see the ol’ troll slaying tradition is alive and well on WHTM.

Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
7 years ago

About to hit 1000 comments on this goddamn post, cos clueless dudes simply won’t let it gooo…

Croquembouche, poorly-dressed vandal
Croquembouche, poorly-dressed vandal
7 years ago

Peevee,

First please don’t compare me to pell.

Interesting.

Jerry has said he is Australian. He’s talked a great deal of bullshit about Australian society. He is probably objecting to being compared to Australia’s Cardinal Pell, 2nd most powerful man in the Vatican – not to our troll pell.

I can only assume this means Jerry believes the Cardinal is guilty of the historical pedophilia he’s currently being tried for.
We had a Royal Commission into institutional child abuse, including the failure of his diocese under his leadership and his church to address child sexual abuse, of which he said http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-01/a-sad-story-and-it-wasnt-of-much-interest-to/7210690

So, kind of like Jerry’s stated views on the sexual assault and murder of women. It’s presumably the possibility of being compared to a pedophile that bothers him, not comparison to a self admitted compassionless hypocrite who values comfort, power and prestige over human decency (that’s our Cardinal, though applies to troll of yore too).

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EtHOmforqxk

1 38 39 40 41 42 78