Yesterday, I wrote about former A Voice for Men Number Two Boy Dean Esmay’s weird and hyperbolic AVFM post attacking Roosh Valizadeh, the scummy pickup artist that a previous AVFM post had described as a “deep thinker” and “a layered, tempered and earnest guy, who truly wants to help other men.”
Today I’d like to bring to your attention another, even weirder attack on Roosh that ran in AVFM alongside Esmay’s post. In “Roosh Rage,” longtime AVFM commenter Bryan Scandrett angrily denounced what he described variously as the “The Greatest Rape Hoax Ever,” “The MSM Global Rape Hoax,” and “the Great MSM Rape Hoax.”
By this he apparently means the tendency of media outlets to refer to Roosh as a Men’s Rights Activist, thus conflating the pure and innocent Men’s Rights movement with the terrible rape apologist Roosh, even though he’s not technically an MRA. (And it’s true, he’s not officially an MRA; he just shares so many of the beliefs of MRAs that last year AVFM was praising him as a deep thinker and decent dude.)
Like Esmay and presumably most other AVFMers, Scandrett assumes that journalists were wrongly calling Roosh an MRA on purpose, as part of some nefarious plot, and not because to most people outside the manosphere MRAs and PUAs look like conjoined twins.
“The MSM Global Rape Hoax was never about Roosh or PUAs or even the legalizing of rape allegation,” Scandrett asserts.
That was simply the excuse to call for proxy violence against men. While PUAs did receive some Discussion within the articles, without exception to my reading, not once did they miss calling him an MRA. Their real target. …
It is simply an attack on men, to silence their voices, to vilify and demonize Men’s Human Rights Activists with a false allegation of rape advocates.
As you can see, Scandrett is not what you’d call a particularly lucid writer.
And his post only gets weirder, with Scandrett declaring that this “call for torches and pitchforks” was really
about reasserting Mummies’ procreative abilities as the central and only thing of critical importance in our global human culture. The woman on the pedestal is a mother. The issue of her uterus is what gives her absolute protection and absolution from all crimes, her carte blanche. She has parlayed this privileged position over the centuries into power and speshul snowflake privileges. You are all attached, at a primal level, to your mothers, with few exceptions. A primary attachment. Even those who didn’t for various reasons, likely pined for her warm stereotypical comforts.
Null gravida women assume the same authority by virtue of being potential mothers. Sugar and spice becomes ‘I have the pussy, I make the rules.’
You want the sugar, you bend the knee.
Well ok then.
Scandrett continues onward with his peculiar and generally incomprehensible argument, declaring that “Feminism is a false allegation” and attacking Roosh himself for “help[ing] to tar us all with the false allegation of rapist at a global level of perception.”
Scandrett has managed to convince himself that none of Roosh’s critics are really bothered by Roosh and his toxic views; they just want an excuse to beat up on the real enemy, MRAs.
The gynarchy couldn’t give a flying toss about PUA’s. Or even any actual attempt to legalize rape should a single human in the history of humanity be stupid enough to try it. The more the boys get between the girls legs, the more babies get born and child support gets paid, the more future economic growth and taxpayers we can expect and the more money gets released to the US states.
Drunk or sober, they couldn’t give a rats. So long as the livestock keeps breeding, the Great Human Ant Colony will thrive.
Nonetheless, he warns, “[t]he lying sexist feminist pigs,” will use Roosh’s “‘thought experiment’ … as a club for as long as they draw breath.”
Scandrett leaves us with a few other bon mots as he staggers unsteadily to his conclusion, my favorite being this “sentence” here:
The selfish paradigm that boys getting their end away as central and paramount is idiotic in the face of the ocean of male suffering we confront daily.
Scandrett concludes by informing us that “Roosh Rage is better out than in,” whatever that means.
Meanwhile, Roosh has decided to troll MRAs by declaring himself one of them.
https://twitter.com/rooshv/status/697291119911161856
I think I have a gif for this.
I love this site and the work you do is important as well as hilarious…but, how sure are you that the targets of your scorn aren’t mentally ill? This one seems seriously not right in the head. I usually have no problem at all laughing at hate-muppets and the idiotic things they say, but the rampant paranoia some of these guys exhibit borders on the schizophrenic. I’m not suggesting hug-an-MRA day, I’m just conscious, for the first time, in truth, of feeling a bit uncomfortable at mocking someone who is clearly very, very… not well.
The Doosh (I refuse to use his name after seeing how excited he got about watching it trending – graphs and everything) almost certainly has Narcissistic Personality Disorder and is probably a sociopath. While this makes him extremely dangerous, it also means he is a broken person, likely irreparably. And it would mean that his lack of empathy has a biological foundation.
Do you think it’s even possible to be sane and entertain the kinds of thoughts some of these people have – Lizard Gynarchies and whatnot? If not, are they insane beyond the point where it makes sense to hold them personally responsible for the things they say/do?
Perhaps you’ve discussed this question before and I’m treading old ground but I’d be interested in your thoughts. Just where does one draw the line between malevolence and insanity? I know your purpose here is just to shine a light on their murkitude, but what is the answer to the existence of these groups? How should society deal with them? Is this too many questions for a comment post? OK, I’ll shut up now.
Ugh. They probably do think of “incel” as a form of violence against them.
uhm, someone should tell him that rape is and has been literally legal in many/most societies for much/most of recent history, In Europe, White America, & the Middle East in particular
@ Kale
Yep. And even in the places it was illegal, it was rarely enforced.
Perhaps the worst current offenders are terrorist extremists in the Middle East and Africa, with some anti-rape laws *very rarely* enforced for a multitude of reasons.
How does one ‘officially’ become an MRA? Is there a pledge and a handsign? Do official MRA’s wear sashes with sewn on (de)merit badges?
Please, MRA’s, start doing something to distinguish you from other sexist assholes so we can tell you apart. Maybe stop sounding just like them. Or, sport a jaunty beret.
http://www.people-results.com/wp-content/uploads/Nuclear-Blast-Pictures-3D-Apple-Desktop317.jpeg
I’m not okay with this.
MRA’s are mostly trying to justify child abuse and domestic violence. So “proxy violence against men” means whatever suits them.
@ EJ
Just been reading a bit about the Zoe Quinn thing. It’s a pity they don’t have the ‘super-injunction’ in the US. They’re a bit controversial here, but one might address the particular circumstances in her case.
@Guest
We don’t speculate on issues of mental health; it’s explicitly part of the comments policy. I suggest you read it before discussing this any further.
@Guest,
Yes, it has been discussed here in the past. Read the comment policy, please. Short form? There’s a difference between “narcissist” and “Narcissistic Personality Disorder”, and just because someone is the former doesn’t mean that they have the latter.
More generally, “asshole” is not a synonym for “mental disorder”. There is absolutely nothing in the world stopping people with normal neurology from coming to conclusions this blinkered, bigoted, and wrong.
@ Guest
Others have already directed you to the comment policy. I’m just going to add that mental health professionals don’t diagnose people based on what they read. Diagnostic labels get applied (ideally) after face-to-face meetings, based on the current and past history reported by the patient, not to mention any other assessments deemed necessary.
@ Alan
I heard about that. Hopefully, all the trolling and hate will blow over soon, but she should start carrying things she can use in self-defense if she can. There might be a few violent men interested in her. *shudders*
This guy is so right, as a man I cannot even remember the numerous occasion when I’ve been forced to squirm on all fours and kiss the feet of Miss Beatrice — the old lady who lives next door — whenever I show up to borrow a cup of sugar. This proves the gynarchy exists! How could I have been so blind?
@Alan
I’m not sure if a super-injuction would be able to help Zoe Quinn. It may stop journalists from reporting on the individual but it doesn’t stop the issue from circulating on social media. Not only did much of the harassment occur on social media, but also social media was vital in the circulation of accusations against Quinn at the start of GG.
Also, I have an off topic — and seemingly random — question. What kind of accent does Boris Johnson have? I can’t quite explain it, but his pronunciation sounds “off” when compared to RP speakers.
David, you linked straight to the actual AVFM article, not to a proxy.
@ drednought
The thing with a super injunction is that, as well as prohibiting any direct activities, it would prohibit any mention that the injunction existed or even that proceedings had been issued to get one. It would prevent matey-boy from doing his ‘my ex is trying to silence me’ schtick and then sitting back whilst every asshole on the internet harasses her on his behalf. There’d be nothing in the public domain for them to react to, if you get my drift.
As for Boris, it seems to be that fairly common British public school accent. Not quite RP. Posh but slightly louche. And of course he has quite a mixed family background (he does a very good US accent) so that might feed into it.
Guest – oh how I cringed when I saw your post. We do not speculate on people’s health conditions – diagnosing or mental health shaming is just not OK here, for many good reasons. Please feel welcome to post here, but read and understand the comments policy!
Semi-on-topic, but this has been bugging me…Roosh actually bears an ancient, beautiful and regal name:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darius_(given_name)
so I do hate to see it dragged through the mud.
I have trouble seeing how a super-injunction would have helped.Zoe Quinn did get an injunction against Gjoni. He broke it, so presumably he would have broken a super-injuction also. Plus, by the time she got the injunction the fact that he had beef with her was hardly secret. It would be nice to stop him from actively spreading hateful gossip about her but covering up the mere fact that he hates her doesn’t strike me as possible or even desirable.
Is the Guest that has a blue geometric pattern different than the Guest with the gold pattern who usually posts here and in fact just did post.
Just want to be sure because they definitely sound different.
Re: gender differences in brain size
I always found the neotny argument facinating; it’s 100 years old (at least), demonstrated to be false and then abandoned. Now you can read online comments where people bring it up like it’s some sort of unpopular truth.
These arguments have always been used to justify racism and sexism. Even Paul Broca was all… women have smaller brains, it may be because women are smaller than men, but it’s probably because women are not as smart as men, because everyone knows women are just a little bit less intelligent (paraphrasing here)
When it comes to brains, it really is not the size that counts. Neuron density in the cortex is our best biological construct for intelligence, to my knowledge
@Alan I believe the First Amendment in the US makes it so someone can’t be completely prohibited from discussing a legal case. So Eron is technically not violating the restraining order if he simply complains about the conditions of the order. He’s probably protected as long as he just complains and he’s completely passive with respect to the people harassing Quinn.
US law also has a history of murkiness on mob actions. You can’t really get a general protection order against mob harassment because courts assume there will be a named defendant.
@ history nerd
Yeah, that’s one of the main objections to super injunctions here. I’ve had some experience of them (which obviously I can’t discuss) when we’ve used them in blackmail cases, so that has been deemed to be a reasonable restriction on the general right to free speech.
We also have injunctions against groups of un-named and indeed unknown individuals in things like some of the animal rights activist cases.
Of course, enforcement is a massive issue. Easy enough within the jurisdiction but almost impossible outside, as the ‘Spycatcher’ case demonstrated. Even moreso with the internet.
Gjoni knows what he’s doing. At first he only talked about Quinn even though he knew the people on r9k would harass her for him. He wrote multiple drafts of the blog post so that it would appeal to people on 4chan even though it seems like it’s a first draft.
Hmm, I wonder why that might be.
I think that’s meant to be read as “in the broad course of human behavior, this sort of thing has occurred, simply because humans have all sorts of bizarre twists of conduct, however, it’s not statistically significant in any way.
And of course, I’m sure MRAs would count the following as an example of “Proxy Violence”:
‘Nice Guy’: “Hey, that guy you’ve been dating is a real jerk. Why don’t you dump him and go out with me?”
Woman: “No, thanks, you and I are just friends.”
‘Nice Guy’: *Proceeds to engage in all sorts of creepy stalkery behavior while simultaneously trying to sabotage the relationship. Woman’s boyfriend eventually finds out about it.*
Boyfriend: “Hey, jackass, quit harassing her.”
Woman: “Eh, don’t worry about him, he’s just doesn’t get it.”
Boyfriend: “Well this will make sure he does.”
*Fight ensues, Boyfriend wins.*
Woman: *Rolls eyes* “Look, can we just go, now?”
‘Nice Guy’: “Proxy violence!”
(I suspect “Calling the cops on your stalker/abuser” is also considered proxy violence.)