Manboobz’ “Worst of the MRM”

I rarely visit manboobz’ blog since the “big debate” has ended because it’s apparent he’s just a mentally challenged radical feminist like any other. Usually I don’t use such language but after posts like this I feel compelled to… He found a feminist study saying that it’s non-feminists who hate men, not feminists. Any living being with an IQ higher than a potato’s knows that is bullshit, but he takes this retardedness seriously. The ultimate irony is that if it were true, it would mean that feminists are reeeeealy stupid since they view men as oppressors of women, thus implying they love men (ie. their “oppressors”) more than normal people love men. In other words, when an average women becomes a feminist and learns the bullshit that men oppress women she immediately starts liking men more. Oh yeah.

So, Futrelle is a braindead feminist like any other, that much is clear. He keeps on coming up with shit everybody knows are lies but even if they were true they would mean bad news for feminists. Enough said about this.

The thing which caught my attention is one of his pieces titled The Worst of the MRM. In it he gathers some quotes from different articles from the MRM (more or less). I’ve decided to look at the articles he chose and decide what’s what.

“Let’s start with Paul Elam’s charming “Bash A Violent Bitch Month” Post

As I understand things Elam’s article basically says this: There are obnoxious bitches out there who feel entitled to slap a man across his face for whatever reason they see fit and demand that no ‘retribution’ is initiated. These bitches would deserve a punch in the face, and it would probably teach them an important lesson too – but guys, please don’t do it because the police will arrest you.

What’s the problem with this article? Nothing, really. First of all, Elam has some insightful observations about the nature of women in our contemporary cultures. Then he proves that he has a working sense of justice, and after that he shows that he knows the laws well and gives good advice to the men out there listening to him.

Is it really “the worst of the MRM”? Because if it is, we have nothing to be ashamed of.

“Another by Elam: Jury Duty at a Rape Trial? Acquit!

Of course at face value this article might seem “odd”. But if one reads through it, Elam properly justifies his POV. The system is biased against men, and in the spirit of Blackstone’s formulation we ought to help them. This article does not contain any misogyny, any bigotry or whatever. It’s a logical and articulate reasoning against a flaw in the justice system.

I still feel like I don’t need to feel ashamed if this is the worst of the MRM.

This post from Roy Den Hollander”

Manboobz “skillfully” cuts the quote where the risky stuff ends and he “forgets to mention” that Hollander cites the Declaration of Independence, proving that his words about firearms are not meant to incite violence against women. Hollander’s point is described by the Declaration of Independence:

“[W]hen a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new guards for their future security.”

Does Futrelle have a problem with the Declaration of Independence?

Next stop is Roissy, who is not a part of the MRM. He’s not a men’s rights advocate by any means. That MRAs often visit his site for advice on game does not mean that he’s an MRA.

“here’s a post from Citizen Renegade, a Pick-Up Artist (PUA) site popular with MRAs: Game Can Save Lives

In this article Roissy theorizes that if Sodini had learned game he wouldn’t have reached the point of no return mentally. What’s wrong with this article? Nothing. How is this “the worst of the MRM”, not even considering it’s not from the MRM? How is this article the worst of anything?

If we look at the selected comments at amptoon’s, it’s still a mixed bag. Yes, there are some wackos out there, but do notice that they are not representative of the MRM by any means. (And I have to remind feminists again that Roissy’s is not an MRA site.) All we’ve found out is that Roissy have some commenters who think that western culture and western laws are so misandric that it’s understandable if a few men go berserk. And all the alarmists scared shitless can ease up because these types of comments are downrated at real MRA sites faster than you can say “all sex is rape”.

Is this the worst of the MRM? It was not even the MRM. But even if it were, we’d still be floating. I have seen lot worse at feminist sites.

“Another from Citizen Renegade: Owning a Dog is Training for Owning a Woman

Oh, the horror… Let me just answer with one link – well, three, actually. As long as we have real books in print titled “How to Make Your Man Behave in 21 Days or Less Using the Secrets of Professional Dog Trainers” I feel more than amply justified to answer with a simple “fuck you” to these whiny feminists.

Is this the worst of the MRM? The feminists have surpassed this by far. (And Roissy is still not an MRA.)

“MRA Jay Hammers, a regular contributor to The Spearhead, (…) Age of Consent is Misandry

It’s a controversial topic.
But hey, what’ this?

“This post did get some criticism in the MRM.”

Manboobz admits this much. What’s the problem then, really? We have controversies. If someone or some topic is too radical we tend to recognize that and act accordingly. Manboobz unintentionally showed that the MRM is not the radical misogynyst club the feminists want others to believe it to be.

“And here’s Hammers again, accusing other MRAs of being “pansies.”

Infighting in the MRM… How is that against feminists? How does that prove anything negative about MRAs? This is only proof that the MRM does weed out radicals, unlike the feminist movement, which weeds out moderates.

“(…) Schopenbecq, who is equally obsessed with the age of consent and what he sees as the superior attractiveness of teen girls. Here’s one of his posts on the subject

So he thinks the age of consent should be 14 instead of 16. His post is well-written, he cites sources and he has arguments going for him. What’s the problem with his post? Nothing. If a feminist thinks the age of consent should be higher than 14 then they have a debate at hand, but disagreeing on something is not reason to dismiss your opponent with dubious accusations like “it’s the worst of the MRM”.

Is this the worst of the MRM? Somehow I still don’t feel ashamed.

“In this post, he mocks any man who doesn’t think Heather Locklear’s 13-year-old daughter is hotter than Locklear herself”

Actually he doesn’t mock anybody. Go there and read it. Futrelle is intentionally misinterpreting Schopenbecq’s words – a well-known feat of feminists and other assorted leftist radicals. But even if he would mock anybody, if this is the worst of the MRM we’re still thousands of lightyears ahead of feminists.

Here, he argues that feminism is a “Sexual Trade Union””

Oh well, he argues. He’s entitled to have his opinion, isn’t he? And come to think of it, isn’t feminism a sexual trade union? It is. So, what’s the big fuss about it? Does feminism represent anything other than the interest of women? It was a rhetorical question.

“More misogyny: Anglobitch: Women, Self Awareness and the Guillotine of Bitterness

So, an observation that women tend to overestimate their talents thanks to the constant feminist grrrl-power mantra is misogyny? Anglobitch did not say that this happens to each and every women in the USA, but you can rest assured it happens to many, so technically the observation is spot on. It’s not PC but it’s true.

“Heretical Sex: Never Date Western Women

Should you date western women? Must you? Feminists come up with misandric laws like IMBRA (another sign of them being a sexual trade union) just to force men to date them, but it seems it doesn’t work. If men think that western women are intolerable maybe they’re right. We’ve all heard the retarded slogan about fishes and bicycles…

“Henry Makow has gotten too loopy for most Men’s Rights activists to consider him as one of their own.”

How come his name shows up here, then? I thought this article was about the MRM and Makow is clearly not part of it.

“Here are some quotes from his classic in craziness How the Rockefellers Re-Engineered Women.”
[I've fixed the link he f*cked up.]

Actually this is not so crazy. You don’t believe it, that’s fine, but show me why this is soooo unacceptable. He states lots of things: some of them obvious, some of them researchable. But it’s not so radical.

“The fellows at the Manhood Academy have also gotten a lot of criticism from MRAs.”

…and again and again I have to ask, why they are mentioned here, then? I thought we were talking about the MRM, not people thrown out of it for being radicals.

“this classic, from “ramzpaul” on The Spearhead: How Female Suffrage Destroyed Western Civilization

There are valid arguments supporting his claim. It’s not PC, sure, but that doesn’t mean it’s automatically wrong. Since we MRAs tend to know that PC was invented by the Frankfurt School as a marxist tool for mass thought control we’re not really giving a damn if some of our ideas are not perfectly in line with it.

Now, assuimng these are “the worst” of the MRM, let’s compare them to the worst of the feminist movement. Well, uh, we can’t. Not one item on manboobz’ list is actually comparable to this:

“Sally Miller Gearhart, in her article “The Future—If There Is One—Is Female” writes: “At least three further requirements supplement the strategies of environmentalists if we were to create and preserve a less violent world. 1) Every culture must begin to affirm the female future. 2) Species responsibility must be returned to women in every culture. 3) The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately ten percent of the human race.” What do you think about this statement?”

Or this:

“If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the Earth. I think this will be accompanied by an evolutionary process that will result in a drastic reduction of the population of males. People are afraid to say that kind of stuff anymore.” Mary Daly

Manboobz, if that’s the best (worst) you can come up with, you might as well forget writing about the MRM altogether.

This entry was posted in Feminism and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Manboobz’ “Worst of the MRM”

  1. Wanderer says:

    Forgive me for popping back in here, but I was caught by a pique of nostalgia and decided to wander back over to a few places I wandered into during that debate a long time ago.

    Not to defend Mr. Futrelle overmuch, but if his examples don’t seem too convincing to you, here are some others you might be interested in:

    http://bobstruth.blogspot.com/2009/12/happy-marc-lepine-day.html

    Feminists argue that the feminists who were killed on December 6 by Marc Lepine were just innocent females in school. Nonsense. Each of them was a foot soldier in the feminist war on men. Each of them was pretending to be a man, taking a man’s space in a limited number of technical school enrollments. None of them were working toward a decent life as a wife and mother. All of them were practicing the hate and destruction of feminism.

    This is somewhat ironic, since from what I’ve gathered most MRAs point to the dearth of females in “productive” professions like engineering as proof of the gender’s inferiority. Well, the girls Mr. Lepine killed were training to be engineers, surely that ought to provide some defense against being accused of being feminists?

    http://roissy.wordpress.com/2009/08/05/game-can-save-lives/#comments

    From Arpagus, George Sodini is an MRA hero as much a reason to learn game. Finally a mass murderer writes a relatively coherent manifesto. Could be better, but at least it is implied that feminism is to blame and he is taking a last stand. I had been waiting for this (almost thinking I had to do it myself) and I am impressed. Kudos.

    Once again, somewhat ironic, since the girls Sodini killed were working out at a fitness club, meaning they were probably more attractive than the average fat feminist. I get the feeling he didn’t strike much of a blow against the “sexual trade union,” in that case.

    Lastly, check this out:
    http://dissention.wordpress.com/2010/07/29/modern-women-are-crappy-sexbots/

    While it will be necessary to increase the number of such sexbots to truly replace the need for inferior ones, it is a problem of logistics not feasibility. Some of you might wonder about the fate of inferior sexbots with no other purpose or use other than sex. Once again, it is a problem of logistics that could easily be solved by building more incinerators to handle biological waste. I might add that there is precedence and existing literature on such methods.

    The morality of certain methods of bio-waste disposal might trouble some, but what if the positions were reversed. Indeed, many feminists and other “sensible” women routinely mention that they would not mind if 90% of the men died. In their eyes, most men are only sperm donors or sucker slaves whose sole purpose for existence is to keep women happy.

    As unpalatable as Ms. Gearhart’s suggestion of genocide may have been, at least she didn’t specify how, exactly, the men would be eliminated. One has to give this dissention guy credit, then–at least human incinerators are a tried and true method.

    Now, you could just say, again, these guys aren’t “true MRAs,” but then again, Mr. Futrelle can just as easily claim that Ms. Gearhart (and Ms. Dworkin, and a variety of other man-hating feminists) aren’t “true feminists” and have been rejected from the movement (and in Futrelle’s case, this wouldn’t be inaccurate, he wrote a fine article a few years back criticizing Dworkin, actually. Check it out at http://articles.latimes.com/1997-03-16/books/bk-38664_1_andrea-dworkin). Just as these sorts of comments would get downvoted (though also upvoted a few times) at MRA sites, like you mention in the OP in reference to Arpagus’ comment, it’s not uncommon to see Dworkins-esque misandry getting downvoted at feminist sites.

    Secondly, you could also attempt to justify these rather extreme statements–“Oh, the evil feminists have just pushed Bob and Arpagus so far that they’re sympathizing with murderers! There’s no misogyny or bigotry in defending Sodini or Lepine, or advocating for the extermination of women once realistic sexbots are produced, all these guys are just logically and articulately critiquing feminism!” However, by the same token, Mr. Futrelle could argue that “oh, the evil patriarchs have pushed Ms. Gearhart so far that she’s merely contemplating murder! There’s no misandry or bigotry in advocating for a reduction of the male population! She’s just logically and articulately critiquing the patriarchy!”

    I don’t mean to offend or be a gratuitous guest–like I mentioned, I’m just a wanderer, far be it from me to defend somebody else on your blog. Indeed, it’s not much of a defense of Mr. Futrelle, who somehow missed these examples I’ve cited above. However, if nothing else, I do hope this comment can help MRAs like you understand why folks like me, who dislike feminism and are more or less sympathetic to the Men’s Rights Movement, are still hesitant to attach ourselves to it. There may not be too many of us, but we are out there. Still, like I said, this is your blog, you’re obviously not obligated to pander to us or anything. Feel free to delete this comment if you like, then, it is pretty long after all, hehe.

    (Was this posted twice? Got an error message when I posted it the first time).

  2. Deansdale says:

    “(Was this posted twice? Got an error message when I posted it the first time).”
    It was caught in the spam filter. Must be the links.

  3. Deansdale says:

    Wanderer, feel free to comment here anytime.

    About the guys praising killers… Yep, that’s sad. There are idiots out there, that’s for sure. And some of them call themselves MRAs.
    The difference between the feminist movement and the MRM is the overall stance towards these idiots. When Mary Winkler killed her husband and when Lorena Bobbitt cut off her husband’s penis some feminists called them heroes, much like how idiots called Lepine or Sodini “heroes”. BUT the MRM throws out these idiots while the mainstream feminist movement either lauds them or is silent about them. See the Bobbitt video I linked: she went “on tour” appearing on Oprah’s and other shows, with feminists cheering and laughing and clapping. Show me a video where people are clapping to Lepine.

    you could just say, again, these guys aren’t “true MRAs,” but then again, Mr. Futrelle can just as easily claim that Ms. Gearhart (and Ms. Dworkin, and a variety of other man-hating feminists) aren’t “true feminists”
    There is a serious problem with this, namely that Gearhart and Dvorkin were recognised as feminist leaders at the time, quite unlike most of the people Futrelle and you have quoted.
    That Futrelle criticised Dvorkin doesn’t mean much in the context that Dvorkin’s influence is pretty much felt up to this day. Where’s the influence of “bobstruth” or “dissention”? They don’t have any.
    Lepine and Sodini were not MRAs, they were people with serious mental problems, in the strictest sense of the word. The MRM does not “worship” them, it’s only a few nutcases. Dvorkin and (for example) Solanas had similar mental problems but their legacy is still part of the feminist dogma. This is one distinction between the two movements the importance of which cannot be overstated.

  4. namae nanka says:

    Deansdale, if Men’s movement gets off the ground(not possible) it’s possible that such guys will be made out to be one of the radical leaders/thinkers. Though the difference ultimately would be that a man’s word is automatically taken to be more serious, or woman’s is taken more leniently.

    “This is somewhat ironic, since from what I’ve gathered most MRAs point to the dearth of females in “productive” professions like engineering as proof of the gender’s inferiority. Well, the girls Mr. Lepine killed were training to be engineers, surely that ought to provide some defense against being accused of being feminists?”

    Was there affirmative action for women in these institutes? I vaguely remember reading such. There was also a guy with a marc lepine blog who was jailed for it.

    Dissention is not a MRA, being an advocate of the devil he proposes his questions in a deliberately outrageous way.

  5. namae nanka says:

    I am not a believer in conspiracy theories, rockefeller whatever, but Makow does bring up some good points:

    http://www.henrymakow.com/eliteadmitstosecret.html

  6. Deansdale says:

    it’s possible that such guys will be made out to be one of the radical leaders/thinkers
    I respectfully disagree. Internationally recognised MRAs like Paul Elam, Glenn Sacks or Marc Rudov are usually very articulate but at the same time remain moderate. Neither of them worshipped Lepine or Sodini, much less advocating for the reduction of the number of women. I think there is no prominent radical MRA out there.

    Feminist leaders have already made a shitload of radical menhating comments which can not be explained away (although they try); comments the likes of which are only made by fringe lunatics in the MRM, not by any prominent MRAs. The conclusion is of course evident: feminist leaders were (and some are) fringe lunatics. And this defines the whole movement of theirs. No wonder they come up with seriously fucked-up laws like IMBRA in the name of ekvalitee. Indeed, it would be a wonder if someone who believes feminist laws are for equality would turn out to be clinically sane.

  7. Wanderer says:

    That’s a fair response, Deansdale. Thank you very much.

    BUT the MRM throws out these idiots while the mainstream feminist movement either lauds them or is silent about them. See the Bobbitt video I linked: she went “on tour” appearing on Oprah’s and other shows, with feminists cheering and laughing and clapping. Show me a video where people are clapping to Lepine.

    This is true, I concede that, but you also have to remember that the MRA is a much smaller movement with nowhere near the political clout feminism ever had or still has. I think a big reason, if not the primary reason, folks like Mr. Elam and Mr. Sacks work so hard in weeding out the crazies is that they understand how much scrutiny they’re subjected to and how precarious their ideological position is. Feminists, on the other hand, are very secure, so they feel like they don’t have to worry about the reputation of their “movement” being tarnished and can praise Dworkin, Bobbitt, etc. as much as they want. Thus, somewhat ironically, I suppose, I think I would end up agreeing (somewhat) with Namae Nanka–you’re correct in saying that Mr. Elam and most other MRAs aren’t “radical” and they work very hard at keeping out the crazies, but I strongly suspect that if the MRM ever became as culturally powerful as feminism currently is, their treatment of Sodini and Lepine would be closer to the feminist treatment of Bobbitt and Solanas rather than the ostracization we see in reality.

    Still, I could be wrong. I’d hope so, anyways. In any case, thanks for your time, Deansdale.

  8. tspoon says:

    Wanderer I can’t help but challenge your last statement, when you say that if the MRA movement were more mainstream, men would express open support with regard to atrocities committed against women, similar in extent to the ‘bobbitt’ affair.

    Your view that the average male has an almost hateful animosity toward females, could really not be further from the truth. In fact such attitudes are commonplace only for females when considering males. This quote says it better than I could :

    In all species, the relative investment that is made by the male and the female in their offspring determines the degree of discrimination exercised by the individual in selecting a partner. In humans, like many mammals and most animals, females can be expected to be the more discriminating in their choice of mates. Therefore females limit the reproductive success of males and men compete with other men for access to women. Males form a dominance hierarchy. A cognitive mechanism known as cheater detection (Cosmides 1989) evolved to police tactical subversion of the dominance hierarchy, i.e. keep lower ranked men ‘in their place’ (Mealey, Daood and Krage 1996). Females seek only a minority of males at the top. The upshot of this is that women have an inherent prejudice towards most men. Misandry (hatred of men) is a common prejudice of women and not just feminists, but it is such misandry that led to feminism and the invention of ‘misogyny’ which is a myth used to excuse their misandry.

    ( quote from : http://feminism.martinsewell.com/ )

  9. Deansdale says:

    @Wanderer
    the primary reason, folks like Mr. Elam and Mr. Sacks work so hard in weeding out the crazies is that they understand how much scrutiny they’re subjected to
    I think they do that because they are decent men.

    how precarious their ideological position is
    I don’t quite get what you mean by this. The work ahead of them (us) is hard and long but the ideological position of the MRM is clear and simple. We want to repeal bad laws – this pretty much sums up 95% of the aims of the movement. And by ‘bad laws’ we mean gender-specific laws giving unfair advantages or disadvantages to one sex based on nothing more than their sex. Feminists talk about ekvalitee all the time but anyone can look at the laws they’ve come up with, eg. IMBRA, VAWA, etc. They are discriminating against men for no reason other than feminist wishes based on heavily biased false research.

    if the MRM ever became as culturally powerful as feminism currently is, their treatment of Sodini and Lepine would be closer to the feminist treatment of Bobbitt and Solanas rather than the ostracization we see in reality.
    I reckon if the MRM would “succeed” then feminism would be scaled back considerably and it’s political powers would shrink (preferably to non-existent) and then there would be no need for the MRM any longer. I think it’s safe to say that after we’d “win”, we would go home and continue with our lives – just as the sufragettes and the Nth wave feminists should have done but failed to do so. We will not fight for privileges for men, we are fighting against specific injustices in our laws. If you look carefully, noone in the MRM says that there should be quotas for men anywhere, or affirmative action for men. We just want a fair society, a level playing field. Feminists are also saying this, but the acts of the two movements uncover the truth about real agendas. Words are cheap. Acts – and laws – are proof.

  10. Richard says:

    As with any “group” of men – it is going to be diverse:

    Bikers.
    Catholics.
    Chess Players.
    Athletes.

    So, the label “MRA” is really just that – a label. A group of MRA’s in a room will ultimately end up being a diverse bunch of people.

    Futrelle does selectively pick his quotes – he also does not check his references carefully – I have seen this.

    Also, many of the people he calls “The Worst” – he really should just call, “The Stupidest”…

    I do not consider myself an MRA – some other people consider me one, but I don’t.

    I would definitely fall into the “More Dumb than Naught” category!

    This is an excellent article!

  11. Danny says:

    Looks like manhood academy has answered Paul Elam’s insanity: rebuttal

  12. Deansdale says:

    I don’t want to get into this fight between MRAs.

  13. Nergal says:

    “”Oh, the evil feminists have just pushed Bob and Arpagus so far that they’re sympathizing with murderers! There’s no misogyny or bigotry in defending Sodini or Lepine, or advocating for the extermination of women once realistic sexbots are produced, all these guys are just logically and articulately critiquing feminism!””

    Bob’s mostly anti-police, nobody really pays that much attention to him. And Arpagus? Seriously? You’re calling ARPAGUS an MRA? The dude admitted that he’s pissed off at women cause he doesn’t get laid. I told him on the Spearhead that I think he’s a feminist agent provocateur because if he is an MRA then he is the ONLY MRA that fits the feminist shaming narrative about us all being bitter or sexually frustrated.

    It’s like I said,I would be SERIOUSLY fucking surprised if Arpagus even WAS an MRA. If he’s not a feminist,then he’s just a Sodini wannabe himself, NOT an MRA. I have personally,and publically led the charge to silence all this age of consent bullshit in the MRA. Age of consent has NOTHING,I repeat NOTHING, to do with men’s rights. The fact that some boys are put in jail for being 17 and having a 15 year old girlfriend is unfortunate,sure, but if you change the cultural perception that all men are preying on women, that won’t happen anymore. There’s no reason for an adult man to claim not being able to fuck a 14 year old girl is a violation of their civil rights. Not being able to fuck ANY female is not a violation of your rights. Being culturally perceived as, and treated as, a rapist/wife-beater/or child molester by virtue of your genitalia is a violation of your rights,not being able to say what a woman does with your biological material, your sperm,is a violation of your rights,not having any guarantee that your very own CHILDREN will not be snatched up and STOLEN from you because you’re a man is a violation of your rights,being legally required to defend people who have no legal requirement to do a GODDAMN THING for you is a violation of your rights, and it’s violations like THESE that we should be fighting.

    Our brothers in England won’t even push a child out from in front of a bus for fear of being called a pedophile. How ridiculous is that,that they’re treated that way?That’s the shit I’m talking about. The age of consent is irrelevant. It’s a bullshit side issue. A red herring. We have MUCH bigger fish to fry.

  14. Fidelbogen says:

    I can sum this up as follows: If you kick all the haters out of feminism, then feminism as a movement would cease to exist. But if you kicked all the haters out of the MRM, the movement would keep right on rolling and never skip a beat.

  15. Jenna M. says:

    When feminists can’t win a debate, they try to INCARCERATE the opposition: http://goo.gl/491PA

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s