“Red Pill” director Cassie Jaye has responded to what she calls my “slanderous claims” about her. You can find her video on the subject, and a transcript of it, on her Kickstarter page. (The posts that offended her can be found here, here and here.) It would be quite an effective takedown of me, if what she wrote were actually true.
I was going to write out a detailed response but instead let me give you the tl;dr version as it played out on Twitter last night:
After her video went up, a small squad of her supporters headed here to share their lovely opinions with me. Their comments went straight into the trash, but, what the heck, I thought I’d fish out a couple of them to share with you all now.
I guess these are the heroes of truth and objectivity who are funding her documentary.
EDITED TO ADD:
But wait! There’s more! Jaye’s fans on Twitter also have some things to say.(Mildly NSFW.)
The attacks on me by @Cassie_Jaye 's fans on Twitter are reaching new heights of sophistication. pic.twitter.com/0lMglv0lz3
— David Futrelle (@DavidFutrelle) November 4, 2015
And here's another @Cassie_Jaye fan resorting to Argumentum ad David is Fattum. pic.twitter.com/WJhWhDzpMs
— David Futrelle (@DavidFutrelle) November 4, 2015
PI, you have the patience of a saint!
Pandapool — the sad part is that that change would be very much in line with what LGBT activists usually mean. The amount of fucking shit I’ve seen that’s BLATANTLY transphobic… I’m not even talking lesbian TERFs here (though they do have the most vocal and most horrible “anti-MRM” among them). Just a casual pervasive “same sex lovers only” sign hung on the door. My bi/pan genderqueer ass is sure as shit doesn’t feel terribly welcome.
Also, if anyone wants to call for the banhammer, you have my preemptive vote. Tim’s tedious and not saying anything new.
PI
Geez you are on a roll.
Pandapool
That’s just sad but I believe it wont come true. Yes it does happen when guys dress up in women’s clothing and calls themselves women to be total creepy a-holes but just stop with the transphobia seriously enough is enough I can’t believe gay people are doing this. Guys you hated others discriminating against you don’t do it to others.
Gays and lesbians hate each other? What? Why?
I’m ready for the banhammer too.
@Argenti
That’s why I’m disgusted myself. Most of my friends trans and agender, I know more non-binary people than cis, hell, I just figured out/accepted that I, myself, am genderfluid – they’re also all not straight. FFS, I can’t walk a foot or get a internet friend (who are within driving distance) without coming into contact with a trans, non-straight individual, how the hell are those assholes not drowning in trans peeps, for real? Gay and non-binary people are, like, fucking magnets or hydrogen and oxygen, they just fucking find each other like that.
There’s over 600 gay peeps (who are probably mostly white men and women, LBH) that are trying to exclude a part of the community for what reason? What benefit would they get excluding such a chunk of the community? Do they think that getting rid of trans peeps would make them more legitimate in the eyes of the straight, cis community? Are they just afraid that they might end up in a bed of someone who has the “wrong” set of genitals? What the hell are they thinking?
I just don’t understand some assholes, I swear.
PI:
You seem to think you already know what kind of movie Cassie Jaye has made. You seem quite sure that she could not have made a compelling movie about the issues and ideology of the MRM because there are no real issues there as well as no coherent ideology.
Wherever you got this idea, you definitely didn’t get it from the 100 hours of interviews that Cassie Jaye says she did for her documentary. Only she and her crew have seen those 100 hours.
And I hope didn’t get that idea here at We Hunted The Mammoth. Because this blog pretty much excludes issues and ideology from its focus. Trying to determine the ideology of the MRM and the validity of the issues it addresses would be virtually impossible by reading WHTM. It would be like trying to figure out the ideology of modern Hollywood cinema by reading the National Enquirer. You’d get a few scattered clues, sure, but the stories simply aren’t about that. The stories are about gossip and scandal.
Here’s an idea for a Mammoth article that you’ll likely never see:
Determine the Top Five issues that the men’s rights movement says it cares about. Then list all of the accomplishments that the feminist movement has achieved on behalf of those specific issues in the past twenty years. This list of accomplishments would go a long way toward supporting the often made assertion that the MRM is not necessary because feminism already is successfully doing the work of the MRM.
It is almost impossible to imagine this article appearing on We Hunted The Mammoth. This blog simply doesn’t do articles that examine the issues that the MRM says it cares about. It doesn’t publish articles that mainly focus on issues at all. The blog’s focus is squarely on the individual personalities in the manosphere, particularly the worst aspects of those personalities.
That’s an editorial decision on David Futrelle’s part that is of course his right to make. And in terms of traffic and activity, it is probably a shrewd editorial decision. This site gets clicks. Personalities generate more interest and excitement than issues do.
But when Cassie Jaye, unlike David, does want to get into the specific issues? She is pilloried for it. And the main complaint is that she fails to focus on the individual personalities of certain MRAs and how horrible they are. In other words, her movie does not have the same focus as David’s blog.
It’s as if the personality-obsessed narrative promoted here, at a blog that pretty much admits that it has an extremely narrow focus, must be the narrative adopted by all others who discuss the men’s rights movement. Or else you’re the enemy, and you get targeted for attack.
Contrary to what you repeatedly claim, I’m not saying that We Hunted The Mammoth should change its focus. It is what it is. I’m saying that David and the commenters here shouldn’t be so defensive about someone else having a different focus. The issues and ideology of the MRM are not the primary topics of WHTM. Why not let Cassie Jaye release the first-ever documentary that does focus on MRM issues and ideology before attacking the film sight unseen?
http://i.imgur.com/veowOVI.png
I wonder fucking why.
Can we have a troll challenge for Tim? No more posting until he names one MRA who isn’t a misogynist.
I don’t even understand what Tim is rabbiting on about. The ideology of the MRAs is pretty well represented in their vitriolic screeds about how women control the world with our butts, etc, I would think. How does this obvious hatred and resentment of women (that is displayed by the most well-known MRAs) get categorized as merely ‘personality foibles’, things that can be safely left out of the MRA ideology as a whole? The movement is made up of people. People with personalities and biases and agendas. It’s not an independent entity.
It’s almost like you’re saying “well, yes, the KKK is known for having many toxic people, but when they were sat down and interviewed, they talked about how their goals were to make America a better, safer place! That kind of ideology seems perfectly reasonable!”
I’m just ignoring Tim, the LGB(T?) thing is way more interesting.
“Gays and lesbians hate each other? What? Why?”
If that was directed at what I said, I’m sorry for the confusion, I didn’t mean to imply that. Other than the radical feminist lesbians who hate men in general (a small sect with one VERY obnoxious spearhead) I’m not aware they hate each other.
“Do they think that getting rid of trans peeps would make them more legitimate in the eyes of the straight, cis community?”
In a word, yes. In more words, fuck the fuckers who think that acceptance of gay marriage hinges on the “fact” that (let’s be real here) middle class white gay men are just men who love each other, there’s nothing depraved here! *gags*
“Are they just afraid that they might end up in a bed of someone who has the “wrong” set of genitals?”
Oh, almost certainly, but the discussion of trans women as lesbians is not one I’m up for reopening! The public face of it though? Including trans people means trying to educate people, I guess it’s easier for people to grok that adults can consent regardless of the gender of their partner than trans people are palpable as human fucking beings?
Gay marriage is officially legal in the US, and “bathroom panic” is still very much a thing, makes a sick sort of calculated sense why the socially acceptable gays and lesbians (cuz damn, biphobia is alive and well in LGBT communities) would want to distance themselves from the, at best, laughingstock of the comedy show. I’m always amused by what letter is added to the queer umbrella next, seeing as how the (middle class white) cis gay guys holding it are really only accepting of sharing it with (white) cis lesbians. Add asexuals, intersex people, those of us who ID simply as queer, adding damned letters to the acronym means fuck all when the fucking communities that, by any logic, should support us are willing to shove us aside the moment it’s politically convenient.
/gets off soap box
Catalpa — I’m reminded of the video below, where Louis Theroux hung out with neonazis and, iirc, explicitly notes how at odds they are day to day with what they believe — they’re nice to him, a white guy, and Not Thrilled that he’s Jewish. But overall? Decent people to have a beer with… as a white guy. Because just because someone has abhorrent views doesn’t mean they’re an absolute shit 24/7.
That was actually a Tweet of Milo’s in the article say gay men and lesbians hate each other. No reason given, of course.
I’m only out to a handful of people offline – I’m open about my identity online – and I’ve never experienced any sort of transphobia first hand from anyone I know that’s part of the LGBT+ community. Mostly because they’re trans themselves. So, any transphobia I’ve heard about in the gay community has been second hand. (Although, who the fuck knows now that I’m leaning more towards masculine lately.) Same with biphobia (I’m pan). I’m lucky and never experienced it first hand, never been directed at me. Not that I haven’t seen it or had it effect me but yeah.
You know, the funniest thing about the gay community is that they’re pretty accepting of drag queens and kings (at least gay men seem to like drag queens), but, you know, actual trans people just seems a step too far.
Did…did you not read anything I wrote? At all?
Where the fuck are you pulling this shit from?
I don’t know what kind of movie Jaye has made, I only expressed legitimate concerns judging from her actions, the source of her donations, and the track record of MRAs shredding anyone who says anything that’s not super positive about them that there is a possibility that this movie is going to be pro-MRA.
That’s literally all anyone here has said.
You keep rattling on about the “issues and ideology” about the MRAs, but you don’t say what the fuck that is.
So, tell me, what the fuck is the “issues and ideology” of the MRAs you want to talk about Tim? I’m waiting.
Yes, Captain Obvious, we know this.
THEN WHAT DO YOU WANT US TO TALK ABOUT TIM?
Maybe if I shout it in bold, italic caps, you’ll actually read it instead of just pretending it’s not there.
What the fuck are these “issues and ideologies” you want to see so fucking badly? You’ve done nothing but repeat this phrase and say we’re not talking about it, and you’ve yet to define exactly what the fuck it is you mean by this.
Tim: Lurk more, talk less, read to comprehend, not to respond.
We talk about this shit. All the time. Sometimes, we talk about this shit on other sites, because we don’t only exist in this comments section, Tim. Nor is this the ONLY blog on the internet that discusses the manosphere.
Believe it or not, us feeemales are human beings with complex brains, and are capable of caring about and talking about more than one issue at a time. Just because we don’t discuss it at this moment on this site doesn’t mean we give no fucks and don’t want to talk about it ever.
However, while we can and do talk about what the manosphere says they want, this isn’t the focus of this blog specifically. The tagline reads “Misogyny. Tracked and mocked.”
The purpose of this blog isn’t to debate the manosphere or talk about why it exists or what they’re doing wrong. It’s a safe place for women who suffer this kind of sexism in real life to sit down and laugh in a place where they won’t be attacked for it, and can relax. It’s like a place where PoC can sit back and laugh amongst themselves about racism.
I don’t see why you seem to think we only need to be talking about “issues and ideologies”, nevermind the fact that “issues and ideologies” are directly related to how the faces of the manosphere act. If they’re sexist, racist, and homophobic, chances are their “issues and ideologies” reflect that.
You’ve still yet to explain why only talking about “issues and ideologies” only is so fucking important, or even what “issues and ideologies” we should be discussing.
Uh, Tim? We do actually post articles about articles in other places of the manosphere, so I think that would qualify as “talking about the issues within the manosphere”.
If they’re talking about it, it’s an issue within the manosphere. It’s not a “focus on personality/individual personality”, it’s literally David going, “Look, Roosh V/AVfM//r/TheRedPill/ect. have posted an article about this thing. Here are my thoughts, and share yours in the comments section.” Sometimes this leads to mockery, sometimes this leads to serious discussion. Sometimes it leads to me wasting my time with someone who likes the sound of his own keyboard.
David’s also posted articles about events in the manosphere, like AVfM’s conference, and Roosh V’s “world tour”.
Again, Tim: Lurk more, talk less, read to understand, not to reply.
“David’s not doing the blog the way I, the Almighty Tim, Lord of WordPress, want him to, so I’m going to come in here and Teal Deer all his readers to death because I don’t understand basic concepts like how feminists can talk about more than one thing at a time on their own.”
This is literally how you sound right now.
TIL: Pointing out that Paul Elam and several other members of the manosphere can be, have been, and will continue to be really awful people and worrying for Jaye’s safety should she not do an adequate enough job in their opinion is somehow equal to attacking Jaye (and her movie somehow) for not focusing on how they’re awful people who might do her harm if she slips up because she’s taken their money to make a movie about them, and if they perceive any of said movie to be a hit piece after they’ve given her their money and admiration, they’ll make her life a living hell.
It’s as if Tim doesn’t read anything anyone says and just continues the train of thought that’s slowly sliding out of his ass without allowing any room for interjection from anyone else whatsoever.
You just refuse to read anything I have to say, I guess.
Then why come into the comments section and raise such a huge fucking stink about it? Why make a huge deal about this? Why bring it up at all?
In fact, why are you even here?
Which we never did.
HOLY SHIT YOU ACTUALLY UNDERSTAND.
However, I have to ask again, then why make such a big deal out of this point?
And what exactly are these “issues and ideology of the MRM” that you think are so damn important?
We’re not attacking the film, you cucumber and pumpernickel sandwich.
We’re raising legitimate concerns based on her actions as of late, and one of the major sources of funding for her film that it won’t be neutral at all. We’re also raising concerns for her safety should it be anything but pro-MRA because MRAs have donated to it and don’t treat people (especially women) kindly if they are anything but absolutely positive about them.
They have been known to harass, doxx, threaten, and attack women for saying bad things about them, even if it’s as mild as “I don’t like MRAs harassing women”.
The conclusion that I and several other commenters have come to in the Open Letter thread is: The best-case scenario for Jaye is that the film turns out pro-MRA because if it doesn’t, Jaye will only be attacked for it by MRAs, and harassed and doxxed, and possibly harmed.
We’d rather see a pro-MRA movie than see Jaye be attacked and harassed by MRAs for not being perfectly positive about them.
How do you not understand this? How is raising a few legitimate concerns akin to attacking everything Jaye does? Are you really that sensitive, Tim?
The cold’s not helping. Both the temperature and the oncoming illness that I might have.
Oh! Oh! I do! I do!
Because (a) trolls be trollin’, and (b) there are no non-misogynous MRAs. None! Nada! Zippo! Zilch! Bupkus!
All their “issues and ideology”, as our troll keeps saying (without expanding one iota on the subject), are “women are bitches”, “we hate women (because bitches)”, “women have too many rights (and that means we have too few, waaaaa!)”, “Bash a Violent Bitch Month”, and “Amanda Marcotte’s pussy stinks”.
I’m pretty sure I’ve missed several, but that’s the general gist of it, anyway.
And that’s why Timmeh the Tedious Troll won’t talk about what he means by “issues and ideology”. It’s because the issues are woman-hatred and misogyny, and the ideology is pure sexism, undiluted, and downright violent at its core. They want one thing, and one thing only: Male supremacy, and a boot stomping on a feeeeeemale face, forever.
No wonder Timmeh ignores all that, and acts like they’re all just victims of a gross misunderstanding. They are…but it is not we who have misunderstood them.
Trigger warning: discussion of RLAN (Real Life Actual Nazis.)
Dear Tim,
Firstly, fuck you. You don’t get to walk into a feminist space and talk the way you have: that’s simply bad manners. I understand that you’re not used to being called on your manners, especially by women; but I’m male, and I’m hoping that perhaps we can communicate via Y-chromosome telepathy on this matter in order to make you realise that you’re being inappropriate.
No more on that though, because WWTH makes a good point. I’ll defer to her as to whether or not said MRAs are misogynist or not: I’m terrible at recognising misogyny because as a man, it’s often kept hidden from me.
That’s what I wanted to talk about, in fact.
I have been approached by neo-Nazis and other fascist groups numerous times in my life. Sometimes these are literal German-, Afrikaner- or white-supremacist groups. Once it was a Jewish-supremacist group who thought that I was Jewish. Twice it was #GGers (including once by someone who’s been featured on this very blog.) A few times it’s been #braveheros. Once it was Lesswrongers. In every case, the approach has been similar.
At first, they ask you to hang out and “see that we’re not all like that.” This often works very well because a) most people are fun to hang out with, and b) for young people starved of friendship this can be a huge change to their normal lack of socialisation.
Pretty soon, if you don’t have a lot of other social connections, their social mores become your own, and that’s a problem because such groups tend to have a morality which is tied more to in-group loyalty than to any concept of universal human behaviour. You start to lose contact with objectivity.
If done deliberately this is known as love-bombing and is a standard piece of radical and cult recruitment fare. It’s very effective, too.
One of the best signs that someone has fallen for it is that when they encounter outsiders pointing out the less-nice aspects of their new friends, they panic. Humans aren’t very good at holding contradictory thoughts in our heads at the best of times and are very bad at morally grey areas, so it’s very difficult for people to reconcile themselves with the fact that their new friends, who showed them love and acceptance for possibly the first time ever, could be capable of such deeds. As with so much of this, the response is fairly predictable: panic, blind stony-faced denial, tu quoque or subject changing. The one thing that never seems to happen is an acknowledgement that their new friends’ behaviour is problematic.
From the fascists’ point of view this is good, of course, because it causes new recruits to alienate and distrust their more mainstream friends and sources of information. From an epistemological point of view it isn’t.
From here it’s only a short step to blaming the targets for what gets done to them. It must be their fault because one’s new friends are never at fault.
My own experience of Nazis has been that they are extremely friendly and welcoming (to me, a white man, because they want me as one of them.) Likewise, my experience of #GGers and Jewish fundamentalists and so on has been similar. This has made me profoundly distrustful of any group who come across as friendly and welcoming, and similarly distrustful of anyone who claims that they’ve started talking to a group they heard bad things about but have found them to be awesome people.
(On the other hand, when I started hanging out with feminists I got called out a lot, which was great. I can trust that sort of community immensely. It’s up front with me and isn’t trying to love-bomb me.)
You know, if I wanted to list the top five issues MRAs pretend to care about and then talk about how feminism helps solves those problems, I could. I could do it easily. Everyone here probably could. But I’m so turned off by all the demands men constantly give feminists to prove that we’re doing something to men in order to legitimize our existence, that I’m not going to it right now.
What Tim either doesn’t understand, or pretends not to understand, is that nobody here would have a problem with a group that tackled some of these issues Tim keeps bringing. What we have a problem with is the specific groups that call themselves MRAs or Red Pillers. Because they are misogynists, don’t do anything to help men who need it while expecting feminists to devote all their energy to helping men, harass people who disagree with them, etc.
What’s interesting – and gross – about bathroom panic is that in addition to being transphobic, it’s very patriarchal. It’s not generally trans men using the men’s room that people are panicking about. It’s trans women in the women’s room that everyone talks about. The concern being that “a man in a dress” will assault the “real” women and girls the bathroom is intended for. It reminds me a lot of the old racist trope that black or brown men will carry off and sully the nice white women who are supposed to be the property of white men. In addition to the transphobia, it’s misogynistic when men try to protect me from sharing a bathroom with trans women. Particularly since I don’t feel threatened and don’t care if I share bathroom with a trans women.
Bathroom panic is definitely one of those issues that illustrates why intersectionality is so important.
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_r4_yQ3ZgoA&w=560&h=315%5D
Argenti
No need to apologize I was asking becuase I have heard “gays and lesbians hate each other” before and I don’t know why where does it come from?
PI
Hope you get better
Bina
“there are no non-misogynous MRAs. None! Nada! Zippo! Zilch! Bupkus!”
I have seen at least seven MRAs who are not misognists at all but most of them already left becuase they been harassed by other MRAs and all they do is whine about feminists and women and actually don’t care about men and boys at all but to be used as weapons. Most of them even became feminists themselves. Not only they think feminism helps men and boys but they realize what a sh*tty world it is to women and girls.
WWTH
Everything you said I’m seconding.
weirwood:
I actually don’t know how to determine if an anti-circumcision activist is a misogynist if all he talks about is circumcision.
I don’t know how to determine if an advocate for Family Law reform is a misogynist if all he talks about is Family Law.
I don’t know how to tell if an activist on the issue of male suicide is a misogynist if all he talks about is male suicide causes and solutions.
I am also far from certain that The Most Important Thing in a discussion of circumcision, Family Law and male suicide is whether any of the participants have a fear of women lurking in their heart of hearts.
Let’s say I do what Cassie Jaye did and I actually get up, leave my house and interview an activist in person. Let’s say he is an anti-circumcision activist. He spells out why he believes that slicing off the foreskins of babies is wrong. Facts, figures, arguments, all that stuff. Then I talk with him further, about his personal life, and I discover that he has some serious mommy issues as well as a deep fear and mistrust of all women. Although he is straight, he has never had a relationship with a woman because he believes that the only thing women will ever do is hurt him. I even discover that his anti-circumcision activism is related to his attitudes about women — his mother made the decision to have him circumcised, and he feels that she gave him a wound that will never heal. He resents her deeply.
Does that invalidate everything he says about banning the practice of circumcision?
Bina:
Thank you for spelling out so clearly your impression of what the MRM claims to be its core issues and ideology.
Your conclusions are pretty much what I would expect a person to reach if their source of information about a movement were mainly a collection of ad hominem attacks. And I would guess that many readers of We Hunted The Mammoth have reached similar conclusions. Cassie Jaye herself had a similar impression of the MRM before she made her film.
But then she sat down with self-identified members of the MRM and asked them to explain their movement from their point of view. And to her surprise, she discovered that this list…
“women are bitches”
“we hate women (because bitches)”
“women have too many rights (and that means we have too few, waaaaa!)”
“Bash a Violent Bitch Month”
“Amanda Marcotte’s pussy stinks”
…actually doesn’t fully represent their point of view.
And she is being punished for making that discovery.
Jaye’s method isn’t exactly unique in documentary filmmaking. When seeking to figure out what a social movement wants, she went to the source. She asked the people in the movement what they cared about and what they wanted to do about it. And she gave them plenty of time to tell her. And she listened. She also sought out and listened to their opponents.
And then she considered what everyone had to say. Not only did she consider it, but also she taped video diaries in which she documented her thought process as she confronted the ideas she heard directly from MRM figures and their opponents.
And with Jaye’s film yet to be seen, and her specific conclusions yet to be known, her enemies seem absolutely certain that she got it wrong.
Because if Cassie Jaye did not come to the conclusion that this…
“women are bitches”
“we hate women (because bitches)”
“women have too many rights (and that means we have too few, waaaaa!)”
“Bash a Violent Bitch Month”
“Amanda Marcotte’s pussy stinks”
…is everything that anyone needs to know about the men’s rights movement, then she got it wrong. She doesn’t know “who they really are.”
The 100 hours of interviews she did? The long process of consideration, documented on video? The 2.5 years of shooting and editing? Doesn’t matter. She got it wrong. She got tricked.
Either that, or she did discover “who they really are,” which is this and only this…
“women are bitches”
“we hate women (because bitches)”
“women have too many rights (and that means we have too few, waaaaa!)”
“Bash a Violent Bitch Month”
“Amanda Marcotte’s pussy stinks”
…but she will be too terrified to reveal that truth in her film. Because everyone already knows that MRAs are so scary and violent when they don’t get their way. Poor Cassie Jaye must have been coerced. She is therefore in need of Concern Trolling.
TIL
Reading a person’s arguments gives you an incomplete understanding of their arguments. For fuller understanding, you need to have them read the arguments to you, out loud, in a closed room.
None of this describes anyone who identifies as either an MRA or a red piller. Try to keep up.
Why are you talking about activists, Tim? No one in the MRM is an activist. To be an activist, you have to have made concrete steps toward achieving your goals. In fact, Paul Elam is super proud about the fact that he is not an activist and that the MRM is not about activism. Literally all the MRM has is rhetoric and threats. I challenge you to point out any concrete steps anyone in the MRM has made to achieve their goals – which will be very difficult since neither you nor they can actually elucidate what the goals of the MRM are beyond ‘females should be declared property again’.
No, because those are two entirely different topics. See, this is where your little analogy falls apart, Tim. Sexism against women and circumcision have little to nothing to do with one another. It’s more of a religious matter, and a matter of men going “Well, I want my son’s penis to look like mine”, and a matter of a lot of medical misinformation being taken as dogma.
The man in your situation is still in obvious need of some counseling (just not from Elam) to maybe deal with his so-called “mommy issues”, but that doesn’t even prove he’s sexist against women as a whole. Just that he’s got some issues he needs to work out with his mother and possibly a therapist. Abuse can manifest so that men are afraid and wary of women, and that’s not sexist, just a sign of trauma. I’m wary of men as a whole because I was abused by my step-father as a child, and I still flinch whenever a man raises his hand sharply or yells. That doesn’t mean I hate men, just means I’m afraid of them.
The MRAs are “advocating” for men’s rights and for “sexism” against men (which is really just toxic masculinity in action) to stop, but they’re doing it by being sexist to women and denying them their rights. They want “men to be men”, but at the expense of women’s safety and personal freedom.
So let’s say the hypothetical anti-circumcision activist demanded that vaginas get mutilated at birth like in so many other countries to make things “fair”, or demands that vaginas SHOULD be mutilated at birth, because that’s what “god intended” or some other reason, but still thinks that circumcision is bad for babies with penises. THAT would invalidate everything he says about anti-circumcision, because he’s advocating for the rights of babies with penises to not be circumcised by trying to destroy the rights of babies with vaginas to not have their genitalia mutilated.
THAT is what’s going on here. MRAs are advocating for men’s rights by stomping on women’s rights and feminism, which is advocating for women’s rights, and that’s why we take what they say (and do) seriously.
According to Google:
Pages about circumcision on A Voice For Men: 971
Pages about Family Law on A Voice For Men: 2990
Pages about suicide on A Voice For Men: 2590
That’s just on one MRM site.
Not all of the pages are entirely devoted to the topic, but it’s clear that a substantial amount are.
You may not think that MRAs are interested in these topics, but they appear to think they are.
Stop goal post shifting. You asked what if someone only talked about circumcision/child custody issues/male suicide. AVFM also defends Bill Cosby, had Bash a Violent Bitch month, had a holocaust denier write posts, calls women whores constantly etc.
You can’t just constantly shift goalposts.
I mean, you can, but it will cause everyone to think you’re a disingenuous fuckwit.
I don’t give one shit if AVFM posts about those issues. For one thing, nobody there has done one thing to change it. For another thing, they wrongly place the blame on feminism and use it as an excuse to spew toxic misogyny.
I seriously don’t even know what your point is anymore. Are you arguing that AVFM isn’t misogynist? Because that’s laughable. Are you arguing that they are misogynist but it doesn’t matter because they talk about issues sometimes? WHAT IS YOUR POINT?
Goals: AVFM’s Mission Statement
Steps: For some reason, AVFM is seeking volunteers in 11 different categories of specific tasks. That seems kind of strange if they don’t want to do anything to achieve their goals.
Again, this is just at AVFM. It took seconds to discover this apparently impossible-to-find information.