Categories
alt-right antifeminism cassie jaye entitled babies hate speech homophobia literal nazis matt forney men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA racism rape culture red pill

“Red Pill” director Cassie Jaye hits a new low with her appearance on a white supremacist podcast

caption
Odd couple: Matt Forney and Cassie Jaye

Filmmaker Cassie Jaye seems to have developed a weird affinity for bigots.

First, she cozied up to some of the most hateful figures in the Men’s Rights movement during the filming of her documentary The Red Pill.

Then, when her funding for the film ran out, she happily accepted financial assistance not only from the actual subjects of the film but also from a motley assortment of far-right ideologues — among them a notorious quasi-journalist who was famously tossed off of Twitter after his fans barraged Ghostbusters star Leslie Jones with racist abuse, and a delusional Trump superfan who literally believes he gave Hillary Clinton the flu with his mind. (After a big donation to Jaye, he got himself an associate producer credit on her film.)

Now she’s trying her best to drum up interest in her film, which has barely drawn any notice at all outside the overlapping spheres of alt-right lady haters and MRAs since it premiered at a New York theater earlier this month.

While The Red Pill got a glowing, if rambling, “review” from new pal/volunteer fundraiser Milo Yiannopoulos at Breitbart, and a somewhat less-enthusiastic thumbs-up from Cathy Young at the right-wing internet tabloid Heat Street, the two real film reviewers who’ve bothered to give it a look have panned it.

Katie Walsh at the Los Angeles Times took issue with the film’s “uncritical, lopsided” argument, complaining that Jaye “twists herself in knots to justify the movement’s misogynist rhetoric.” The Village Voice’s Alan Scherstuhl dismissed Jaye as an inept “propagandist” and warned potential viewers that, as the headline to his piece put it, “You Can’t Unsee ‘The Red Pill,’ the Documentary About a Filmmaker Who Learns to Love MRAs.” (His review of what he described as an “agonizing” film caused much wailing and gnashing of teeth amongst the MRA crowd.)

With little hope of attracting positive attention from film critics, and apparently desperate for any publicity she could get, Jaye agreed to appear on the podcast of an internet-famous bigot who has been described by one critic, not without reason, as “THE MOST WARPED USELESS PEICE OF SH*T THAT I HAVE EVER HAD THE DISPLEASURE TO ENCOUNTER [on the] INTERNET OR ELSEWHERE.”

I am talking, of course, about the rape-excusing, abuse-encouraginglady-hating, gay-baiting white supremacist Matt Forney — he’s the one on the left in the photo below.

https://twitter.com/basedmattforney/status/787198238575120384

She didn’t just give Forney a couple of minutes of her time; she sat down with him for roughly three-quarters of an hour for his podcast “This Alt-Right Life.” It’s a singularly unedifying discussion. At one point she mentions that she used to get into arguments with her boyfriend every month about nothing, something she now jokingly blames not on PMS but on her (former) feminism.

Badump-tsssh!

She also expressed sympathy when Forney mentioned that he himself had been the victim of a “false” rape accusation. (Imagine that, the author of a blog post titled “Why Girls Rarely Mean No When They Say No” being accused of rape!)

Not that long ago, Jaye was by all appearances a staunch opponent of pretty much everything Forney and his alt-right pals stand for.

In 2012, she released a documentary titled “The Right to Love,” which, according to its description on IMDb, is the portrait of a “Californian married gay couple and their two adopted children,” fighting against the forces of “discrimination, ignorance and hate” who would deny them their right to marry and raise children.

Now she’s appearing on the podcast of a guy who is a virtual embodiment of this ignorance and hate.

It’s not as if evidence of Forney’s despicable views is hard to find, and not just in the WHTM archives. The name of his podcast contains the phrase “alt-right.” In the list of “popular posts” highlighted in the sidebar of his blog one finds such lovely titles as “How to Crush a Girl’s Self-Esteem” and “Why Fat Girls Don’t Deserve to Be Loved.” (Neither title is meant ironically.)

And then there is the endless stream of racist, misogynist and homophobic abuse that is his Twitter account. Some highlights from the last several days:

https://twitter.com/basedmattforney/status/790064680907792386

https://twitter.com/basedmattforney/status/790364983171354625

https://twitter.com/basedmattforney/status/790367816360857601

https://twitter.com/basedmattforney/status/790050589598162944

https://twitter.com/basedmattforney/status/789976518596362240

https://twitter.com/basedmattforney/status/789633067791122432

That last tweet — a reference to Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet’s practice of murdering people by throwing them from helicopters — is technically a death threat, aimed at a National Review writer who has gotten many such threats from Forney’s colleagues in the alt-right, including photoshopped images of his 7-year-old daughter being gassed in a Nazi death camp.

Are these really the sorts of people Jaye wants to align herself with?

In his “review” of The Red Pill, Milo claimed, without evidence, that a virtual army of feminists was “scrambling to stop Cassie Jaye” and her film. In fact, feminists have mostly ignored The Red Pill. And the person who has done the most to damage Jaye’s credibility is, well, Jaye herself.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

677 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
3 years ago

I can’t believe that

Apro fuckin pos. We show facts, we point out how her thinking is wrong, and her response is always ‘I can’t believe that’. We support male survivors, that’s not how free speech works, girls have always been gamers, women have good reasons to distrust men, adoption isn’t a cure all, etc. Stuff she admits, explicitly or otherwise, to know nothing about. But when she’s told the real shit, ‘I can’t believe that’ and makes another factually wrong statement with a dollop of passive aggressive character assassination. Stating the obvious, but it’s never been about learning or engaging other perspectives. There’s an agenda, and she’s glued to it

Giving an apology when I have no idea what you think I should be apologizing for is rather meaningless, don’t you think?

Don’t care about Suzie, but for everyone else: *ahem*
Apologizing. For. Hurting. Someone. Is. Never. Meaningless!
Even if you don’t really understand what you did. Cos there’s 2 options when someone says you hurt them. Either you fucked up, or they’re being hysterical. By refusing to apologize, you’re committing to the latter. I mean, Suzie should know how she fucked up. Everyone else got it. Still, an apology, or lack thereof, is a choice. And it means something either way. Unpologies induce my rage, so I just had to get that off my chest

eli
eli
3 years ago

Susan’s original comment (back on page 3):

Jaye made it quite clear to those considering funding her project that she would retain complete creative control of her work. It just so happened that many of the people most willing to support her research and filming with an open hand, not knowing exactly where her inquiries would lead her, were not feminists.

As a 52-year-old liberal, I myself have noticed a strange authoritarian mindset creeping into the left wing. Many college students are now protesting and even trying to prevent talks by certain speakers from taking place on their campuses. To me, it would make more sense to attend the discussions and present my point of view in the Q and A session. As long as we uphold the rules for respectful discussion and debate, people can be encouraged to logically examine the ideas being presented and come to their own conclusions. [BWAA HA HA HA]

If we set out today to impede the free speech of only those whose opinions we find most objectionable, who’s to say that tomorrow, the cultural tide will have shifted and liberals will be the ones everyone is trying to dismiss as not worth listening to?

We’ve been taken for quite a ride.

comment image

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
3 years ago

@ POM (& Scildfreja)

Of Politics and Planning

Don’t know if this will interest you, and you may already know about it anyway.

http://www.citymetric.com/politics/6-planning-loopholes-which-screw-over-affordable-housing-723

Basically over here we have a thing called ‘Section 106’. That allows conditions to be attached to the granting of planning permission. A common condition now is that, if you’re doing housing development, you have to agree to build a number of ‘affordable homes’ as part of the scheme. Other conditions can be attached too, such as who the affordable homes can be made available to.

As you can imagine it raises all sorts of issues, similar to the ones you were discussing.

Sigh :/
Sigh :/
3 years ago
Reply to  That_Susan

It’s possible that I didn’t make myself clear enough. I believe that most feminists will listen compassionately to any woman or man who is sharing their story of being raped without naming the accused, and accept what they’re saying at face value. As I would.

I’m very glad to hear that. If you are genuine here I did quote you directly and it seems unlikely to me you can’t see that isn’t what you said.

I must say, though, that I am glad to hear that you’re not in favor of automatic assumption of guilt. One feminist talking point I’ve heard is that only 3% of rapists ever see any jail time. Which makes no sense, at least in the U.S. I mean, there may be men in other countries who are tried and found guilty of rape and then just allowed to walk free, but I can’t believe that would happen here.

So it seems more likely that RAINN is assuming that everyone accused of rape, even if the rape isn’t reported to the police, is indeed a rapist. That’s not innocent till proven guilty. And since the majority of the accused are men, that essentially means making negative assumptions about men while assuming that all women are virtuous and would never lie about rape.

You are confusing someone convicted with a crime with someone who has committed a crime, no?

You are talking to a lawyer here, I know at least a bit of something about this stuff. And again, this is disingenuous don’t you think? Rainn, at least in the report you cited, aren’t claiming that 96% brought to the justice system are set free having been found guilty. It is saying for many reasons people who rape will likely not receive justice.

Can they be 100% accurate on the numbers of rapes if more than half have never been tested in court? No, of course not. Shall we dismiss the whole issue on that basis? No, of course not, the numbers are too high. Please refer to my question below.

As far as my hunch that most feminists would be more inclined to sympathize with a woman accused of rape who says she’s innocent, I’ve already made it clear that feeling something doesn’t make it a confirmed and proven fact. I didn’t present it as fact.

This is no different than some people here expressing their own feelings about what kind of awful person they think I am. And I get it: It’s their right, it’s free speech, and I wouldn’t even mention it now except that it seems a little lopsided that the only one who should apologize for expressing their negative hunches is me. I’ll look for some other way to apply your caring advice about being the generous one. 🙂

When I offended you, or thought I might’ve with a claim that turned out to be baseless, I apologised. Twice, in fact.

One could argue that some have assessed whether you are an awful person on the basis of what you yourself have said and demonstrated. You, however, voiced an assumption of the people here without anyone here having mentioned male rape victims at all.

Fact or assumption doesn’t matter, it was a horrible thing to assume and voice as an accusation, none the less.

And I don’t think I need to apologize for my hunch because I’ve already read at least a couple of posts here now implying that while it’s reasonable for women to want some areas where they can just be with other women and not encounter any men, men who want their own spaces must just want them for bad reasons, and women know better than men what kind of space men need.

Sorry, are these equivalent? Are you know concluding your hunch about feminists and male rape victims was correct based on some people (Idk if they are feminist) responding to YOUR claim that men needed safe spaces so they could say things without worrying some woman will be offended?

You don’t think this sounds at all like the “skewed and incendiary” message that Christina Hoff Sommers refers to as “Women are from Venus, men are from Hell”? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christina_Hoff_Sommers
https://www.rainn.org/news/97-every-100-rapists-receive-no-punishment-rainn-analysis-shows

Sorry, I’m not following your question here? I read a RAINN report that was gender neutral, and advocated testing outstanding rape kits, doing it quickly and providing proper standards for test kit collection. That’s all about actual physical EVIDENCE.

And the Hoff-Sommers Wikipedia entry leads me to an article where “Women are from Venus, men are from Hell” is quoted but not explained.

What’s your issue here? Can you be specific? What is “skewed and incendiary” in that report?

Is it the math mentioned earlier? I couldn’t find the study and I am not from the US so I can’t draw from that much knowledge of US stats, but it seems you are concerned perhaps there is insufficient evidence that all those rapes were actually rapes?

If that is your concern how about take a figure, of your choosing if you like from any study you wish, and minus the false ones from the numbers of rapes reported, prosecuted, and resulting in conviction, and tell me: does it mean more rapists are walking free, or more aren’t? And the numbers you come up with, do they concern you, or are you satisfied the justice system is providing justice for society when it comes to rape?

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
3 years ago

So it seems more likely that RAINN is assuming that everyone accused of rape, even if the rape isn’t reported to the police, is indeed a rapist. That’s not innocent till proven guilty.

You heard it, y’all! If a rape wasn’t reported to the police, and/or the accused wasn’t found guilty, that means the rape never happened! Women are just lying sluts who make shit up. Pix or it didn’t happen, bitches!

Policy of Madness
Policy of Madness
3 years ago

There are several possible outcomes after a rape:

1. A person reports a rape (and by “reports” I mean “tells another person” not necessarily reporting to the authorities) and does not mention any names. This, according to That_Susan, is a “rape” that didn’t happen.

2. A person reports a rape and points at the person who actually committed it, but goes to friends instead of to police. Again, according to That_Susan, this rape didn’t happen.

3. A person reports a rape, a rape that actually occurred, but is mistaken about the perpetrator and accuses the wrong person. Again, according to That_Susan, this rape didn’t actually happen at all.

4. A person does #2 but reports to authorities. The authorities choose not to prosecute, or prosecute and the person is acquitted. This rape, like all the others, magically disappears into the “didn’t happen” category.

5. A person does #3 but to the authorities. The authorities choose not to prosecute, or prosecute and the person is acquitted. This rape again disappears! It didn’t happen at all, because the wrong person was identified for it! I will note that this scenario is the legal system working properly, for the accusation at hand, but the person who suffered a rape is again erased entirely and gets no justice because the actual rapist has not been caught.

6. A person does #2, but to the authorities, and the authorities convict. Okay, now a rape actually happened according to Susan … but note that the wrong person went to jail?

7. A person does #3, but to the authorities, and the authorities convict. Again, That_Susan will finally concede that a rape occurred here.

I’m noticing a pattern of erasing the majority of rapes! No wonder That_Susan just can’t believe that most rapists get away scott-free! If we just assume that most rapes didn’t actually occur, and narrow our data set down to just scenarios 6 and 7, then the conviction rate becomes 100% and all rapes see a conviction.

eta: oops hit post too soon.

There is also scenario #8: a person is raped but tells NOBODY, because they know that people like That_Susan will deny that the rape ever actually occurred at all, and they don’t feel like being victimized a second time. So, congrats in helping to reinforce your own presumptions, That_Susan! You must feel very proud of yourself.

Sigh :/
Sigh :/
3 years ago

Apologies, many of my points already covered much more succinctly and poignantly.

Must type faster!

Also, I’m caught up, thanks for the insight into “reserved judgement”, I’d not thought of that before. I am however fairly ok with people shutting the fuck up and saying nothing at all to rape victims. It’s so incredibly sad to be so enamoured by the prospect of silence in a time of extreme need.

But if it prevents one frightened little girl from going to the doctor to get help and have the first question be “What were you doing there?” I’ll take it. That question has haunted me for decades. Silence would’ve been a great courtesy.

And yes, that disingenuous Susan, I hope the same courtesy is extended to men. I cannot say it enough, it horrifies me that you think otherwise.

weirwoodtreehugger: communist bonobo

Men are far more likely to be raped than to be prosecuted for a rape they did not commit. Rape apologia does mostly harm women and that’s a big reason MRAs engage in it, but it does hurt men too. If the MRM was actually about human rights, they would join feminists in fighting rape culture. Even if they don’t care about women, they’d do it for male victims. But they’re in it for the misogyny and only use male victims as a shield or weapon, depending on the need.

Fuck them.

Rhuu
Rhuu
3 years ago

@Fruitloopsie: i’m sorry, i should have specified that i already don’t use those words. I have also started to sustitute ‘extreme’ for any word like ‘crazy’ or ‘insane’ or anything like that. Because that is what we are saying, so why would i want to throw anyone under the bus?

I know gendered words aren’t equivalent, but i am a very lawful good personality type. I can’t help it! I don’t expect other people to do the same thing, but for when i’m talking to a meninist and they’re all ‘women call men gendered insults your points are invalid!!!’ I can reply with a) they aren’t equivalent and b) i am trying not to use those. So shut up.

I’m sorry i didn’t make this clear, Fruitloopsie.

Also @that_susan: How are you still not understanding that safe spaces provide space from harassment, and not places for ladies to sit around eating bonbons and telling off coloured jokes?

Men could use safe spaces as well. But their harassment is from other men expecting them to uphold a version of masculinity which frequently involves harassment as part of it. Sooo… As someone else said (sorry for not remembering who!!) Men’s safe spaces would look different than what women create.

Also, wth is this man flu you keep going on about?

And how do you not see that women laughing at men who are poor at doing women’s work is part of the whole system keeping us all down?? Men should be as goddamn competent at sewing or washing clothes or caring for children as women. Men should be able to grocery shop. Men should be able to cook and clean and bake and basically TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES. There is no secret to these things that only women know.

They have just been told they don’t have to, that a woman will take care of it. Thankfully i think this is changing, but ads still infuriate me when they do the ‘husband as child’ trope. No. He is an adult, he can change the toilet paper himself.

Rhuu
Rhuu
3 years ago

Missed the edit window by whoa but I also should have said that of course the words Fruitloopsie mentioned are more important to examine our usage of, and not use them. It’s good to specify which ones cause immediate harm, because those are the most important to deal with in our everyday speech.

LindsayIrene
3 years ago

Here’s a heartwarming tale of how wonderfully rape victims are treated by the system

Here’s an academic article about ‘undetected’ rapists.

An article about how US police are unhelpful or actively hostile to rape victims.

I mean, the information is out there. I’m a middle school janitor who barely made it through high school. If I can figure this shit out, anyone can.

Tizio
Tizio
3 years ago

Every single time a MRA or anti-feminist tries to say that studies on unreported rapes are invalid because “Anyone could just lie about having been raped and the researchers would just believe it without any doubt or reserve”, I always ask them a question.

“Why would anyone lie on an anonymous survey”?

Because, as far as I see it, there are three main reasons why someone would claim to having been raped even if they weren’t actually have been raped:

1) For “gaining attention”.
However, these are anonymous surveys. You can’t get attention to you by lying on an anonymous survey. So, pretty much anyone who would falsely claim to having been raped will NOT lie on these surveys, because they wouldn’t get any “attention” in doing so.
Therefore: we don’t have to worry about this specific kind of false positives.
(Also: most of the false claims of this kind do NOT accuse specific individuals – in fact, they tend to be as generic as possible so that nobody would be wrongfully arrested.)

2) To give trouble to a specific individual (the whole “vindictive woman who ruins the life of a man who displeased her” stuff).
However, again, these are anonymous surveys. You can’t name your rapist PERIOD, much less falsely accuse anyone of being your rapist.
Not only that, but even if you could name a specific individual as your rapist, said individual would face 0 consequences. There wouldn’t be any social shunning from friends (since the accusation would be kept private by the researchers), nor there would be legal action from the police (the researchers are NOT the police). So: falsely claiming to having been raped on an anonymous survey would be COMPLETELY USELESS for the whole “Ruining the life of Individual X” project.
Therefore: we don’t have to worry about this specific kind of false positives.

3) They really do believe that they have been raped. It’s the case with false rape accusations coming from mentally ill people – and researchers have often found that this kind of accusers have been victims of some serious crime; it wasn’t rape, but it also definitely wasn’t nothing.
This kind of false accusations might actually count as false positives, but they’re so rare they DON’T completely inficiate anonymous surveys.

TL;dr: Nobody has been able to explain why people who falsely accuse other of rape for “attention”/”ruining the life of an innocent man” would lie en masse on an anonymous survey – enough to inficiate all anonymous surveys.

Fruitloopsie
Fruitloopsie
3 years ago

David
I call for ban.

Rhuu
Thanks and no worries.

LindsayIrene
3 years ago

Given that Susan is condemning us for things she imagines we would say while giving Matt Fucking Forney a pass… Yeah. She’s just a bad faith troll.

Scildfreja Unnýðnes
Scildfreja Unnýðnes
3 years ago

Thank you, David. I had some replies to her, but there’s really no sense in posting them, cause, well. Talking to a wall, etc. I’ll post this though:

…I wouldn’t even mention it now except that it seems a little lopsided that the only one who should apologize for expressing their negative hunches is me. I’ll look for some other way to apply your caring advice about being the generous one. 🙂

We aren’t expressing hunches. We’ve provided robust evidence for everything we’ve said. You haven’t.

You’re not being generous. Generosity involves giving the benefit of the doubt to positions you disagree with. It’s not about being nice, or using polite words, it’s about doubting yourself and following the lead of another person for awhile.

You’re doing the opposite. You’re saying “Well, I could be wrong, but I’m going to continue to believe what I believe anyways.”

A lot like old Miggy; I had the exact same conversation with him, too. Huh. Common theme in the manosphere.

… That’s what I’d post to her, anyways. And no, I don’t think she’s actually Miggy. She’s as verbose, but there are a lot of people who argue like that. It doesn’t surprise me that she’d sound like familiar trolls. S’what happens when you swim with those fishies for too long, you become part of the school.

(Same thing happens here as well, notably. Happens in any group. But we’re pretty fractious, so it’s not as big here.)

So, that was a thing.

Scildfreja Unnýðnes
Scildfreja Unnýðnes
3 years ago

Additional lol: I looked up “Man Flu.” It’s a sarcastic comments about guys who get a little ill and are suddenly in the throes of a deadly flu, incapable of doing anything and requiring a mommy to get their orange juice and chicken soup.

So, yes, women need a safe space because of sexual harassment, but dudes need it because they sometimes get teased for wanting to be coddled when they’re sick.

I take it back, I don’t believe Susan’s life story. No woman can raise two children and not roll her eyes when someone mentions the word “man flu”.

(The website about Man Flu is a comedy gem, though, really. http://manflu.info/womans_role/womans_role.htm .)

PeeVee the (Noice) Sarcastic
PeeVee the (Noice) Sarcastic
3 years ago

Is there going to be a “Million Man-flu March” to DC?

Since T_S mentioned this devastating men’s rights violation at least twice.

Paradoxical Intention - Resident Cheeseburger Slut

What a glorious thing to wake up to, thanks David.

The Dark Lord has spoken!

I’m calling for a perma-ban. Unless she can pass some kind of troll test where she can genuinely respond to someone without going “Well, I’ve never seen it/heard of it/I don’t believe it.”

Or apologize to Oogly.

Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
3 years ago

@Paradoxy
2nding the troll challenge. Both cos it’s a fine idea, and, selfishly, cos I don’t think I’ve ever seen one initiated and enforced

weirwoodtreehugger: communist bonobo

I haven’t seen a troll challenge since Woody was required to put the word “sporkle” in every post. He complied.

eli
eli
3 years ago

That_Susan will probably:

a) go running back to JudgyBitch’s site and declare victory

b) give Oogly another notpology

c) leave more clueless comments. Every once in a while David will address her directly. We’ll only see the challenge from the shadows on the cave wall.

numerobis
numerobis
3 years ago

I recall once being so sick I couldn’t cook myself any food. Certainly couldn’t take myself to the hospital (and doubted I needed it, as long as I didn’t get dehydrated).

I swallowed my foolish manly pride and called a friend. He came over, cooked for me, helped me check my temperature, promised to check on me in the morning.

In the morning I felt like shit but was functional again.

It was one moment among many that helped convince me that the patriarchy is bullshit.

Andy Robinson
Andy Robinson
3 years ago

Absolutely hilarious stuff. From the presumption of bigotry among any who disagree with you (pure irony: bigotry is the intolerance of other opinions and ideas) to the comments describing how “we’ve shown you how your thinking is wrong,” this forum is like a parody of 1984.

Brandon
Brandon
3 years ago

Did the author of this or most the idiots commenting even watch the red pill? The reason she left feminism is the slander and unfounded accusations made against her in this article. The writer of this article should be ashamed of themselves.

RabbitHole
RabbitHole
3 years ago

Funny how you decide to ban very polite person presenting very sensible points in polite manor because

obviously a lot of people here are fed up with her nonsense, and for good reason.

Person that advocates for open respectful discussion, gets called to f… off and gets banned.

You are intentionally trying to lock yourself into echo chamber. Do you even know how destructive this behavior is to any community?

Joy
Joy
3 years ago

Cassie Jaye is a hero. Thanks to her more people are aware of the lies the radical left loves to spew.

1 12 13 14