Bye-bye Men's Rights Brethren

To John Dias, cybro, Kapt Krunch, Fidelbogen, MadShangi, Frostyboy, Anti Misandry, and all the other Father's Rights/Men's Rights/Antifeminist Activists out there:

It has been brought to my attention by a colleague that all the arguments you put forth have already been answered sufficiently (see below). Therefore, I decided it would be an utter waste of cyberspace to further engage you on those subjects here.

Since you don't seem to know it, I'll inform you that you are a group of very privileged human beings who are utterly clueless about the living conditions and lack of privileges most people in the world--who aren't you--live with, endure, and often don't survive.

When you are, from your points of view, unfairly treated, or falsely accused--sometimes by one woman in your past--this "affront" generates in far too many of you the most self-righteous, scathing, and scornful written assaults on women, especially feminists, with a particularly foolish level of deranged irrationality focused on radical feminists.

These sorts of ego-bruises--assuming the occasional personal injustice done to some of you--to which you are apparently not at all accustomed, is but one indication of the enormous amount of privilege you carry day to day. (Most women I know are treated unfairly every day of their lives.)

You give humanity a bad name. So much for the myth of white men being western civilisation's standard of sanity, honesty, and integrity.

Let the record show that, to date, my questions to antimisandrists have never been answered. I gave John Dias his requested two days to reply here, and he did not choose to do so.

I apologise to the anti-misogynist visitors here for giving those men as much attention as I have.

I'll close this post with the following quotes, correspondence, and this important link (a website from which all of what follows was found). What is blockquoted below, in addition to the other information found at the link just above, thoroughly exposes many of the distortions and lies Fathers' Rights and Men's Rights Groups are organised to promote and promulgate.

Robert Okun, a specialist in men's issues and domestic violence, pointed out that many of today’s dads, whether married, never-married or divorced, are doing their best to stay actively involved in their children’s lives. But of men in the organized father’s rights movement, who typically represent themselves as the innocent victims of gender discrimination and manipulative ex-wives, Okun writes: "Some may very well be getting a raw deal. If so, it is essential that divorce lawyers, psychotherapists, family service court officers, mediators, guardians ad litem and judges educate themselves about those circumstances and take steps to intervene when a man has been erroneously targeted as part of a strategy in a contentious custody complaint. However, in a dangerously high number of cases, many of these fathers have a documented history of abuse."

[C]oncerned citizens who've taken the time to investigate the activities of father's rights groups in greater depth -- notably Trish Wilson, a freelance writer who considers exposing the shady underside of the father's custody movement her part-time job. Ms. Wilson first became curious about the movement when she stumbled into a father's rights message board on AOL ten years ago. When she questioned the accuracy of child support statistics posted on the board, Ms. Wilson reports she was "attacked by the regulars there. The woman who had posted the original out-of-context quotes told me that I believed all women should have custody of their children because they had uteruses, which is nonsense. There were similar, ugly flames thrown at me by others. I was taken aback at how nasty they were." Since then, Ms. Wilson has conducted extensive research reviews and produced a series of articles disputing the studies and data father's rights advocates use to justify their intention to overhaul child custody and support laws.

Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 06:12:26 -0500 (CDT)
From: enclosed@mo.net
To: liz
Subject: Re: SMH

Liz,

One evening I was sitting at dinner with a man who stated "Women don't understand abstract justice." I said, "What do you mean by that?"

He said, "They can only see the world through relationships, and that is all that matters to them."

Thanks for proving his point.

Look for this man's book coming out this year, "The Case for Father Custody." [5]

Liz, a man is very interested in raising his progeny, not somebody elses.

"Organisms have evolved to expend their very lives enhancing the fitness prospects of their descendants. Parental investment is a precious resource, and selection must favor those parental psyches that do not squander it on nonrelatives." --Daly and Wilson, 1988.

Nick

LIZ'S RESPONSE:

I see you've run out of arguments and now have descended into thinly veiled insults, i.e. telling me (a lawyer), that (being a woman) I do not understand "justice," as well as resorting to sloganism, and the "authoritative fallacy," i.e. quoting others, who are to be given extra credence because their words have been published.

You go on to say: "A man is very interested in raising his progeny not somebody elses."

I have a question back. It's "why?" Why do you think so? Are you sure it's RAISING that progeny and not merely passing on genes?

My response to you is this: catering to an adult's ego is just not a priority consideration. It has nothing whatever to do with the interests of a child. If you believe a parental DNA connection is a motivating thing, well that speaks volumes.

We're talking "possession" here, as in property, as in "mine." And "molding" here as in "indoctrination into my beliefs." Not caregiving. Not a child perspective. But self-adoration and replication. If the biological connection alone was so motivating, how is it we have the numbers of nonmarital unions and bad marriages we have? what about adoptive parents? what about sperm donors? I'll agree with you that some men think this way. I just don't buy it as some naturally arising drive, and even as a result of social indoctrination, I don't buy it as a given.

But let's accept your theory for the sake of argument. If a biological father's ostensible natural interest is in raising his own progeny, that interest nevertheless still is unlikely to compare favorably with the gestating mother's interest. She's got the very same biological connection, PLUS the biological relationship in fact with the child! And how is the father's interest later on demonstrated? Who is more likely to be the primary caregiver?

"The Case For Father Custody?" Nonsense. By your own measure, natural mothers' parenting generally would come out on top on both counts: your "abstract justice" theory, as well as my real life relationship preservation.

In one breath you've pretended (that male superiority thing?) that "women don't understand abstract justice," and then implicitly called upon nature, quoting talk about about organism evolution. Evolutionarily, the male reproductive drive in species the world over is merely to pass on the genes, not to raise the children. Most organisms also have evolved such that mothers raise their young.

And what about your "abstract justice?" Life is not lived in the abstract, and some men's egos are just not the sum total of what counts.

This is really what the FR movement is about, isn't it. Children and women as men's possessions. The ideology of property rights. Patriarchy. It has nothing whatever to do with the well-being of children.

By the way. Clarence Darrow, a famous man lawyer well known for his righting of wrongs, had this to say about "abstract justice": there is no such thing, in or out of court.

liz

MadShangi is the Feminist Killer [according to MadShangi]

This is one of the most hostile antifeminist diatribes by a man I have ever read.

I think it constitutes a serious, terroristic threat against a specific group of people (feminists). What's posted here, below, is just the beginning of it. WARNING: VIRULENT RACIST WOMAN-HATING LANGUAGE FOLLOWS. IT IS LIKELY TO TRIGGER ANY FEMALE SURVIVOR OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT OR ASSAULT. I am wondering if this sort of hate speech is prosecutable.

Monday, November 17, 2008

"Fuck The Feminists"

Fuck the Feminists, 'cause they've gone too far
MadShangi's gonna expose what cunts they are
I'm no fake, and I'm no player
MadShangi is the motherfucking truth sayer
You say you want equality, you're lyin'
You're just a greedy bitch that wants what's mine
You stupid bitch, don't be a sequel
To the last bitch that thought she was equal
You're a stupid ass motherfucking bitch ass ho
MadShangi says: "Fuck your soul!"

[...]

Gonna spill more blood than your average thriller
'Cause MadShangi is the Feminist Killer [...]

To view his YouTube video, in which he speaks about himself and his opinion that he doesn't hate women, see this. A significantly less serious warning: this video is rambling and boring.

This is his email address, in case you'd like to challenge his hateful views: patrick_doran1@hotmail.com

He reportedly is from Calgary, Alberta, Canada. He is listed as 24 years old, and is white with short to medium-length brown hair. Women should regard him as a dangerous individual.

Oh, and Patrick Doran, re: your allegations of me stalking and being, um, attracted to you:

You're not my type. My type is humane, thoughtful, caring, profeminist (anti-racist, anti-misogynist, anti-homophobic) men who don't behave like the stupid, hateful asshole you repeatedly portray yourself to be.

In case my motives aren't clear to you, Patrick, let me spell them out:

Revealing how misogynistic, antifeminist, antiWomanist men behave is part of my political work, and reporting men who threaten to kill women is important for anyone to do. Therefore, I'm placing your threatening statement here, with your contact information, where it might be seen by someone living in your part of Canada who can report and/or arrest you.

(That's not an invitation to go out on a date, in case you are still confused.)
END OF POST.

Misogynist-racist misopedic white man Roger Sweet

I want to thank Heart for posting this news story. I link to it here to make it available to those who come by this way.

When will white heterosexual men's gross human rights atrocities end?

As B. Dylan said, the answer is blowing in the wind.
END OF POST.

"The Anti-Dworkin", aka John Dias

As we await John's reply to a recent post here, I wanted to give visitors to this blog some information about who John Dias is and what he does.

John is listed at the "anti-man-hating" site as being 38 years old and refers to himself as "The Anti-Dworkin".

He is the founder of the website dontmakehermad.com. It's motto is: "Stopping False Allegations with Surveillance Technology".

I am linking to two pages from his website with more info about John. The first, here, is his FAQ page. The main function of his site it to get men who live with women to purchase surveillance equipment so that if a man is falsely charged with domestic violence by a woman he lives with, he'll have proof that it was really she who is the abuser or, at the very least, a liar.

The story about why he created that website is linked to here.


He joined antimisandry.com on July 13, 2006, which, though a while ago, is not when the site was hatched. The site's first listed member, Marx, has a "join date" of Nov. 5, 2005. That antimisandry website also has members ranked according to what they term reputation. This appears to be similar to a ranking system found in Scientology, in which Tom Cruise is first or second most reputable. At the antmisandy site, reputation appears to connote one's commitment to the Men's Rights Movement, antifeminism, and related activism and writing, including postings on their site. John Dias is listed as among the most reputable members. [Note: I am not making any other comparisons between this antimisandry site and the Church of Scientology. For one things, antimisandry.com doesn't appear to ask its members to hand over all their money.] From what I can tell, members are primarily from North America and the UK; most are male, but not all, and most are white.

John is a skilled debater; he's no novice as we can note here, on a page where he gives Men's Rights Activists an opportunity rank themselves.

He is practiced in scoring points when debating on feminist and Men's Rights issues.

John tends to use liberal argumentation.

Another regular at antimisandry.com, dyslexic banana argues similarly here, about prostitution.

There are things that outrage me in the course of a day. Sometimes it's the latest news story about the latest battered and killed ex-wife, usually by the man who "loved her" [here meaning wanting to completely possess and control her]. Sometimes it's the news of a woman coerced into sexual slavery. Sometimes it's the news from yet another woman or gay man leaving an office workplace, who has been harassed on the street, yet again, and followed by a predatory man after she or he made it clear, usually far too respectfully, that s/he did not welcome any contact. Sometimes it's blatant or subtle white male supremacist racism in combination with misogyny and heterosexism, which shows up in too many ways to name here.

According to this post, there was a particular Diamond Ring billboard that really angered John. I'm not sure how he reacts to the far more numerous billboards, print ads, and online industrial strength pornography, which relentlessly and virulently depict women as things that apparently exist for [hetero] men to exploit, f*ck, and rape. Perhaps he'll address this too, in his reply.

A Response to John Dias who is an administrator at antimisandry.com

Hello visitors.

I recently got a flurry of misogynistic/antifeminist comments (um, unposted here by me, needless to say!) from men associated with the antimisandry.com site. I also got this much more respectful comment:

John Dias said...

I am an admin over at AntiMisandry.com. Are there any questions you would like to ask, rather than just making deductions? I extend my hand to you; please ask away.

Sunday, November 16, 2008 1:50:00 PM EST.

I informed John that, in fact, my questions had been posted over there, and they were not responded to, but were instead by-passed so a few men could rant on in antifeminist and misogynist ways INSTEAD of responding. But I don't assume each administrator over there reads everything, so John may never have seen my q's.

Below is the paragraph I posted over there, with its original questions separated out, and in bold, so as not to be missed. I have welcomed John Dias to answer them here, respectfully and sincerely. I await his reply.


I began by responding to a strange comment by an anti-misandrist man called "cybro" in which he said something about "indians". But the discussion, on my end, was focused on whether and how misandry shows itself socially, and includes issues that negatively impact American Indian women. Anything in brackets is material I have added here today at A Radical Profeminist, hopefully for clarity!!!

OK, enough already! Here's the comment:

I think we all know what happened and is still happening to Indigenous people all over the planet: white men and our values, industries, and institutions are killing them, genocidally. And white men are also systematically raping Indigenous women. See this for more:http://www.indiancountry.com/content...1096415046

What is your humanitarian response to these atrocities?

In what institutions, in what social venues, in what regions of North America, in your view, do "women rule over men"? I am eager to hear your answer.

As for where men get to speak like this: have you looked at the pornography industry in the last thirty five years; men have been putting down women there in every conceivable way, degrading women, raping women, pretending to rape women, cumming on women's faces, gang-banging women, treating women of color like sh*t in particularly racist and misogynist ways.

[So, John, I'll restate the question: Are you familiar with the content of online industry-produced "heterosexual" pornography? And would you describe the content as misogynist, not misandrist, unless it is dealing with the stereotypical portrayal and abuse of men of color?]

Often and routinely over these many years, the pornographers (I'm here I'm talking about the big fellas: the white corporate pimps, not someone at home alone or with a partner using their webcam) make feminists and feminism the targets of this scorn, contempt, and defamation: that's a multi-billion dollar a year industry.

I ask this in earnestness: can you name for me one multi-billion dollar a year industry that promotes (accurately) the perspectives of radical feminists?
Because I can't, and I've looked.

Practically every woman I know has been seriously harmed physically, emotionally, and sexually by a man or by several men, often within their own families of origin: I'm not a youngster, and this means dozens and dozens of women, just those women to whom I am personally connected. One woman friend was molested by three different men over one summer when she was nine years old. Another woman was raped by her father, older brothers, and male cousins when she was a girl. My female dental hygienist was murdered by her ex-boyfriend; he came to her home when she was alone and killed her. I also know boys who have been raped or molested or assaulted by men: again, their numbers are in the dozens, but approximately half as large as the population of females harmed by men in these ways.

Do you know even five women who have been charged with rape, incest, child molestation, criminal battery, women who have detained boys or men in their basements as sexual slaves, women who have trafficked in boys and men for the purposes of sexual gratification, at the expense of the humanity of those so used and abused?

I see men treat one another like sh*t often, beating each other up outside of bars, shouting and threatening each other: white men threatening and discriminating against men of color; heterosexual men bullying and beating gay men.

I'm curious why you don't see men as a significant population of man-haters. [That's a question.]

I honestly (I'm being entirely serious here) know of not one single woman who hates men. Not one. I know women who fear men, based on past experiences; I know women who fight for justice for women, for women to be free from rapist culture, from pornographic culture, from a dominant culture in which Indigenous North American women can be raped by white men without any recourse. I can't "reverse" this phenomenon and match it to reality.

Could you name the social experiences, on a large scale, that lead you to see the world this way?

Regarding your use of the term "feminazi": Given social-political reality, aren't white men "the Nazis," and women of all ethnicities more like "European Jews" than the other way around?

In what sense do feminists in North America control the media, run state police forces, direct the military, and form an unfathomably inhumane dictatorship, as Hitler did?

What sense does it make to call any feminists "Nazis"? Please explain this to me. (Thank you.)

How have you been harmed, personally, by women?

I look forward to your response. Thanks for engaging on this topic. I appreciate your willingness to keep the dialogue open.

Julian

[NOTE: the above was posted on July 24, 2008 11:13 AM at antimisandry.com. John never responded to me there. There were no extended hands... until now.]

This Advocate Cover is so Damned Racist and Heterosexist

I never have had any confidence at all in The Advocate speaking for a majority of queer folks, who, btw, are not white. This is not to say the magazine is "all white". It isn't. But it is a pro-liberal, pro-corporate, pro-consumerist magazine, promoting a sadly and predominantly dominant cultural and political agenda that won't benefit hardly anyone but possibly the most privileged white gay men.

Once again (and again, and again...), the assumption is made, as in the cover's saying, that all the gay folks are white, and all African Americans are heterosexual. WRONG.

I may write about the content of the article as well, but just wanted to get this stupid Advocate cover posted, while it's fresh.

As for the subtitle on the cover, "The Last Great Civil Rights Struggle", I address this comment to the white male author, Michael Joseph Gross:

There are several "last great civil rights struggles" going on, and many human rights struggles as well, one of which is to radically challenge heterosexism and homophobia. Fighting white supremacy, anti-Black racism, and other forms of racism, are still "Front and Center" in the struggle, if you care about humanity. So too is the fight against male supremacy and misogyny, Western cultural and economic imperialism, and ecocide. And each of these struggles is intricately intertwined, overlapping, or synonymous in the experience of many human beings.

For those who don't know it, what is now often termed "Queerness" has its roots in civilisations, societies, and communities that were and are not white-majority or European. And in many societies that have since been seriously and detrimentally impacted, if not destroyed, the "queers" weren't seen as odd or peculiar, as we are now in white heteromale supremacist Amerikkka.

Here is a resource page, and as the disclaimer says, an imperfect one at that, with a list of African American same-gender loving writers. It's a good starting point for self-education, if you are among the people who are white and who also conjure up an image of "white people" when you hear the term lesbian and gay community.

19 Nov. 2008 UPDATE! Queerty's site has an analysis of the Advocate cover article, with a handy pie chart!!!



Let's give the last word to conrad who posted a comment following the Queerty critique:

No. 6 · conrad

this is identity politics at its worst and ugliest. im so tired of lots of white folx saying gay is the new black, as if there arent any queer black people (that bare the brunt of both white supremacy and homophobia)…

Bayard Rustin anyone?

Fuck the advocate.
Posted: Nov 13, 2008 at 9:06 pm
END OF POST.

To Any Woman who is involved intimately with a Misogynist Man: Take This Test for Validation

There is a test [here] one can take to find out if one is in bed with, in love with, or married to a misogynist heterosexual man. That first link was to page one of a five page article. Here are the links to page 2, page 3, page 4, and page 5. Please note, at the end is a link to another quiz to find out if you are in an abusive relationship.

Note: at the end of page 5, there is a place to rate the article, one through five stars. Click on star 5 if you found this article very useful. And check out the misogynists comments below that! It's tough for misogynist men to be identified accurately, for they have so many systems, structures, and strategies in place to never be held to account.
END OF POST.