Facebook hates women?

Facebook, we need to talk.

Apparently Woman Action Media (WAM!) has you looking out for gender-based hate speech. That’s good to hear, but why focus so strongly on hate speech against women and not men? Does “hate speech” include speech regarding glorification of violence against men?

For those of you who have not seen the news today, Facebook gave in to pressure from a collection of women’s groups to do three things. Their message has been copied verbatim from the WAM! Open Letter to Facebook, signed by over one hundred organizations and individuals.

1. Recognize speech that trivializes or glorifies violence against girls and women as hate speech and make a commitment that you will not tolerate this content.

If you are an anti-feminist (or if you think that a girl who got drunk and regretted sleeping with a guy was not actually raped), does this mean you are trivializing violence against girls and women? If so, your words are not to be tolerated, because your thoughts are not allowed.

2. Effectively train moderators to recognize and remove gender-based hate speech.

Why does this remind me of a book about a farm that had animals that could talk?

3. Effectively train moderators to understand how online harassment differently affects women and men, in part due to the real-world pandemic of violence against women.

Harassment for men and women on the Internet is defined by the groups who support this letter. This is their answer and I have questions for that answer.

I will not dismiss concerns of hate speech, but shouldn’t men’s groups have a say? Shouldn’t the women’s groups show us what they have done to prevent hate speech against men? And Facebook, what specific changes to your policy do you envision? Specifically, will your policies be just as vague as the language in this letter?

The offensive content feminists intend to get rid of concerns media glorifying or trivializing violence against women or rape. Feminists are also accusing Facebook of biased moderation.

These pages and images are approved by your moderators, while you regularly remove content such as pictures of women breastfeeding, women post-mastectomy and artistic representations of women’s bodies. In addition, women’s political speech, involving the use of their bodies in non-sexualized ways for protest, is regularly banned as pornographic, while pornographic content – prohibited by your own guidelines – remains.

I can’t find porn on Facebook and believe me I looked. However, what I did discover are models who reveal cleavage and bikini butts. I can only believe in the absence of feminist citation, that what I am observing is the normal interaction of both sexes interacting in a social environment doing as humans do. If cave-people had the Internet would they not show a bit of leg peeking through their Mastodon skin coat? I dug and now I’m confused even more. I need more data!

Rape, it’s glorification? My experience has been that people who post images, videos and text that promote rape and violence are doing it because they know the value of shock. If you conflate their intention to deceive with their presentation of an untruthful reality you rob yourself of the truth. It is tempting for some to believe as they say, but in the end those that do are denied what is actually real. I doubt real rapists are publicly announcing their desire to rape. I want numbers because I am curious.

How many examples of hate speech that WAM! and affiliates moan about lead to proven incidences of rape or domestic violence? Is this project making the world a better place for you and me? Ask Facebook.

Indeed, Facebook’s ad revenue was attacked and it was attacked by the cluster bomb that WAM! deployed.

To this end, we are calling on Facebook users to contact advertisers whose ads on Facebook appear next to content that targets women for violence, to ask these companies to withdraw from advertising on Facebook until you take the above actions to ban gender-based hate speech on your site. (We will be raising awareness and contacting advertisers on Twitter using the hashtag #FBrape.)

Facebook’s revenue is being cut off by people who are only out to help the “fairer” sex. After all, the fairer sex outnumber men on Facebook, so of course they are going to listen.

This is a call to action to all MHRAs and women’s organizations to allow men to speak in this discussion without “appropriate editing.” Why do we deserve what the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, well you know the answer already.

I want you to look at this experiment that took me thirty seconds. Here are the results for “I hate men,” “men are evil” or “men suck” when I searched for them in Facebook.

  1. http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=660529757307186&set=a.111990072161160.15768.111962042163963&type=1&relevant_count=1
  2. http://www.facebook.com/mensuck?fref=ts
  3. http://www.facebook.com/pages/men-are-the-source-of-all-evil-or-shall-i-just-say-CS/110868285616325
  4. http://www.facebook.com/pages/All-men-are-evil-and-will-act-upon-their-vicious-nature-if-given-the-chance/120775494673908
  5. http://www.facebook.com/pages/I-Hate-Men/121104277931041
  6. http://www.facebook.com/pages/i-hate-men/123497954342168
  7. http://www.facebook.com/pages/Men-are-Evil/388676584573526

Facebook moderators do not remove this content even though the hatred is overt. WAM! and company currently number over one hundred, so where is our mainstream media coverage? Oh that’s right, like all oppressed groups that have a tiny membership, the “fairer sex” has it.

Choose one or be lit up under a spotlight shining on your theater of bigotry. Hate speech against either sex is not allowed, or, hate speech against both sexes is allowed.

I can put up with this but I’m not going to.


Addendum: More extreme links have surfaced depicting men in uncomfortable pornographic positions or as the targets of hate speech or violence. The following links are not safe for work, so do not click them if you are below legal age to view them in your jurisdiction, or are uncomfortable viewing such material. Feminists complain about this material when it targets women, but do not mention content like this in their crackdown on hate speech.


  1. https://www.facebook.com/pages/Castrate-decapitate-the-misogynistic-pigs-at-the-head-of-Faceshit-LULZ/289681341143480
  2. https://www.facebook.com/pages/Operation-Castration-Domination/120988944593314
  3. https://www.facebook.com/FemdomJeanette (exposed penises being stepped on)
  4. https://www.facebook.com/pages/Men-should-be-Shrunk-and-kept-in-Jars/241193324293
  5. https://www.facebook.com/pages/Girls-beating-up-their-boyfriends/414662217432?fref=ts
  6. https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-aiYjqnsA1Xc/UaJ4ljXm8OI/AAAAAAAAAIc/ECBAY-BZiXA/w851-h411-no/Beating+up+your+boyfriend-FB+page.jpg


Woman physically abusing man

  1. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=383057471809389&set=a.383057265142743.1073741859.369674346481035&type=1&theater

Woman physically abusing woman

  1. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=186102954873025&set=a.186102921539695.1073741838.168267283323259&type=1&theater

Addendum 2: Thankfully some of the links above have been breaking since the misandric content was being removed, no doubt from MHRAs reporting the spotlighted material. This gives some points to Facebook, but we are not out of the woods yet. Facebook has still removed content from AVFM’s page that merely challenged false rape statistics without violating community guidelines, which shows we still have work to do.

About Sage Gerard (Victor Zen)

Sage Gerard (Victor Zen) is the Collegiate Activism Director of AVfM and the founder of Zen Men, the first men's rights student organization sponsored by the AVFM community. Sage has been interviewed by USA Today, Mother Jones, The League of Ordinary Gentlemen, GQ Magazine, The Los Angeles Times, New Republic, KSU Student Media and other publications for his activism, and students all over the nation turn to him for guidance on making men's rights advocacy a reality on campus.

Main Website
View All Posts

Support us by becoming a member

AVFM depends on readers like you to help us pay expenses related to operations and activism. If you support our mission, please subscribe today.

Join or donate

Sponsored links

  • https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Voice-for-Men/102001393188684 Paul Elam

    This is not about hating women. We know who these fuckers are coming for. And I tell you what, if there was ever a time in the MHRM for men of differing views to set their squabbles aside and pull together, this is it.

    This is not just another balloon full of misandric hot air. It is the start of an assault designed to silence all dissent from feminism. And it might work if good men and women stand by and do nothing.

    I am staying up to write a follow up to this.

    • Victor Zen

      Awesome! Do it.

      The thought police won’t win.

      • Lambo

        Hi Victor. So glad to see you’ve picked up on this.
        I saw a related story to this in the Courier Mail in Australia and tried adding a bit of perspective in the comments
        Wasn’t at all surprised that none of my comments were published.
        I refer you to my comment innapropriately posted amongst the recent booze article for the content of the last comment sent.
        Very much looking forward to Pauls take on this too…

    • http://shiningpearlsofsomething.blogspot.com Suzanne McCarley

      Please do. We need to coordinate a social media blitz.

    • Turbo

      “if there was ever a time in the MHRM for men of differing views to set their squabbles aside and pull together, this is it.”

      Absolutely agree.

      Well done Victor Zen.

    • Tamerlame

      Women suffer less violence than men, so they feel more threatened than men from online text?

      We got to train society to ignore the threat narrative, so these women can’t manipulate society.

  • Carlos

    Truth is the New Hate Speech.

  • Victor Zen

    I want to give a shout out to Ian Williams, who did a wonderful job helping me edit this piece. Thanks again for your help, Ian!

  • feeriker

    I knew there was a reason why I despised Facebook and wanted nothing whatsoever to do with it.

    • http://www.facebook.com/tardisguy Stephen Haworth

      Hate facebook, or not: The fact is such a popular social platform will generate ideas that reach “the real world”
      If ignored, things like this will go unchallenged.
      well… even more so.

      • feeriker

        No argument there. The challenge will be in getting a significant enough majority of Facebook’s current clientele to realize that this not-so-subtle attempt at censorship is a very dangerous slippery slope, one that will affect EVERY FB customer at some point.

    • Near Earth Object

      Aside from myself, I personally do not know another person who is NOT on Facebook.

      • feeriker

        I know of three others, so I guess that between you, me, and these three other folks, there are about a half dozen of us “holdouts.”

        As I’ve told a few other close acquaintances, I would be honored and overjoyed to discover that I was one of the last people in North America who does not have either a Facebook or Twitter account. Social media in general annoy me (“TMI” seems to be the theme common to all of them). I only have a LinkedIn account for professional reasons and keep my profile content to the minimum necessary to maintain a professional profile.

        All of the above said, I do agree that Facebook’s cave-in to the Feministas is an inexcusable disgrace. I really hope that they’re smart enough to weigh the benefits of catering to these creatures’ demands against the costs of alienating what might be very significant segments of their customer base – including women.

  • http://www.facebook.com/william.vann William E. Vann

    I can find a little bit of “soft-core” pron on face book. Point two we should do the same to ad’s that are next to hate against men.and we should write facebook an open letter about it also..

    • http://kevin-wayne.wordpress.com kevinwaynesongs

      Great idea.

    • Xevaster

      All we should do is take the letter they wrote change every reference of female to male and put it out there.
      Once the cries of misogyny start poring in we can point out that all we did was change the sexes, then sit back and watch the tempest in a tea cup.

      • feeriker

        Yep, EXACTLY. They need to have their faces rubbed in their own hypocrisy.

  • http://www.facebook.com/tardisguy Stephen Haworth

    What to do?
    We need more inventive ways of educating the public.

    • Victor Zen


      One thing that disappoints me is that I cannot tell my FB friends about this without connecting my alias to my real name. Since death threats have been made towards me, I cannot take the risk of being targeted for my activism to date.

      I am terrified to speak out as who I am, and I know I am not the only one.

      Fucking putrid.

      • http://braveheartwallace.wordpress.com braveheartwallace

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zXajYDnprQ Victor Zen, you are a slave, and I empathize with all of us living in FEAR Roy Batty from Bladerunner has a message for you…

  • http://kloo2yoo.wordpress.com kloo2yoo

    Facebook needs to be cautious here, and all MRAs on facebook need to be active in ensuring that Facebook does not take the stance – espoused by many feminists – that MRA speech = hatred.


    organizations have attempted to make such labels stick. here are two examples:




    O2 / Symantec / Norton


    • JGteMolder

      The BBC article says Facebook is going to/needs to talk with interest groups.

      So how do we become an interest group, and how we get to be one of the interest groups that facebook talks with?

  • KeanoReeves

    Also, remember, Face Book can be SUED. Yes, SUED!!!!

  • Near Earth Object

    Great report, Victor.

    Very nice to see that Ian helped you out with the editing.

    THIS is when men are truly at their best: working in concert with one another.

  • Never Blue Again

    I hope you’ve taken screen shots of them.
    Some links are not working now.

    • http://kevin-wayne.wordpress.com kevinwaynesongs

      They’re working for me…

    • Victor Zen

      This has been pointed out to me. Other links have been added. Take screenshots now!

  • http://kevin-wayne.wordpress.com kevinwaynesongs

    Minor point, but I don’t appear to be able to up-vote anyone’s comments.

    • scatmaster
      • http://kevin-wayne.blogspot.com Kevin

        Thanks. |m/

      • Kosh

        Thank you, Scatmaster. I was wondering how to do this since the login format changed. Upvoted.

  • http://kevin-wayne.wordpress.com kevinwaynesongs

    I now have screen shots of the Fb pages at each of the above links, if anyone’s interested.

  • MenDiscontinued

    This goes along quite well, TJ does a great job shutting down these ridiculous Feminists demands over the internet. You could almost mirror these points for Facebook groups.

    • tallwheel

      Nah. His heart is in the right place, but compared to a bonafide MRA, most of his arguments in this video are lazy and don’t get to the crux of it. It was frustrating to watch because I found myself saying, “No, no. There are much better arguments you could have used here!” at so many points throughout the video. Some of his arguments are actually similar to those feminists in that they are dismissive and lazy. This is not a good example of how to refute feminist claims. (Though the crappy material he’s refuting here hardly deserves good refutations.) He has other videos on feminism that are all right though.

  • Jack

    I.. just… don’t.. even ..

    I give up on trying to understand why. Do feminists breed like urak-hai on Lord of The Rings, brain wash their spawn to be completely irrational, biased and paranoid.

    Or are they fucked up on acid 24/7

    Either explanation seems reasonable to me.

  • http://masculism.ca/blog Jack Day

    “First they came for the writers, but I didn’t speak up because I was not a writer. Then they came for the students, but I didn’t speak up because I was not a student. They came for musicians, but I didn’t speak up because I was not a musician. And then they came for the greeks, the muslims, the trade-unionists, the christians, and the jews. The travellers, homosexuals, the journalists, the artists, the doctors, the philosophers, the economists, the anarchists, and the politicians, the nerds, europeans, the americans, the communists, the hackers, illegals, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t any of them. And then they came for me and there was no one left to speak up for me.

  • Bamph

    All of the FaceBook pages that were mentioned in this article have been reported by me as hate speach. I recomend that you all do the same.

    • OneHundredPercentCotton

      Me too.

      • Altair

        I did that too.

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/DannyboyCdnMRA Dan Perrins

    WAM = What a mess.
    Nothing like a little bigotry baked up with censorship to rally moral and ethical men and women to the MHRM is my take on things.

  • Mike S

    An old collectivist tactic. The current way FB is run won’t give them the leverage and victim status they want so they want the rules changed to tilt the table in their favor.

  • http://gravatar.com/johntate1 MGTOW-man

    I agree. This is a censorship/hate manipulation in order to rid the world of the truth that feminists despise and blame on men; But indeed, nature is responsibile, not men.

    I doubt very much will be done to stop it becasue it is too hard to get men to see that they are not selling the farm, but giving it away.

    I have always said that censorship is coming and it is here!

    Why would men be so tratiorous as to become so apathetic as to allow their own voices to be ERASED?

    Where are the real men…and I dare use that term because it fits most appropriately!

  • http://gravatar.com/johntate1 MGTOW-man

    This comment was SUPPOSED to come as a direct response to an above comment that said “we should find more innovative ways to educate the public,” but it posted at the bottom…the second time this has happened. Anyway…

    I couln’t have said it better myself! (about educating the public before it is too late).

    This is but one reason why I said if the changes coming to AVfM soon are to make facebook and other social media mandatory for participation on this site (and in the overall MHRM), then that is a huge mistake!

    • https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Voice-for-Men/102001393188684 Paul Elam

      ” make facebook and other social media mandatory for participation on this site (and in the overall MHRM),”

      LOL, where did you get THAT?

      • Kosh

        Probably the same place I got it from. I came here one day and instead of reading “Login to reply” it just said “Reply” and gave options of Facebook, Twitter, something else, and anonymous, with no apparent way to post with the old AVfM login, unless that was what the third option was and I was just too stupid to realise it. I was on the verge of e-mailing you about it when I came up across Scatmaster’s helpful link up above. I’ve added it to my bookmark toolbar so I can just click on it as needed. Thanks again, Scat. :-)

  • Chris Caroll

    Victor…you’re absolutely right. It should go both ways. In looking at the news coverage on this issue, I discovered that they do have a page on their site where they have documented the kinds of images and speech they’re talking about. You can see it here: http://www.womenactionmedia.org/examples-of-gender-based-hate-speech-on-facebook/

  • Wil

    I was one Facebook’s biggest targets by feminist, the only thing I can tell you this they (Facebook feminist) will try every thing from finding out where your work, to your exact location of where you live, and family member’s, etc, etc. It became so bad with me and this well known Facebook Feminist that the law stepped in both counties. You do not ever want to go through this.

  • agztse

    Well, there is one word for what these people want: fascism. Total control of mind, of speech, of every aspect of human life. Because they serve the interest of woman? Bullshit! This is a small group of organized misandrist’s only looking after their own interest. In Germany, they created a whole industry for themselves. The German government is spending millions of taxpayers money for “genderresearch” (which, if you look into it, sounds pretty similar to what the Nazis did in their racial theories which essentially justified the holocaust against the Jews) for thousands of superficial “equal opportunity commissioners”, for a program (EUR 150m) to push for more female professors on universities and so on.
    It’s a small group which manages to hold the rest of society hostage, make it appear as if their cause is “just” and not supporting them is backward and against the interest of society progress. It really is about time to unmask them and show that they do not represent majority. They do not speak in the interest of all. It’s about time to give companies, such as Facebook, a clear signal that they should not feel obliged to bend over when those misandrist’s scream. Yes, they are well organized and yes they will initiate a “shitstorm” – but so what? In Germany we have a “Shitstorm” from that side nearly every week, the last one was know as “Aufschrei”. Great. In the end they exposed themselves. In the end most of the people understood what the real agenda of those clowns is.
    It’s about time to ignore them. It’s about time to do exactly what they hate to see and to write what they hate to read – just for spite. Just to make it know to them that they don’t dominate free speech, that they wont be able to disrupt and to destroy the healthy relationship between the two sexes – something they are incapable of having.

  • OneHundredPercentCotton

    I flagged every one of these sites, and received this reply for every flagged item:


    Thanks for your recent report of a potential violation on Facebook. After reviewing your report, we were not able to confirm that the specific page you reported violates Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities.

    Learn more about what we do and don’t allow by reviewing the Facebook Community Standards: https://www.facebook.com/communitystandards.


    Give us feedback to let us know how we are doing: https://www.facebook.com/survey/take.php?survey_id=242477152482072&cid=127546554007207

  • barry targett

    I’ve reported to FB all the pages displayed. Thanks for the article.

  • http://gravatar.com/johntate1 MGTOW-man

    Intended as a reply to Paul Elam who responded to me….

    I will respond to you via e-mail. As for now, on here, just know that I could have worded my statement in a way that said I am HOPING we do not have to go through facebook or other social media outlets. Indeed, I never read it anywhere or was told such, or anything like that. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

  • Klar

    There is nothing about the German population of the 1930s that made them less educated, less informed or less sophisticated – and yet it happened.

    We used to laugh at stories of the soviet gulags, just as much as we talked about nazis as if it was ancient history. When the 50-year-old secrets from WW2 were about to expire in 1995, they were immediately re-classified as secret for another 100 years – nobody cared.

    The desire for most people to live a life of peace and goodwill will always be exploited by those depending on the masses not caring about connecting the obvious dots.

  • http://www.facebook.com/mike.jens.1 Mike Jens

    I went on facebook and searched every group under “Hate men” I then reported them as hate speech against a gender. Facebook actually removed three of them. The ones with names like “Hate men” “Men are evil” and “Men are natural born rapists”

    As much as I dont really dig censorship facebook is at least trying to be fair. Do I think this could get out of hand? Yes but lets keep a watch and make sure AVFM doesn’t get targeting unfairly.

  • http://gravatar.com/juliesisthebest22 Julie

    These violence toward men links really don’t hold any ground for me. They look like really weak props which barely have any posts at all. While i don’t believe in violence should be glorified for either sex it was evidently clear that the pages glorifying the violence toward women were much more popular reaching far above a few thousand at times where these can barely get 300. I’m not discounting the fact that their is misandry out there. But really i think this feeling of animosity isn’t warranted. These pages “of man hate” are so unpopular and small I didn’t even know they existed. I find this arguement reminds me much of when i was in grade school, where two children are fighting because “the other one started it.” or something to that respect when really it can be deflated much quicker when one party decides to not retaliate. All the pages glorifying the hate of women were fought against because they were so prevelent not because we wanted to exclude or hate men.

    Sorry if you’re angry that this was a case fought by women and for women. Not everything revolves around you.

    • http://shiningpearlsofsomething.blogspot.com Suzanne McCarley

      You kinda missed the point. The real danger lies in who “trains” the censors, according to what standards. Did you read the part about Norton/Symantec?

    • Victor Zen

      Look at the new links that were added. See the one with the lady sticking her heel right into a man’s scrotum? See it? Apparently that’s okay. It’s still there.

      The first links were less extreme, yes, but they were found in a 30 second shotgun search. What does that tell you about the prevalence of hatred against men?

  • 21149315

    Why should WAM! stand up for men when AVFM doesn’t stand up for women? You’re too busy being sarcastic and throwing fits instead of following their example and speaking up. Facebook is the problem here, stop going after a group and go after the company! Show Facebook that certain content offends you and take measures like WAM! and get something done!

    The moderators on Facebook are plain stupid if they can’t tell violence against either gender when they are given a clear visual.

    • http://shiningpearlsofsomething.blogspot.com Suzanne McCarley

      Seriously, Unicorn? We don’t speak up? We don’t stand up for women? When will you feminists figure out that men’s and women’s rights are not mutually exclusive? By supporting men’s rights, we ARE standing up for women. What we aren’t standing up for is women’s privilege.

      Thanks for the sage advice – to do exactly what we are doing.

      • http://www.genderratic.com Typhonblue (Asha James)

        Men’s rights supports my right not to be treated like a whiny bitch.

        Where else is a woman’s right to be expected to “human up” respected? I tells ya… nowhere but here, that’s where.

    • Peter Wright (Tawil)

      Hi 21149315, this is for you – hopefully it will educate you. :-)

    • Victor Zen

      Here’s why: WAM! is anti male and pro-female, while AVFM is pro-male WITHOUT being anti-female. Anti-feminist, yes, but that’s not the same thing.

      As for Facebook, what should scare you is the fact that a bunch of organizations got together and managed to seize control of a tech giant’s policies. If they can control Facebook, they can control anything.

      What are you going to do when you leave Facebook and join another site, only to have that one claimed by feminist interests, too?

      Look at the big picture.

  • http://DancingWithMyself Tundra Woman

    C’mon. Look, the old widow broad here who does *not* “participate” on social media can see IRL and over many years how much male bashing goes on; why would I even bother with social media sites to be exposed to more of the same?
    Reality: I supported the first wave of feminism. I spent my entire professional life working with Vietnam Combat Vets-long before PTSD was conveniently jerked from the DSM at the height of the War.
    The old broad is here to tell ya you missed the real POINT: One gender that seeks to vilify the other isn’t truly vested in HUMAN RIGHTS: They have a very clear Agenda and that is insisting the source of their woes is *always* an XY chromosome.
    Before we’re men or women, we’re human beings.
    And most fundamentally (and respectfully) THAT IS THE REAL ISSUE. And what really made an impact and clearly showed me how much misandry is alive and well? My male clients who would show up for their appointments with black eyes, scratches, bruises etc. that were visible beyond their clothing. One of my female colleagues would remark, “He got in a bar fight, eh?” (grin/wink)
    NO. His wife, SO etc. did *that* “damage” but hey, he’s bigger so he “deserved it.” When I’d ask these men why they did not proffer charges, they’d look ashamed and say, “No one would help me any way. Yeah TW, we have shelters for female victims of DV. Where can I go? And what about my kid(s)?”
    The unspoken? “I’m a man. I have to tolerate this, otherwise…” she’ll cry “victim.” She’ll ensure she violates Visitation Court Orders at whim and my kids? I’ll be cut off from them because it takes me forever to get to Court on the “Visitation” issue. And then, she’ll be found guilty of an “Unwilling Violation of the (Court) Order (aka, a slap on the wrist.) And by that time my kid(s) will be back in school after Summer Vacation and I don’t want their visitation to impact their education…” etc.
    There’s no excuse, rationalization, “Educated-Beyond-Reality” etc. ever for elevating yourself secondary to your gender, regardless of that gender. There’s NO excuse to make kids suffer because you’re a walking Cluster B.
    In my “Ideal World” when you have kids *both parties* are Court Ordered to take an MMPI-2. Period, the end.
    Keep up the great work, Mr. E and thanks for A Voice for Men.
    Gawd knows, they need it.

  • CeCe

    I’m sure I’ll be thumbed-down here, but I’d just like to point out that the two pictures depicting “violence” are actually fem-dom, which is consensual. It would be no more offensive than a BDSM picture of a male dom whipping a female sub. I don’t believe that such images belong on Facebook, but they aren’t actually promoting violence, they’re just pornographic if they include nudity.

    Also, some of the pages currently linked are about fem-dom (such as Operation Castration and Fem-Dom Jeanette). I don’t think those are very good examples as actually promoting violence against men in general, since BDSM involves the consent of both parties.

    I fully believe, however, that any pages promoting violence against *either* gender should be removed. Promoting hate against either gender is wrong.

    • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F (Ian Williams)


      You are not getting it.

      Firemen go to a scene and they hose down two walls of a burning building and their job is done? Think about this if you will and that is this;

      FB is cool with accommodating vicious voices that salivate when talking of men getting their nuts cut off and at the same time they would never allow vicious voices talking about what a fun thing it would be to have women having their ovaries ripped out with a pair of pliers. Why should they accommodate ovaries being ripped out? They do well by not allowing this and two walls still burn.

      That’s right. You have reversed the sexes now and it’s not so “cool” is it?

      BDSM? Holy crap are you the bell-ringer for the town of idiots? You really think that consensual fetishes are somehow related to this thread, this issue? Mate you really blew it there and thanks for the heads up when it comes to letting us know what we might be in for with any other comments that might dribble from your keyboard.

      You telling us that the matter addressed in this article is not such a serious issue? FB protocol tells us horrors and you have read about it here. Your pasty comment says that not only do you not get it, but you don’t get the other thing and that is the issue that males feel pain and we are being ignored like the “nigger” the “spick the “slope, the boong and the “Jew-skid”.

      If you are offended by those words then here’s another disgusting term – “man”.

      You have just exposed yourself as someone who is fucking shallow and abbreviated with common empathy. Of course you are because our pain gets in the way of the armchair flight you adore.

      Get out of the chair, have a good scratch a yawn and a cup of coffee and join us when you really get it. I hope you do because right now you do not and your singular presentation sucks.

      • CeCe

        I think you missed my point, whether intentionally or not. All that I was saying was that the particular examples used in this article (the links and the pictures above IN THIS ARTICLE) contained images and pages about BDSM, NOT about hate against men. Therefore, they weren’t the best examples to use of hatred against men, since BDSM is consensual. If I saw a page about male doms that described piercing a woman’s clitoris or nipples, or whipping a woman’s vagina, I wouldn’t take offense to it (though I might think they were too pornographic for Facebook or weird because that’s not the sort of thing I’m into myself), because some people involved in the BDSM lifestyle enjoy those things, just like some men in the BDSM lifestyle enjoy the idea of having their manhood tortured. That is their prerogative, not mine. BDSM was in my comment, because the links and pictures in this article, used as examples of hatred against men, were about BDSM. How did you not notice this?

        I’m not denying that there is hatred against men out there, and I think that’s wrong. But I think that you guys do yourselves a disservice in your arguments when you start insulting a person for pointing out the obvious, when they have not said one way or the other whether or not they support the rest of the article.

        And in fact, I did not say it wasn’t a serious issue. Reread my comment. I said nothing of the sort. I was ONLY pointing out that a couple of the examples were poor. I then went on to say that promoting hatred or violence against *either* gender is wrong. It’s wrong to promote violence against men. It’s also wrong to promote violence against women. Is that clear enough for you? With which part of that do you personally disagree?

        If you wanted to prove yourself as the better person, you failed, even if everyone else on this page disagrees with me.

        • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F (Ian Williams)

          Fuck the links as you know exactly what we are talking about here, and you taking recluse in that hastily patched-together disclaimer has your feminist wheedling louder.

          As for the rest of your “hey I’m on your side” fluff I don’t buy it.

          Always words about how you are as one with us, but coincidentally no mention from you about how I noted your total absence of commenting on the pain men go through. How men are not even a page 45 item in a newspaper. Nothing.

          You talk and I see much ink but no other motivation except for a re-focusing and denial of your obvious ignorance. You are the same stamp as all of the other self proclaimed feminists that swirl in here.

          • CeCe

            When exactly did I say I was a feminist?

            I’m not “with” promoting one gender over another, I’m for equality, plain and simple. I also acknowledged that there is hatred against men, and that it’s wrong. I further acknowledged that some of the laws that favor women are unfair. What more do you want me to say? That women and/or feminists are “teh evil” because of this? I’m sorry, I won’t do that, just like I won’t say that men are evil because some of them rape or abuse women. I won’t join in on that chorus. I’m not that kind of person. I don’t believe in demonizing one for the sake of the other.

            I honestly don’t care what you “buy” or not. I’m not selling anything. I’m simply commenting on a blog post. I’ve shared my opinion, and whether you consider it “shallow” or not, well, I suppose you’re entitled to your opinion, just like I’m entitled to mine.

            What I’m getting from your comments (and I may be wrong on this) is that you have this idea that anyone who doesn’t get behind every single thing that all of you are saying is obviously just a typical man-hating feminist and is against you. And that’s every bit as wrong as the feminists who think that everyone must agree with every single thing they say or else they’re just misogynistic, chauvinistic pigs. I’m willing to look for middle ground, something that benefits both men *and* women, an egalitarian society that equalizes the genders. This means that I acknowledge the merits of some or even many of the arguments I see from men’s rights activists, while disagreeing with some others. There’s nothing wrong with this, in my opinion, just like there’s nothing wrong with men who agree with some tenets of feminism and not others. It doesn’t make them misogynistic at all.

            I will say one thing though, as far as men’s troubles being buried in the media. As a straight white female, I do notice that the crimes most often reported in the media are against homosexuals, racial minorities, and women. Crimes committed against heterosexuals, men, and Caucasians may get *some* coverage, but not nearly as much. But it doesn’t bother me, because most of the time, neither my race nor my sexual orientation are a target of hate. I further realize that as a woman, I do get certain societal privileges (some of which marginalize men, which isn’t really fair).

            However, as men, you guys have certain privileges too. No, that doesn’t mean that you never face any kind of abuse or trouble, because obviously you do. But you also have advantages. For example:
            -If you go to a bar by yourself, how likely is it that you’re going to be propositioned by dozens of women who think that you’re there looking to get laid?
            -If you walk down the street, are you going to be followed by a car full of men or women telling you that you have a nice butt, and they’d like to “hit that”, and how they just know that you’re a dirty slut and you like stuff like that?
            -Ever been out for a walk and had someone offer you a ride, and then call you a name because you told them no?
            -Are you a tease if you don’t give in to sex, and a slut if you do?
            -When people talk to you, do they stare at the bulge in your pants, or do they look you in the eye?
            -If you go to buy a car, does the salesperson assume that as a man, you must know nothing about cars?
            -If you go buy a computer, does the salesperson attempt to talk you into buying a more expensive model, assuming that as a man you know nothing about computers, not even considering that perhaps you’ve already looked at the specs of a cheaper computer and know that it’s more than sufficient?

            Ambition in a man is a commendable quality. Ambition in a woman makes her a cold-hearted b*tch. Men with authority are sexy; women with authority are “scary” and often seen as “too masculine”. Men showing frustration makes them “strong” and “principled”; women who show frustration are “hormonal”. Men are “supposed to be” intelligent and logical; women who are intelligent and/or logical are seen as threatening or “too masculine”. I could go on and on about your advantages as a man, you’ve got lots of them.

            Of course there’s a trade-off. There’s always a trade-off. I’m sure you could give me a similar list of advantages I have as a woman. It’s not “fair” for anyone. It’s not right, and both feminists and men’s rights activists have every right to want change, and work for it. But we’ve all also got to recognize our privileges. You’re lucky, and so am I. We’ve got it better than some, and worse than others. As a woman in the United States, I’ve got it better than many other women around the world, and I know it and am thankful for it. I’ve also got more than some men, and I’m better off than women in the United States were a century ago. I can choose a career, almost any career, or I can choose to have children and be a home-maker, or I can have children *and* a career (and a messy house!). As a woman, I’m automatically trustworthy with children, unless or until I prove otherwise. As a woman, I’m more likely to win custody disputes (though I’ve personally seen men have an advantage if they have a good enough attorney and their ex-wife doesn’t).

            So. I agree that there are injustices. I agree that there are unfair demands put on men. I agree that there are laws and societal concessions that favor women. I agree that it’s wrong to threaten men with violence. I don’t want to see a world that’s absent of men, because I believe that the masculine and feminine aspects of humankind complement each other. I see your side, and I recognize some of the merits of your arguments. I love men, and I embrace both your strengths and weaknesses. Are you willing to do the same? Are you willing to meet in the middle?

          • http://www.genderratic.com Typhonblue (Asha James)

            If you come in with an attack, “male privilege”, “historical oppression”, then you will be called on it.

            Dr. F happens to be more piquant than others here.

            Further, even if some of these pages are BDSM how do you know the ones labeled “misogynist” aren’t?

            And why should BDSM get a pass when shock humor does not?

    • https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Voice-for-Men/102001393188684 Paul Elam

      You may get thumbed down, but I own this site and I think you make a fair point….however, I think it is just a matter of not picking the best examples.

      Here is a page promoting the SCUM manifesto, purely a violent and hateful ideology against men.


      Now I am sure I could find more easily enough (that one did not take long). But wouldn’t it just be easier to link you to every major university in western culture that promotes either direct violence or proxy violence against men as a class? How about links to every metropolitan police department with a primary aggressor policy or mandatory arrest laws? Or maybe I could link you to all your elected officials that pass laws that result in organized and legally sanctioned violence against men? I am sure many or most of these entities now have a presence on facebook.

      Surely we are not going to limit this discussion to what some young idiots do with photoshop and a bad imagination?

      • CeCe

        Thank you for acknowledging that.

        As far as the SCUM manifesto, obviously it’s a hateful book, which is probably part of the reason why it isn’t very popular. I subscribe to several feminist blogs, and also belong to the page “Being Feminist” on Facebook, and have seen absolutely no mention of that book or that particular ideology. Perhaps some radical feminists of the late 1960s/early 1970s espoused that view, and perhaps a few still do (there are always radical elements of any group), but it is *not* a mainstream feminist belief, any more than the Westboro Baptist Church represents all Christians, or Hitler and the Nazis represent all Germans.

        But it’s unfair to say that that’s a page dedicated to it, when it’s simply the Wikipedia article about it. Mein Kampf has something similar (https://www.facebook.com/pages/Mein-Kampf/204370432994024?ref=br_tf). Lots of books have the same thing. Type just about any book into the search bar, and it’ll show up, because the pages are automatically generated, not user created. There’s no one running that page. This disclaimer is on the right on the link you gave: “This Page is automatically generated based on what Facebook users are interested in and not affiliated with or endorsed by anyone associated with the topic.”

        It is true that the law favors women when it comes to domestic violence. I have a guy friend who was arrested for domestic violence after his (now ex, thankfully) girlfriend was pushing him and pushing him, literally, and he finally pushed back because she was cornering him. She was the aggressor, not him, which wasn’t surprising because the girl was psychotic, yet he was punished, which was completely unfair. I don’t agree with mandatory arrest or aggressor policy laws because I don’t think they do what they were meant to do. The victim should always be the one to choose whether or not to press charges, not anyone else. And sometimes it’s hard to tell which of the two involved in the dispute is the aggressor. Sometimes it’s the woman, sometimes it’s the man. Police should never assume it’s the man just because he’s the man. Women can be just as violent as some men.

        What kind of laws would you suggest to protect both genders in cases of domestic violence?

        • OneHundredPercentCotton

          Mandatory prosecution laws came about as a result of women continually making DV calls as part of their psycho-sexual game playing. They had NO intention of having their “abuser” prosecuted, so they can continue to return for more abuse time after time.

          My father grew up with a mother like that – trading one beater for another after another and was himself subjected to extreme beatings from her various boyfriends and temporary “fathers”. As a young man my father was often called upon to “defend” his mother by beating up her boyfriends or husbands (she had 4) for beating her.

          You can say my father was groomed to violence himself, by his mother.

          There IS a mental sickness among women attracted to that sort of excitement and it’s not hard for them to find reactionary men.

          Shame on men and pity poor defenseless women – it’s truly disgusting, and yes – there ARE times when it’s The Victim’s fault.

      • Peter Wright (Tawil)

        @CeCe: “My stupid browser ate my response”

        The responses often get caught in the spam box. I found your response above and released it. If it happens again ask here for a moderator to go release it, or simply wait for a few hours and a moderator will notice it. It happens to a lage number of posts.

        • CeCe

          Thank you, sorry about that. I thought it was my browser because Shockwave crashed and the page came up blank and then died. It’s been doing that a lot lately.

    • Victor Zen

      There are women who consent to role playing rape fantasies. There are couples who pretend that one is a rapist, and the other is the victim, and they get a thrill out of it.

      Can you imagine that Facebook page staying around?

      Yes, I acknowledge that many femdom acts involve male consent, but as always, it’s the double standard that needs to be addressed.

  • Diana Davison

    It’s consensual but doesn’t it contradict the rape culture myth and permissiveness of violence solely against women myth that claims men are violent bestial nightmares just looking for a chance to subjugate the females around them and women are their unwitting victims? Femdom also shows women being made sexual objects by other women. FBrape doesn’t pick a bone with this, they only have a problem when men do it to women. FBrape doesn’t have a problem with pic of a man’s penis cut off but they have a problem with a pic of a woman with a black eye. FBrape doesn’t care if a woman took a few hundred bucks and one orgasm to let them photograph her with being hogtied but they’ll call bullshit if you counter their bullshit with a pic of a guy licking a woman’s shoe.

    The studies have been done: if you try to roofie a girl a lot of people will speak up and protect her. If you roofie a guy every just keeps their mouths shut. If you hit a girl you’ve got a few heroes ready to bash your skull in. If you hit a guy everyone assumes he did something to deserve it.

    FBrape is not actually interested in what Facebook is or how it works, it is a campaign to justify the existence of the protesters. If you enjoy spending a few days digging through fucktardish troll photos and twisted fetish sites anyone can come up with a list like WAM! Big fucking deal. “Wake me up before you go go.”

    Here’s the thing: You get rid of all of it or you leave it the fuck alone. It’s not a question of abuse towards women it’s a question of selective censorship. If WAM! spent as much time checking to see if men were being targeted equally they’d have had no campaign and that didn’t suit their purposes so they didn’t look. If facebook lets any of you tell them how to run their business they will be history and twitter (which WAM used to attack FB) will kill facebook as a result. I don’t see WAM complaining about similar Twitter posts because they are pitting one media giant against another in a lack of actual honesty.

    • CeCe

      Hi Diana, the rape culture actually doesn’t say one way or another who the main aggressor is. I’ve read up on a *lot* about rape culture, and nothing in it says that all men are beasts. In fact, it says just the opposite. While sexual assault is common in societies that have a rape culture, it’s because people within these cultures make excuses for the perpetrator by victim-blaming (“Well, if he/she hadn’t been getting drunk/flirting/kissing that person/wearing that outfit/hanging out with that girl/guy friend/etc. he/she wouldn’t have been raped!”), “slut”-shaming, repressing natural sexual urges (read: consensual sex!), promoting sexual assault through attempting to minimize its impact (“it’s not like rape is that harmful”, never mind the fact that many rape victims wind up with moderate to severe PTSD that lasts anywhere from years to the rest of their life), making jokes about it, and/or letting images of sexual assault saturate the media, which normalizes it. *That* is rape culture. It doesn’t mean that men are all violent beasts at all. And both men and women can be seen as promoting rape culture. You know how sometimes some of us girls call other women “sluts” or “whores” for daring to not be virgins or wear clothes that expose their bodies? Yeah, that’s part of it.

      Those who speak out against rape culture believe that it’s a disservice to men (because it assumes that all men are rapists who just can’t help but rape a woman when she’s drunk/kissing him/flirting with him/wearing “provocative” clothing/out with him on a date/hanging out with him at his place alone/attending parties/etc.), and because men *and* women are both blamed for their own sexual assaults. Rape culture also tends to use rape as a “punishment”; women who are flirts or who wear provocative clothing are “asking” for rape, men who are raped are seen as “weak”, and men who are convicted of crimes “deserve” to be raped in prison. No one deserves rape. No one who is raped is “weak”. It’s the rapists who are weak.

      BDSM simply doesn’t relate to the rape culture at all, because BDSM is consensual. Any consensual act is just fine. If people want to be treated as sex objects within a safe, consensual scenario, that’s their prerogative. The important thing here is consent. The gender of the person in the submissive position is irrelevant.

      There is a huge difference between pictures depicting a male or female submissive in a BDSM scenario, and a picture that makes a joke out of violence against either gender. Personally, I think that the former are wrong if they’re pornographic (not that I see anything wrong with pornography, I just don’t think it belongs on Facebook), and the latter are wrong because they promote violence and make a joke out of it. It’s not a joke. It’s not funny. And it shouldn’t be on Facebook.

      I think part of the reason that more of a big deal is made of the photos depicting violence against women than men is because it wasn’t that long ago that marital rape was still legal (and still is legal in some parts of the world), that women weren’t allowed to vote on basis of being a woman, that women had no legal recourse in cases of domestic violence and sexual assault, etc. I think that they’re kind of seen in the same light as a photo depicting an African-American in chains with the caption “This is all black people are good for” or something similar would be seen. Does it ignore the jokes about violence against men? Yes. Is that unfair? Yes. But that’s what happens when a huge amount of social changes have been made in a short amount of time. It’s the pendulum swinging.

      We’ll find a balance. We’ve just got to work together and try to understand each other, that’s all.

      • http://www.genderratic.com Typhonblue (Asha James)

        Read this:


        TL;DR= a feminist is trying to define male rape victims out of existence.

        In other parts of the world feminist groups have worked to keep the rape of men by women legal or repeal laws that allowed for equal protection for male victims.

        In addition to that men in France and Oman have been sued for failing to sexually satisfy their wives during marriage. Marital rape is not just legal for a woman to preform on a man, but it’s _illegal_ for the man not to consent to her during marriage.

        In other news, women received the vote without ever having been subject to conscription as male citizens are. Restraining Orders have been around for centuries–for women, not men of course, men were legally or socially punished for having been abused by their wives. And society has always prosecuted rape against women; in fact conviction rates for rape when upper class women were the alleged victims were double what they are today(they were the same for lower class women.)

        Working “together” does not mean giving yourself excuses for why unequal treatment is acceptable.

        Particularly when those excuses don’t hold water.

      • ErnestoGuevara

        It’s a unique case in physics: a pendulum that swings always to the same side. Scientists cannot understand why or how, but it happens, look:

        Before: men did all the hard work, the most stressing, dirty, dangerous jobs were done by men.
        Now: well, the pendulum is still there.

        Before: men went to war and were used as cannonfodder.
        Now: can you see the pendulum coming?

        Before: men were many times more likely to die while at work
        Now: hum… Too far to tell, maybe the pendulum is still getting away…

        Before: any man victim of DV would be laughed at and denied any help.
        Now: …give it some time, you know, we’ve just got to work together!

        On the bright side, women were granted the right to vote without even stepping into battleground (as Typhonblue already remarked), have total control on conception issues (while men don’t), still violate men’s reproductive rights by cheating them into fatherhood (and ruining baby’s lives) (oh wait, is that another pendulum?), and can get away with murder, or receive shorter sentences for the same crime.

        When I see someone addressing THESE issues, I consider we are already “working together”. The rest is Tyranosaurus Rex shit.

      • Theseus

        CeCe the reason that you are getting some upvotes is because there is at least some awareness in your posts. Some of my friends here are so used to posers of a very duplicitous nature coming on here with all their crap, that their bullshit meters are on high right now

        The reason that I am giving you the benefit of the doubt is because you actually admitted that women have their own long list of privileges; in my experience most feminists would rather be drug through cactus than admit to any such thing. Usually it’s: “Hey I care about men too….BUT….women are more oppressed, men still have many more privileges, it’s the fault of the patriarchy, blah blah fucking blah” variety. Now don’t get me wrong, I think that many of you observations are very misguided and lacking in proportionality, but…maybe there is hope.

        Case in point, your observations about “rape culture” just don’t make any sense. Since when don’t feminists frame this as gender directional ?

        “Men can stop rape”

        “Men can teach men not to rape”

        Hello! This is flat out demonizing and inflammatory “othering” at it’s finest.

        Also, the term and definition of “rape culture” is a contradiction. Since the vast majority of men aren’t rapists and are repulsed by the idea…how the hell can there be a culture of rape? The familiar “normalizing and joking” definition that you laid out doesn’t exist…at least to any appreciable degree in western society. I have been around the block and hung out, played sports, drank, partied, and worked with men all over the US and abroad, and frankly I can’t think of one guy expressing an urge to rape or laughing about it. Again, this is a bizarre and rare compulsion; the general run of the male population doesn’t have it, nor can they relate to it. This is flat out feminist BS notion that has zero proof behind it.

        • Advocate For Everyone

          Rape culture isn’t just feminist rhetoric. Feminists use it to alter our society to their whim and talk a lot about it, but that doesn’t make it an exclusively feminist concept. Instead of latching onto it as such, consider what Cece has said. She said that it affects both genders, with men being made into monsters and victims being ignored or ridiculed for what happened to them. Male and female victims.
          The double standard rape culture is believed to promote involves not only the concept of slut-shaming, but shaming male victims of rape by calling them sissies who deserved it. Everyone is harmed in a rape culture, because it is believed to normalizes a harmful occurrence. Read: Everyone is harmed, not just women.

          Before assuming CeCe is spouting feminist bullshit, take a moment to read her comment and notice how she doesn’t focus on women. Both men and women are mentioned, addressed, and recognized as potentially harmed. Feminist rhetoric doesn’t do that, as you guys know. Feminist rhetoric focuses mainly on women, just as your rhetoric focuses mainly on men.
          Rape culture is connected to feminism, but that doesn’t make it an exclusively feminist thing. If you believe this you might as well believe that the idea of unjust laws favoring women is an exclusively MRA thing, which it isn’t. You don’t have to know of or be a part of the MRA to see that things in this world are fucked up. The same applies to rape culture regardless of who’s spreading it or keeping it alive. It exists and while the vast majority of it is hysteria, that doesn’t make it any less valid. People act based on hysteria, as can be shown by the wildly unfair laws in place for those accused of rape.

          I’ve watched you guys periodically attack reasonable responses that you claim are spouting anti-male views when all they’re doing is presenting in a equal manner something you guys have unreasonably grafted to feminism. I’m not a feminist, before I get the few responses that claim I am such. I am someone who is tired of watching you guys downgrade and mock yourselves by refusing to listen to a viewpoint that may conflict with your own while spouting your belief in gender-equality. There is no need to insult CeCe and in doing so you might as well be hanging a sign over your valid counterpoints saying “I’m an asshole, don’t listen to me”. You guys deserve to be listened to. Please stop shooting yourselves in the foot.

          • Theseus

            OK so did I insult her in any way? I gave her a kudos for something and then shot back a reasoned disagreement over “rape culture”.

            Rape culture is a feminist concept that IS used against men. It’s not a mainstream “gee this goes both ways” type of deal. You were given specific examples of why this is so, yet you did not counter them with a rational reasoned response. This is a current PR move from feminists to all of a sudden insert a caring element about men into their ideas, because they (feminists) are finally having their bullshit narrative sufficiently challenged; they are hoping to alter history by pretending that caring about men was always a part of the package. Bullshit! “Rape culture” was never about concern for male rape victims.

            Frankly, your analogy on unjust laws stinks to high heaven. MRA’S never created a theory about unjust laws that hurt men because they can be proven by indisputable facts. Not so with “rape culture” which is a heavily disputed opinion based on feelings and perceptions, not facts.

            Look at what you admitted; you said that “it exists and while the vast majority of it is hysteria..” HYSTERIA! YES! You admitted what we have been saying all along…get it? If the “vast majority is hysteria” how the hell can it be a “valid” concept?!! Think… think about what you are saying.


            My friend, you are on a reasoned based skeptical site…and you will have every inconsistency, distortion, or falsehood picked apart like a Thanksgiving turkey; this of course is the polar opposite of ANY feminist blog or publication out there.

        • CeCe

          A couple things (it’s almost 6 a.m. as I’m starting this and I need to get to bed). You said:
          Since when don’t feminists frame this as gender directional ?//

          Since rape culture stopped being a feminist idea and has been propagated by people outside of the feminist circle.

          I agree that it’s wrong to demonize men by making them all out to be rapists. The reason that the campaign generally focused on men is because statistically, *most* studies have shown that most rapes are committed by men. I think it’s somewhere between 80 and 95% percent, but it also depends on the study. While men are raped are raped at a ridiculously high rate (it’s either 1 in 5 or 1 in 16, depending on the study), I read that between 60 and 80% of them are raped by other men. However, it’s still wrong to demonize men, because men have never raped anyone and never would. As I stated above, I think the statistics indicate that about 6% of men have raped someone.

          The idea of rape culture does not mean that most men are rapists; what rape culture includes is the idea of victim-blaming, which basically implies that any man will rape a woman if her skirt is too short, if she has too much to drink, if she’s alone with a man, etc. But the only people who rape are rapists. Not men in general, and not women in general.

          In a response above, I detailed some examples of rape culture. I could include a few more here, like people who insist that men can’t be raped unless they’re penetrated (oh yeah, that’s rape culture!), that 50 Shades of Grey is so popular (UGH, I have not read it and I will not read it), that comedians do make jokes about rape, that only about 3% of rapists will ever spend a day in jail, the ridiculously short sentences for rape (except in cases where the assault is connected to another crime, where the assault is on a minor or someone who is disabled, or where the perpetrator has sexually assaulted in the past)… I could go on and on. Those things are absolutely real, and they are absolutely part of rape culture.

          As I’ve said, it’s true that rape culture was originally only propounded by feminists… but that doesn’t mean that it has no truth to it.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F (Ian Williams)

            “As I’ve said, it’s true that rape culture was originally only propounded by feminists… but that doesn’t mean that it has no truth to it.”

            The flat earth vision was propagated vigorously by flat heads and they would assert “…that doesn’t mean that it has no truth to it.” also. (Same deal with the hollow earth proponents with their hollow heads)

            You convince the minds of the neuronally-bereft and that means no sale here.

            Many many words. All the fluff of a pigeon with the same parroting of what you like to hear and that’s the sound of your peeps and squawks.

      • Diana Davison

        This is downright hilarious. CeCe, the river of irony flows from your fingertips with every sentence.

        You, who claims to have read so much about rape culture, are discounting an actual, literal rape culture on the grounds that it is consensual. Femdom is really special because it’s deeply connected to radical feminism where no other fetish subculture has such affiliations, and because it is the most extreme of all the fetish scenes which use sexual humiliation as the main focus.

        Femdom is an actual attempt to normalize rapey behaviour. It’s the real deal. It’s what you have to compare to mainstream culture. It sets the bar for whether or not the average person accepts rape as normal. And you say that them normalizing humiliation and rape is okey-dokey with you because it’s consensual. Why is it consensual? When you answer that question you’ll find the feminist blatherings start falling apart. I’ll get back to this in a moment after we deal with the other misconceptions you have about the FBrape campaign.

        Of course we knew the photos came from BDSM sites. Look at where the FBrape photos came from. Pages that declare all the posts to be “offensive humour.” They were actually posted with the understanding that the posts were offensive and outrageous. Get that?

        I’ve said it twice now just in case you missed it the first time. Let me elaborate now:

        FBrape claims the opposite, they claim the photos were there promoting or condoning violence against women when in fact the pages admit by their very descriptions that nothing posted on the page is okay. All of those “FBrape” photos were memes. One of them was taken from BDSM depicting a fully clothed girl hogtied on a couch. A few of them were photos of girls who got themselves so fucked up they passed out.

        When you pass out amongst friends a couple of things can happen like having an eyebrow shaved off or having your picture taken and your friends write crude captions on the photo. These girls were lucky they didn’t get an eyebrow shaved off. All of the “date rape” meme photos had the women completely clothed with no signs of rape. Again, they got off lucky. Now here’s a kicker;

        More and more of these rape jokes are showing up now because of the rape culture campaigns.

        When you assert to men and boys that they are all rapists who have to control themselves they will lash out with making jokes about it. They will either laugh or have a mental breakdown. I think they made a good choice. And stop with the bullshit that rape culture doesn’t claim all men are potential rapists. Show me a single “Don’t rape” advertisement showing a female giving that advice to her fellow women. You won’t find one. They don’t exist.

        Now back to the fetish scene for a wrap up.

        Dismissing the actual rape culture that is right in front of your face because it involves consenting adults is the same as saying a woman who seeks out abusive relationships one after the other is a consenting adult to a domestic violence fetish.

        There is overwhelming evidence that the repeat victims of DV are women who actively choose men who they can be violent with. These women initiate the violence and do it for the negative attention. They apparently like it.

        Do you still want to use your excuse now? You say you know a lot about rape culture. I know a lot about BDSM. Is it ever okay when someone is turned on by sexual humiliation? I don’t think so. They’ve been given a “safe space” to play out their mental issues but they are, absolutely, mental issues. What you’ve just done here is to try and make their problem… and it IS a problem… sound like it’s normal.

        You are supporting rape culture if you believe that what they do is okay. You’re trying to convince everyone to accept it as normal.

        BDSM most certainly relates to “rape culture” because it’s the real fucking deal. The comparison of that culture to the norm shows that the norm is not rape culture.

        Here’s the final note of my reply: Anyone supporting this campaign should actually pay attention to the responses from companies that tried to educate the campaigners. Advertisements on Facebook are not linked to pages that you view, they are linked to the profile of the person searching the site. The only reason any of those ads appeared on the pages with offensive content is because you, the user, fucking clicked on the page. You are the one responsible for putting their ad there, not them.

        Find out how shit works before you sign petitions.

        • http://shiningpearlsofsomething.blogspot.com Suzanne McCarley

          Awesome. Stunning logic. That’s all I’ve got ‘cuz I’m speechless.

          • Bewildered

            hehe! you are not the only one !

          • Theseus

            Ummm, wow, what she said.

        • Victor Zen

          > ” Advertisements on Facebook are not linked to pages that you view, they are linked to the profile of the person searching the site. The only reason any of those ads appeared on the pages with offensive content is because you, the user, fucking clicked on the page.”

          Bingo. Interestingly enough, this tells us that the people who looked for offensive ads were looking to BE offended.

          You should stress this point. Hard. It tells us a lot.

        • CeCe

          Diana, starting from the bottom:
          I never said that I signed the petition, and in fact I did not. I’m sure that statement was a general “you” rather than a personal “you” (as in me), but I thought I’d put that out there anyway. Regardless, however, on the websites about the petitions they clearly say that the companies whose ads appear next to these pictures and pages have no control over where their ads appear. That’s actually the point. While the companies can’t control exactly where on Facebook their ads appear because the ads are based on the user, allowing their ads on Facebook at all means that potentially, their ads could appear next to something they would never condone. Such as things that are actually criminal, like sexual assault and violence.

          Now, as far as rape culture. Rape culture exists within BDSM, but BDSM is not rape culture. There is a difference. Rape culture is hard to define because you can’t point to a specific entity and say, “Ah yes, there it is!” Further, BDSM is *not* the norm, nor do those who engage in it try to pass it off as normal. It’s a fetish, like sniffing panties, foot worship, rubber, furries, and golden showers are fetishes.

          Consent is absolutely key, because what it means is that within the BDSM construct, the submissive controls what happens to them, and can call off a scenario if they’re uncomfortable with it at any time. There is an aspect of control in BDSM that is completely absent in things like domestic violence and rape. Victims have no control over either one while it’s happening (unless they’re stronger than the person hurting them and are in a position to overpower them). A submissive has total control, ideally.

          As for rape culture in itself, I’ll give you a few examples of what rape culture is, and you decide whether these things are common or not.

          Rape culture is victim-blaming: “If they hadn’t been wearing that/drinking that/hanging out with that person/at that place/behaving like that, they wouldn’t have been assaulted!”
          Rape culture is treating rape like it’s a compliment, and accusing sexual assault survivors of “lying” if they’re not conventionally attractive.

          Rape culture is when someone accuses someone else of raping them, and they receive death threats.

          Rape culture is when mainstream journalists, reporting on a case in which two rapists are found guilty, focus on how sad it is that these “boys'” lives are “ruined”.

          Rape culture is when politicians get away with calling pregnancy resulting from rape a “blessing from God” and use terms like “legitimate rape”.

          Rape culture is when witnesses to a sexual assault do nothing to stop it, either because they don’t realize that having sex with or penetrating someone who is unconscious is rape, or because they apparently don’t think that a woman screaming for help while being raped in the hallway of an apartment building actually needs assistance.

          Rape culture is when young girls are raped, and then bullied for being raped to the point where they commit suicide.

          Rape culture is when a judge gets away with blaming a ten year old girl for getting raped, because she liked to “dress provocatively”, and when the same judge suggests to a rapist to buy his victim a new bicycle to “cheer her up”. No, I’m not kidding: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6237480.stm

          Rape culture is when a judge suggests to a woman that perhaps she shouldn’t go to a bar or wear a skirt if she doesn’t want to be groped.

          Rape culture is when boys who are raped are “pussies” and girls who are raped are “sluts” and “whores”.

          This is why it’s important to make a distinction between BDSM (consensual) and what rape culture is. As I said, is there a rape culture within BDSM? There certainly can be. People who accuse a dom of raping them can often be blamed for their own assault or called a liar, the same as they can in “vanilla” sex. And this is absolutely shameful, whether the victim is male or female. But the dynamic and the power play within BDSM are consensual, and it does not recognize the idea that the woman must be submissive and the man must be dominant. But the BDSM community recognizes that it’s a fetish and not “normal” behavior. BDSM is not mainstream at all.

          Now you said:
          When you assert to men and boys that they are all rapists who have to control themselves they will lash out with making jokes about it.//
          That is not what those who speak out against rape culture are saying. What they are saying is that there is no way for a person to protect themselves 100% against rape, unless they’re simply never around a rapist. But since rapists don’t exactly have “Rapist!!” tattooed on their forehead, how is a person to know that the man or woman they’re hanging out with is a rapist? Are they just supposed to never drink, never hang out with anyone at all, never go anywhere alone, etc.? That’s not realistic at all. No one can live that way, especially since statistics indicate that more than 60% (and some statistics say up to 78%) of sexual assaults are committed by someone that the victim knew. Therefore, the responsibility to prevent rape *must* fall on the would-be rapists. It doesn’t mean that all men are rapists at all. Most men are not, and would never rape a woman (I think that at last estimate, about 6% of men have raped someone). The problem, however, is that so far most statistics (and yes I’m aware that there are exceptions) indicate that most perpetrators of sexual assault are men. So of course men would be targeted (and I’m not saying this is fair, I’m just saying that it’s the way it is, and this is why). Personally, I think that we ought to do away with gender-specific language in that campaign altogether, and educate both men *and* women as to what sexual assault is, and teach them to respect one another’s ownership of their own body. The simple admonishment of a general “Don’t Rape!” would work just fine.

          Further, one of the most harmful effects of rape culture is that it causes women to view *all* men as potential rapists. This is unfair to women, because it creates a culture of fear and control, and it’s unfair to men, because most men would never, ever rape a woman and are in fact sickened by the idea. Even further, one of the reasons why rape culture is so harmful is because it places the blame on victims; that implies that any man who sees a woman dressed provocatively, drinking heavily, etc. will be tempted to rape her, when this is not the case. The only men who are tempted to rape a woman in those situations are rapists.

          The idea that putting the onus on would-be rapists to prevent rape “creates” rape jokes is preposterous. It’s like blaming video games for violence. Rape jokes have been part of society for a long, long time, long before the term “rape culture” was even used, and long before advocates for those who have been sexually assaulted have realized that the responsibility to prevent rape is on the would-be rapists. What in the world would possess a person to believe that rape jokes are acceptable? Do they not realize how much those jokes can hurt a person who has been assaulted? Imagine seeing one of the worst things that’s ever happened to you in your life turned into a punch-line. And while the shame and trauma that you experienced bring tears to your eyes and cause you to have nightmares at night, people laugh and laugh and wonder why you’re not laughing. What’s worse is what it communicates to rapists; it tells them that rape is hilarious, and not really a big deal. So what would be worse: Drawing a line at making jokes about violence towards someone based on their gender and rape, or enabling the behavior by laughing at it?

          While rape jokes don’t bring up the trauma of my own assaults for me personally, my heart breaks just thinking about someone out there seeing one of these tasteless “jokes” being hurt by them. *That* is why I’m against them. It’s not the depictions of fem-dom or male-dom that bother me; it’s the captions put on them. What people get up to in their bedroom is none of my business, or anyone else’s, but if someone took a picture of a woman dominating a man or vice versa and said that this is the way it’s supposed to be, or said something like, “He broke my heart, so I broke his d*ck”, then I would have a major issue with it. So a BDSM-oriented picture of a woman or man bound and gagged? No problem. Turning it into something it’s not (non-consensual), that’s a problem. Making it into a rape joke when the person in the picture consented to it? That’s a problem. Taking a picture of a person passed out drunk? No problem. Turning it into a rape joke, that’s a problem, because it *hurts* people.

          The psychological reasons for a man or woman submitting in a BDSM scenario are their own. Whether it’s a sexual orientation or due to some trauma they suffered in their past, I don’t know. And from what I’ve seen, the field of psychiatry is still in its infancy when it comes to understanding human sexuality. Remember that less than a century ago, women who masturbated regularly were seen as “deviant”, and less than half a century ago, homosexuals could actually be institutionalized and/or given shock treatment because homosexuality was seen as a mental illness, and was classed as such in the DSM IV. So, while BDSM is currently seen as being a “paraphilia”, nothing in psychiatry is written in stone, and this could very easily change in the future, just like the views of masturbation and homosexuality have changed.
          Now, as far as women consistently choosing abusive partners, I’ve seen the same thing out of men; I have several guy friends whom I absolutely adore who have had psychotic girlfriend after psychotic girlfriend after psychotic girlfriend. In most cases, I think that it’s because either they have low self-esteem and don’t realize that they deserve better and/or have normalized abuse, or because something in their personality attracts predators to them. Or maybe a bit of each. But in order to back up my personal opinion in this case, which is anecdotal at best, I would need to do some more research on the psychology behind these instances. So thank you for giving me something new to research. You assert that they “seek out” these partners for “attention”; where is the proof of this? Can you perhaps link me to a study of some sort to support this assertion to start off my research?
          Also, I looked at numerous examples of the stuff that WAM wanted removed, and most of them do *not* depict BDSM. The only one that comes close is a woman on a couch, bound and gagged but fully clothed; in that case, the picture is not a problem, but the caption (“It’s not rape. If she really didn’t want to, she’d have said something”) is. Another picture depicts a woman with her pants pulled down, laying on the floor on her stomach; the caption says, “Roofies. No response doesn’t necessarily mean no”. Most likely the picture itself was a prank, taken while the girl pictured was passed out drunk; there’s nothing inherently wrong with that. It’s the caption that is the issue, because there are actually people out there who think that if the victim doesn’t or can’t say no, it’s not rape. Isn’t that hilarious.

          I realize that these are intended to be “jokes”; the problem here is that if we wouldn’t accept these “jokes” towards ethnic groups or sexual orientations, why would we accept them towards a gender? Hate speech does protect against racial minorities and homosexuals, but apparently does not extend to memes depicting domestic violence or sexual assault towards women. I don’t think that either men or women should be confronted with threats of violence (whether sexual or physical) on Facebook, even if those threats are not directed at a particular individual.

          Sorry this is so long and it’s taken me so long to get back. Also sorry if the spacing is weird; I copied and pasted this from Word, and am not able to view my entire post.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F (Ian Williams)

            Uh oh.

            Look away everyone.

            DD will make CeCe pee-pee with her doo-doo and have us tee-hee.

            Bye bye.

          • CeCe


          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F (Ian Williams)

            My comment is immature there is no doubt. It was supposed to be immature.

            What you seem not to realise is that is is a membrane above the maturity of your baseless slathering about rape culture. You talk about it as though there are men crouched behind every bush twanging their cocks like Deliverance’s most agile toothless junkies.

            If you are going to go on about rape culture like some narcissistic twit might go on about chakra healing then you really should know that this is what you could get back. A reply from someone that uses puerility to make a point.

            With the verbosity and arrogance of someone selling freezers to Eskimos you actually expect us to believe your loaded assumptions? How you slip “rape culture ” into the dialogue without question as though we are so silly as to not to see your plumped-up tom-foolery with the truth?

            Holy cow you are a cow. A feminist cow as well, and they’re the stinkiest ones on the planet.

            You know, like poops and farts *giggle*

            Seriously, you are not helping boys and men at all and this is what we care about, not your ‘winning” a debate because lady-bovine, it ain’t all about you.

          • Diana Davison

            Oh, CeCe,… yawn… you are delightful.

            Please don’t lie. #FBrape did no such thing as tell advertisers they knew about how ads work on FB. I can say this confidently because they tried to shame corporations who attempted to point this out.
            “…most of Facebook’s advertisers called out by the #FBrape hashtag responded by claiming that since they hadn’t intentionally placed their ads next to these violent pages, they bore no responsibility. They insisted that Facebook targets ads at individuals – not pages – and so there was no way to avoid this kind of mix-up. It was simply the way things worked.”

            Then you get into trying to tell me, after I’ve explained to you that I know a fuck of a lot about BDSM, what BDSM is. Ever read The Story Of O? I’ll assume you have because you are so well versed in the subject. Let’s talk about what safe words mean. They tell your dom what boundaries they have yet to break. If you refuse to let them break you, you find yourself ass on sidewalk and declared not a “true” sub. Do you wish to continue this conversation with me or do you yield? Loaded question.

            If you’d like to pretend that “rape culture” isn’t described as male aggressing against female then you have your own media war to launch. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/julia-kacmarek/rape-culture-is_b_3368577.html You are, if serious, losing the war in defining the subject.

            I’m not saying you don’t believe what you say, I’m just saying that you aren’t speaking the truth. That you might believe it to be true would make it that much more pathetic.

            That you can’t see how accusing people of innately wanting to rape makes them prone to telling rape jokes to relieve their stress makes you normal: read – stupid.

            At AVfM we challenge people to think logically not to parrot things that make them feel comfortable about themselves. When you are ready to be honest let us know.

          • CeCe

            Diana, it’s true that the corporations responded by saying that they couldn’t control where their ads appeared because they’re user-generated. That was exactly the point. By allowing their ads on Facebook at all, potentially those same ads could wind up on pages depicting and glorifying violence against women. That’s exactly why the campaign worked. By forcing corporations to respond to this issue, they were being put in a position of either having to defend these pages which would alienate many of their customers, or remove their ads from Facebook, which would cause Facebook to lose revenue. These companies *pay* Facebook to display their ads, and if they removed them, Facebook would eventually be forced to shut down or start charging in order to keep up with the demand put on their servers. Considering how their stocks have been performing, losing their sponsors would be a financial catastrophe.

            I suppose some extreme forms of BDSM would include the idea that safe words tell the “dom what boundaries they have yet to break”, but that was not my experience. I’ve known about some aspects of BDSM for a long time, and did experiment with it quite a bit throughout my teens and 20s, and never once was I ever exposed to that aspect of it by a dom. Safe words were absolute, and my boundaries were set in stone. Before engaging in any activities, I discussed these things with my partner, setting “hard” (as in, inviolable) boundaries and “soft” boundaries (things I was afraid of trying, but would be willing to try at some point later on, perhaps). They would also tell me the things that they expected, and if our preferences did not match, if they wanted things I did not want, I had every right to walk away, which I did, many times, and I was never told that I wasn’t a “true sub”. They could push the intensity of what I allowed, but they could not and did not violate the things that I said I did not want. “The Story of O” is erotic fiction, like Anne Rice’s Sleeping Beauty; I have not read it mostly because I’m a bit more… hands-on when it comes to sex. I lived it, and had excellent relationships with my doms, with very satisfying outcomes. Wait, *gasp* what’s this, a person accused of being a feminist admitting to engaging in submissive behavior? Oh yeah. I used to joke that I’d try almost anything sexual at least twice to see if I liked it. It may not be my scene anymore, but I do look back on it with fondness.

            Now, as far as rape culture. It’s true that some put more emphasis on violence against women than men, and refuse to acknowledge that men are assaulted by both men and women. I will agree with you on that. But that in itself is part of rape culture, because it implies that men who are raped in prison “deserve” to be raped, and men who are raped by women are weak, or couldn’t have been raped because you “can’t rape the willing”. In high school, I held the latter view (though I personally never would have actually done it, I “just” joked about it and have only recently begun to realize how reprehensible and hurtful it was), until I actually met and spoke to men who had been assaulted. Now I realize anyone can be raped, and at any time, they can be marginalized, ignored, and blamed for their own rape. And yeah, that is rape culture. And many who believe in the concept agree that rape culture hurts men too, because it treats men as though they just can’t help but rape, and also treats them as less than men if they themselves are raped.

            I believe that making it gender-specific causes more damage than good, because if it’s about man’s predilection for violence against women, then where does that put men who are raped? It seems to imply that they’re “less than”, which is completely unfair. Anyway, you are right that some or perhaps many feminists put more emphasis on men being violent towards women, but that doesn’t mean they all do.

            To the best of my knowledge, I’ve been nothing but sincere and honest. You can believe that my opinions are stupid if you want, you’re certainly entitled to that, but please don’t insinuate that I’m dishonest. Naive, wrong, foolish, maybe… but not dishonest.

          • http://www.imnotamensrightsactivistbut.wordpress.com Isaac T. Quill

            @Diana “I can say this confidently because they tried to shame corporations who attempted to point this out.”

            To hell with Confidence – I Rejoice at their silliness. Bullies make silly mistakes and over reach often. Soroya has such a good track record!

          • Diana Davison

            It’s true that corporations tried to educate the #FBrape campaigners. I’m glad that we agree. Where we part is in your bizarre attempt to make it sound like they planned it that way. They didn’t.

            You make the absurd comment that advertisers, who target profiles of people who seem to be good, upstanding citizens, should feel guilty because those citizens suddenly find themselves unable to stop themselves from clicking on unsociable links and screen-capping the event in order to blame the advertisers.

            Please cease and desist from claiming they could predict a fine, upstanding young woman like Jaclyn Friedman would click on a page titled “offensive humour.”

            Talk about blaming the victim…

            You’ve yet to consider why they used Twitter to attack Facebook instead of attacking them both.

            In other news: You haven’t read the bibles of the BDSM movement yet you claim you know what you know. You go, girl. Woo. Lucky for you that you’ve just dabbled.

            Now we get to definitions and find agreement that rape culture puts more emphasis on men as culprits but you screw it up by then going on to talk about your own personal views on the subject. Your views do not trump reality. Your views are not represented by the “Don’t Rape” campaigns. Your views are super secret stuff that only you know about.

            You’ll note that the campaign in question is called #FBrape and the only thing being raped is Facebook. Go save them. They need your help.

            I’m willing to concede that you might not be dishonest but you are naive, wrong and foolish.

          • Peter Wright (Tawil)

            @Diana: “Now we get to definitions and find agreement that rape culture puts more emphasis on men as culprits but you screw it up by then going on to talk about your own personal views on the subject. Your views do not trump reality. Your views are not represented by the “Don’t Rape” campaigns. Your views are super secret stuff that only you know about.”

            KNAP ! You nailed it there. 😉

      • Victor Zen

        > “Hi Diana, the rape culture actually doesn’t say one way or another who the main aggressor is. I’ve read up on a *lot* about rape culture, and nothing in it says that all men are beasts.”

        What, specifically, have you been reading?

        • CeCe

          Specifically? Jeez, it would take a lot of work to find all the things I’ve got book-marked on rape culture. I’ve looked at it from both the feminist perspective and the MRA perspective, and read various journal articles on it.

          The way the current model of the theory of rape culture is set up is that it doesn’t blame only men or only women for perpetuating it, nor does it say that it only harms men or only harms women. It’s a lot more inclusive now. I realize that it wasn’t in the past, but that was then, this is now.

          • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

            When the “rape culture” advocates acknowledge that the entire concept was created by those studying MALE VICTIMS, not female victims, and when it acknowledges openly the deep cultural denial we’re in regarding the prevalance of female predators, it’ll be easier to have this discussion. Neither of those are things which I’ve seen much of any acknowledgement of, ESPECIALLY the latter; the prevalence of female-on-male sexual assault is MUCH MUCH MUCH higher than most people wish to acknowledge. Also discussing the problem of false allegations in a mature fashion and not spouting around the ludicrous, fictional 2% figure and perception of female hypoagency and male hyperagency is a vital requirement to having an honest discussion about these things. So far as I can see, no one spouting the modern “rape culture” meme wishes to acknowledge any of these issues in a mature fashion based on fact and research rather than appeals to emotion and gross generalizations.

            I believe there’s a rape culture: it’s the rape culture that minimizes female predators by orders of magnitude, views it as primarily a male perpetrated problem, and the culture which views rape as primarily a male-on-female problem when it is not. It’s the culture that things a 13 year old boy getting fucked by a 30 year old “Cougar” is “lucky.” That’s your real rape culture.

          • Theseus

            Hello CeCe that’s extremely problematic. It’s never been about being inclusive to males. It’s always been about gender directional hatred towards men as potential rapists. Isn’t that a bit suspicious that this “current model” has morphed into adding males to the list? Doesn’t that smell like a bit of damage control to you?

            This is another common theme that you will read about in these articles and from the comments; feminist ideas (patriarchy theory, male privilege, rape culture) are complete bullshit because they can be tweaked or changed at the drop of a hat depending on the venue, political climate, and pubic opinion. Feminist “theory” is completely unreliable and useless.

            The dangerous thing is that public policy is being based on these undefined and unproven ideas; The VAWA being a case in point. Here we have legislation defined by mile high bullshit that DV is gender directional; this isn’t simply a model on paper, this is legislation! When the current snowball of public awareness gets bigger and bigger that women initiate the violence half the time and there are a lot of male victims… the VAWA will get exposed for the huge lie and damage that it is doing. Are feminists going to claim that the bill was always about male victims too?

          • http://www.imnotamensrightsactivistbut.wordpress.com Isaac T. Quill

            HI there CeCe – you got me attention! I’m working over at the Wiki and one page that needs SO much attention is Rape culture concept.

            If you look you will see that in the section “Theory and manifestations of rape culture” there has been an historical issue with Weasel Words – Bad References and frankly nonsensical claims which are more about wishful thinking and synthesis to cover over chasms. As I’ve been reading I keep finding references that have nothing to do with the subject!

            We are clearly differentiating between the 1974/5 Film “Rape Culture and any concept named after it. You are aware of the Historical Roots of the term “Rape Culture”, aren’t you? Cambridge Documentary Films – Margaret Lazarus and Renner Wunderlich.

            I’m amazed that the history has been negated, but I do love Loretta Ross, her ways with words and her blunt and direct reporting of realities. She spoke openly about her involvement in the creation of the term Rape Culture in a set of interviews 2004-5. As she put it “Oh, I’ve forgotten to tell you about Prisoners Against Rape.“. her quips on Political lesbians are also so funny.

            You refer to a “Current Model”, which evidently I’ve overlooked in my extensive research on the subject. The Original Model has always had the bias of it’s women who get raped and men are rapists …. even when the men are Black African Prisoners being raped in Lorton Reformatory – the Home of Prisoners Against Rape inc (1973).

            In fact, I’m looking for any defined model – not what others come up with and invent – valid defined and structured models.

            Evidently there have been some developments since 2007 when Prof Joyce E Williams (Texas Women’s University) Wrote “Rape culture is a concept of unknown origin and of uncertain definition; yet it has made its way into everyday vocabulary and is assumed to be commonly understood. The award-winning documentary film Rape Culture made by Margaret Lazarus in 1975 takes credit for first defining the concept.Blackwell Encyclopaedia Sociology – page 3791.

            So do you have them bookmarks handy so you can help trace the development of the model from:

            1) 1974/5 Including men but highly marginalised in prison and negated
            2) Post 1975 Not including men and operating with the view that only men rape – that as Prof Williams put’s it, “The major criticism of the concept of rape culture and of the feminist theory from which it emanates is its monolithic implication that ultimately all women are victimized by all men”. (Blackwell Concise Encyclopaedia of Sociology page 493)
            3)Now you report that the “Model” has changed and is more inclusive.

            If you can help out with the references that show the progression I’ll be ever so grateful – Wiki’s thrive on accurate sources of quality, so I’d love to see the one’s you are using when you say “The” model has changed and that it’s now more inclusive. If you have a list of Statutory/Federal/Governmantal bodies that are using it That would be such a big help too.

            It is so odd but in nearly 40 years not a single government on the planet have adopted the term “Rape Culture” – not even The UN. So if the Rape Culture Model is now supposedly coming out of the closet, It would be nice to be able to stay on top of things and keep the Wiki updated.


          • http://www.imnotamensrightsactivistbut.wordpress.com Isaac T. Quill

            @CeCe – Oh and I’ve been looking at your profile and you have a Passion for History. (Does Little Dance).

            Wonderful! Passionate Historians always know the values of Sources and the differences between both Primary and Secondary and Tertiary ( or as most people call it Gossip).

            Looking forward to working with you!

          • http://shiningpearlsofsomething.blogspot.com Suzanne McCarley

            Oh, bullshit.

      • Stu

        Yeah, what Typhon said.

        Oh, and eat shit

        • CeCe

          No thanks, you’re not my type.

          • OneHundredPercentCotton

            We’re ALL aware of YOUR type, CeCe.

          • CeCe

            I doubt that very much. Just what do you think is my type?

          • Robert Crayle

            Think it over at least CeCe. It doesn’t taste all that bad, and Stu makes breakfast for you the next morning – he does great Eggs Benedict!

          • Kimski

            Okay, this is getting ridiculous.
            I’ve stayed out of this conversation, but now we’re down to basic attention whoring, which has basically been the only thing you’ve had to offer to the discussions on these pages.

            Hi CeCe.
            Bye CeCe..

          • Robert Crayle

            Your type?

            Likes long walks on the beach, scholastic nitpicking, and soft bondage?

            (Fingers crossed….)

          • http://www.imnotamensrightsactivistbut.wordpress.com Isaac T. Quill

            @ Robert Crayle – If You Crash And Burn we should chat! P^)

          • Robert Crayle

            @Isaac T. Quill


          • http://www.imnotamensrightsactivistbut.wordpress.com Isaac T. Quill

            @Robert Crayle – So glad to know that me Quill can still tickle some! P^)

          • OneHundredPercentCotton

            There are certainly unattractive, disrespected and rejected men who bear legitimate grudges for the way they are treated by women.

            Those men aren’t allowed to claim “rape culture”, “Violence” or “Objectification” to soothe their hurt feelings or make them selves feel secretly desired by the opposite sex by feigning fear of rape, violence or objectification. No “ugly duckling striking back” for them.

            Men just have to deal with it.

            Do you understand what I am tactfully trying to say to you CeCe?

            Is the term “Daddy Issues” still in current vernacular?

          • Steve_85

            And once again, I’m going to step in and request that you all stop trying to argue with feminasties.

            I like to liken it to trying to teach a pig to sing. You can’t do it, you’re just going to frustrate yourself and annoy the pig… and even if you do succeed, no one wants to hear a pig sing anyway.

            Attention whores be attention whoring, and you’re all giving this particular little piggy exactly what she wants.

          • CeCe

            So commenting and responding to comments is “attention whoring” now? Then what would that make you and everyone else who has commented here? Last I checked, simply commenting on something and having a discussion (and finding common ground, like in several of my comments in which I agreed with much of what was said to me) was not “attention whoring”. Though come to think of it, I don’t believe those comments have appeared here (or at least they hadn’t when I last checked), so perhaps they made it to the spam bin, and that’s why people are assuming I disagree more than I agree.

            And… “feminasties”? What are we, 12? What’s really interesting is that not once have I said I’m a feminist, and the *only* thing I’ve mentioned that is associated with feminism is rape culture, and what’s more, I’ve agreed that many of the things mentioned here are problems. Further, I’ve used gender-inclusive language, acknowledging that many of the problems that are supposedly “women’s problems” also apply to men. And I get called names for that? I talk about problems I’ve seen my guy friends face (like the one who was physically and emotionally abused by a psychotic ex-girlfriend… and he’s only one of many men I’ve seen face crap, like my nephew who hasn’t been allowed to see his son, even though he’s DYING, because his stupid ex-girlfriend claims he’s not the father and refuses to give in to a DNA test, or like my best friend who was cheated on, and emotionally and physically abused by his poor excuse of an ex-wife), and somehow, somehow, that makes me a “feminist cow” as “Dr F” called me and a “feminasty”?

            Honestly, I would have been perfectly happy if Paul had been the only person to respond to me. I didn’t need or want any of the rest, especially since several of them (but not all, and I thank those who were polite) have had as immature comments as you have. What a disgrace.

            I think you guys expect villains, so you look for them even when someone comes along who actually is trying to understand your perspective, who actually has nothing against MRA, and who actually agrees that there are major issues in society that put men at a disadvantage. You accuse them of “attention whoring” and being “feminasties” and tell them to “eat sh*t”, instead of maybe recognizing that they’re making an effort, not just coming here to argue.

            I guess it’s easier to vilify people for the positions you *think* they hold, rather than actually listening to them. But it demonstrates a serious weakness in character to do so.

          • http://www.imnotamensrightsactivistbut.wordpress.com Isaac T. Quill

            @Steve – I am not sure about Singing Pigs. Where I come from we talk about wrestling them – you end up dirty and they enjoy the rolling in the mud! Some Quote Heinlein and others G.B. Shaw – Two Wonderfully Unreasonable Men. P^)

            I’m still waiting to CeCe, the passionate researcher and historian, to help me out with some references. Maybe I’m just and intellectual cold fish who needs to sit on a quill to get a giggle, but I’m always interested in expanding knowledge and finding sources that show the changes of reality. Knowledge can come from the most unexpected of places – and CeCe will know that – which Is why I want to see The Book Marks.

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F (Ian Williams)


            You would have been happy if only Paul had responded to you?

            Oh help me Rhonda. You have been chewing too long on the cud that’s laced with poppy seeds. Your swinging udder has one elongated nipple that squirts a lecture to a member here about BDSM and another squirts “I am happy if you shut up as I only want 1 person to reply to me”.

            Another nipple you got there (scuffing up the dust in your windswept paddock) squirts “You have to make me happy because I just told you all that my happiness is depending on you to shut up”.

            “And… “feminasties”? What are we, 12?” and I say please leave the issue of IQ out of this thread.

            You telling us that you know of a bitch who is shafting a bloke does not make me or anyone here believe you have empathy on a site dedicated to helping men and boys against the wrecking ball of feminism.

            You say you are not a feminist and I say that like a feminist you lie and you are. A neat and filthy circle where your parroting is heard bouncing off the walls of your hermetically sealed anechoic diving bell.

            Yes, they can fit cows in them I have seen the photos.

          • CeCe

            You misinterpreted what I was saying, as far as being happy if only Paul had responded to me. I was accused of attention whoring. When I said that I would have been happy if only one person had responded, I meant that I would have been content with that. I came here to leave a comment, nothing more. If only one had responded or none at all, I would have been content with that. I’m not saying that I mind the responses.

            Context is important.

            And again, I don’t care what you believe or don’t believe. I know what I believe, and I don’t need to have my beliefs validated by anyone else in order to hold them.

            And I had said before that calling me a cow is a compliment, since cows are docile, extremely intelligent, sacred in India, and delicious (beef!). I’d rather be a cow than a crow.

            I’m not bothering with the rest of your nonsense.

          • http://www.imnotamensrightsactivistbut.wordpress.com Isaac T. Quill

            @CeCe – First there are no comments in any spam filters. Do bear in mind that there are people who can check that – and inferences that people are being censored – limited – that mistakes are arising can be checked very fast.

            You may have mistaken that certain of your comments have been shrunk because the community down voted them. They are still present – still available – just one mouse click away.

            As to anyone using or not using labels such as Feminist – they are an irrelevance. It’s what people say and do that reveals labels not the badge they show. Some Fly under False Colours and others simply had followed others and not actually considered the underlying philosophy and ideas of what they think and say. I have to say – you do seem to display that trait…. even down to the telling other people who you know nothing about that they are not aware of matters or realities they live.

            You started out with this phrase “Promoting hate against either gender is wrong.” – so do you have an operational definition of “Promote”. So many learned decades ago that “Promotion” is easy to spot – it’ the issues of “Milieu Control”, false consensus building and above all else Knee jerks that need to be addressed – Promotion is easy it’s the back stabbing and Machiavellian that takes real time and effort to deal with.

          • CeCe

            I was just saying that I couldn’t see the comments myself, I wasn’t saying that I was being censored personally. I don’t believe I was inferring that either. The thought did occur to me, but I shrugged it off, remembering the remark made earlier in this discussion that comments did sometimes wind up in the spam bin accidentally. That’s what I figured had happened.

            Perhaps I do have some feminist ideas, but that doesn’t stop me from also fighting for others; I also fight for racial minorities, homosexuals, religious freedom (of *and* from!), and against inequalities I see regarding men. I don’t believe that one gender should be considered greater than any other, nor do I believe that the rights of one should trump the others. I don’t restrict myself, and I don’t believe that holding feminist ideals is incompatible with also holding the view that men also face inequalities that need to be addressed.

            Perhaps “promoting” was the wrong word, or perhaps I should have expanded it to also include the word “allowing”, because by ignoring both explicit and implicit “promotions” of violence, we do allow it. And that is wrong.

            You said:
            I have to say – you do seem to display that trait…. even down to the telling other people who you know nothing about that they are not aware of matters or realities they live.//

            I’m not sure what you mean. If anything I’ve said has come across that way, I certainly didn’t mean it. Would you be willing to give me a couple of examples so that I can amend the way I present myself? I also sincerely apologize that anything I’ve said could be construed that way. As I said, I don’t mean it.

          • http://www.imnotamensrightsactivistbut.wordpress.com Isaac T. Quill

            @CeCe You seem to like to play rhetoric and games. I’ll ask a few very direct questions and we will see how you respond.

            1) You keep making play that you have not on AVfM identified as feminist and you indicate that it is incorrect for anyone to therefore assume or state that you are feminist – your Avatar links to a great many other sources inclusing your own writings where you state “So yes, I am a feminist. I wear the title proudly, …” (May 24, 2013 – Journey to feminism – Posted by Cece). Are you the same CeCe?

            2) Your inferences that you can only be called Feminist on AVfM when you have identified as Feminist on AVfM is a new one on me. Would it be reasonable in your mind to assume that when looked at Paul Elam should not be believe to be Male? Caucasian? A MHRA? … until he states he is of that status?

            3) If something has feathers, the genetics of the genus “Anas”, webbed feet, a propensity to go Quack and tastes delicious with Orange Sauce, is it reasonable to believe that it’s a Duck?

            3b) If the Duck states publicly that they are a Duck and all evidence proves they are a duck – should it be seen and disingenuous (Even Controlling Behaviour) if the duck later demands to only be seen as Duck when they again make a declaration of Duckery?

            4) Last Question – if the duck test has been applied ( and more ) and you have been found to be 100% Quacking, should you be called Duck or just broiled? P^)

            One piece of advice – It really is silly to assume that the people you are communicating with lack capacity, knowledge and even wisdom. The levels of joint experience here at AVfM are measured in Millennia, and you have no Idea of the Communication networks that people here have and use.

            It’s an idea to get to know people first and then patronise them as necessary – not automatically! Your protestations are in my experience caused by 3 possible causes a) neuro-diveristy b) Lack of clarity of thought and lack of rhetorical rigour c) Netopathic behaviour ( and just cos you is married to a Vicar don’t mean you inherit anything is status from him).

            At the moment it’s not clear why you are behaving the way you are, so only time and increased exposure will allow a clearer Quack to emerge.

            When you have time I’d love to know the sources you are using on Rape Culture – and where and how the academic and referenced position on Rape Culture has changed to be so inclusive of all – which of course also includes perp profiling and behaviours. (You have read The CDC reports and the FBI definition of rape as of December 2011? – The one that still denies rape by Envelopment)… and I keep wondering why you maintain that there has been a shift to Equality in Rape Culture when inequality fostered by the Rape Culture meme is now enshrines in US law.

            You do know the history of the CDC – Mary Koss – The politics of delayed reports on IPV and Changing definitions – the politics redefining rape – the politics of making sure it does not include males raped by envelopment – and just how that little lot interfaces with “Rape Culture”?


  • scatmaster
  • Bewildered

    Hey ! has anyone thought about a petition to counter this petition ?

    • Diana Davison

      I’m thinking of turning my last post into an open letter to WAM! Just want to get more details about their photos first.

      • Theseus

        Do it! Do it! Do it!

      • http://www.imnotamensrightsactivistbut.wordpress.com Isaac T. Quill

        Diana – I think It’s A Splendid Idea – an Open letter. It also needs to go to facebook, New York Times, Washington Post – send a personal copy to Huffy Post …… The permutations are endless.

        Also do make sure The Register Get to know about it too. They may be seen as a Euro based entity but they have global reach. P^)

  • Advocate For Everyone

    For whatever reason, I’m not being allowed to respond the Theseus’s comment way above replying to me. I will respond here.

    I should have been more clear in who I was addressing when I asked that the attacks stop. I did not intend it exclusively for you and was not saying it based on something you had said to CeCe. In fact, you did have reasoned responses and for that I thank you. I also thank you for not outright attacking me and instead debating the points I brought up.
    I’m just tired of the people who seem to forget that this isn’t a place to attack others, but a place to discuss issues with men’s rights in today’s society. I was voicing a concern about that.
    I wish it wasn’t a place to attack feminism or it’s followers and instead discuss issues with men’s rights in today’s society, but oh well. I can understand why you guys would be more than a little bitter with them and what some of their rhetoric has done.

    This is true. When feminists proposed the concept of rape culture they only had women in mind. It was originally a feminist exclusive idea. It has changed. While many feminists add in men to the theory only to appease the skeptical masses, the masses had to become skeptical somehow. Even before feminists gave in and started accepting that men too would be affected by a rape culture, the idea had spread to about any rational mind who considered the existence of it. The caved because people didn’t buy into egotistical theories. Many people believe it’s real and people have been aware of and horrified by the effects it can have on men should it be real. Unfortunately, this probably won’t be altering the courtroom any time soon like “all men are rapists” did and you’re right in that most feminists don’t give a shit about the male side of it and won’t fight for it. And that’s a fucking shame, because it deserves to be addressed. That self-centered disregard for the male side of things is why I started questioning feminism years ago and wound up here. My point was that though the theory of rape culture started out exclusively feminist, people started to pick up on it to the point that normal unaffiliated people know about and believe it, making it a “mainstream” concept. Because people other than femcentric feminists picked it up, the feminists were forced to change the definition of the theory to suit the rest of us that knew there was more to it. As they should have a long time ago. At least where I come from, it’s mainstream and people are trying to alter local laws to help male victims and ask that every rape case be thoroughly investigated so as to avoid false incarceration. Maybe it isn’t that way for you. If it isn’t, know that what we’re doing is spreading. Hopefully the idea of a male victim of rape won’t be potential comedy in the near future.

    My analogy had nothing to do with the validity of either rhetoric. I used that analogy to point out that one thing does not equal another. Like I said before, the theory of rape culture is no longer an exclusively feminist thing. The truth that rape laws in America unfairly favor women used to be an exclusively MRA thing from what I can tell. Then it spread and now practically everyone I know agrees that it’s fuck up and needs to be fixed. Both are, in my experience, “mainstreamed” ideas.
    If I had been comparing the two in terms of validity through empirical evidence then yes. It would have been a godawful analogy. I understand that rape culture is little more than a theory at this point. It doesn’t have the undeniable proof that unjust rape laws have in harming people. I wasn’t making the analogy based on that though. It should not have been read as an analogy comparing the undeniable existence of one or the other.

    I should have been more clear in what I meant by “valid” and I apologize for that. Hysteria is a valid threat and motivation in that regardless of how real the perceived threat is, people will react to it. We cannot underestimate hysteria. Consider the race riots in Tulsa, Oklahoma, 1921. The Greenwood District, a very prosperous black-centric community was burned to the ground due to hysteria. A black man got into an elevator with a white women, stumbled, and brushed against her shoulder. The story she told was that she was raped in said elevator by said man. Due to the mentality of the time favoring white women over black men, people went fucking nuts and that hysteria, despite it being founded on a false rape accusation, led to the death, homelessness, and general suffering of a large group of people who had nothing to due with the initial “event”.
    I’m sure most people here have their own stories about how the hysteria aspect of rape/rape culture has affected their lives.

    That’s why rape culture is still only considered a theory. I believe that it is at least somewhat real, though heavily, heavily inflated by feminist rhetoric. I believe it’s real when I see a woman accuse a man of rape because she regretted having drunk sex with him and knows that she can get away with it. I believe it’s real when I hear my male friends complain about being watched suspiciously while walking down the street at night or while taking their children to the library as if they will attack someone. I believed it when my husband told me about his rape at the hands of an ex and how the police not only laughed at him behind his back, but did a shitty job investigating the crime. I believe it when I see the main question being asked towards my friend who suffered a violent rape is “what were you wearing?”
    These are all personal reasons, but please understand that there is at least something going on concerning how rape is treated in our society, be that it’s being abused by feminist rhetoric or rape culture might, and only might, be somewhat real. I understand that the theory of rape culture is believed based on personal feelings and perceptions. A lot of people have those feelings though (See: Hysteria) and a lot of people like me have these perceptions based on personal experience. I’m not really arguing for it’s existence at this point, despite my belief in it, just that it isn’t exclusively a feminist belief.

    The idea of rape culture has been abused and used to put one group at the advantage of another. That doesn’t mean the theory of rape culture is a bad thing, necessarily, only that it has been used to do bad things. That doesn’t necessarily mean that rape culture is complete bunk, especially since the feminist inflation of the concept is likely what made the fundamental symptoms of the concept so damn common in the first place.

    I invite you to pick apart what I’m saying. I ask that you don’t attack me as I haven’t attacked you, but it’s good that these things are challenged. Despite how personal a lot of this is, I expect you to call me out on a number of things. I also ask that you understand I’m not arguing for the existence of rape culture in America, but that it is no longer an exclusively feminist concept.
    Until you have read every feminist blog or publication out there, what you stated will be a generalization. I’m not disagreeing with you, most of the ones I’ve read are very one-sided. I just find generalizations to be one of the worst logical fallacies in existence as it allows one individual to ruin the image of an entire group. That’s not fair, every group has it’s idiots and psychopaths.
    Note: If you feel I have attacked you in any way, please tell me. I did not intend to and will rewrite whatever was there so that I may be more clear.

    • OneHundredPercentCotton

      The Tulsa Riots and this country’s history of “Strange Fruit” is EXACTLY why the notion of “rape culture” is rejected.

      A woman falsely crying rape was answered with an innocent man swinging at the end of a rope – to wretched excess. The practice wasn’t outlawed until the early 1960’s.

      When the Duke La Cross false rape accusation broke, the reaction by black males was “Good. It’s YOUR turn”.

      Rape culture notwithstanding, black men blame white MEN -NOT white women, they blame white MEN – when a false accusation is believed.

      Women blame men when ANY accusation is not believed.

      Women divert attention from false accusations by accusing white men of racism because black men are disproportionately falsely accused.

      • OneHundredPercentCotton

      • Advocate For Everyone

        If you mean to say that it is rejected in the sense that it shouldn’t exist and is universally disliked because it harms people, then I agree with you. The idea that a rape culture could even exist is disgusting and somewhat frightening.
        If your intention is that it is rejected as being anything other than a feminist construct, please consider the following:
        The current theory of rape culture, as I understand it, includes rampant false accusations of rape within it’s “symptoms”. The theory states the symptom shows that people have rape on the mind to the point where sometimes they don’t even know whether they’ve been raped, but feel the need to prosecute those who made them feel uncomfortable or regretful in a sexual setting because it’s believable to others that a rape happened. The theory also states that the symptom may show sex to be considered a thing of ridicule in the society it manifests in due to some false accusers feeling their reputation will be ruined if anyone finds out their night of consensual sex was just that and then choosing to change the story for their own perceived self preservation. Connected to that, sexual repression is one thing the theory states can bring about this “symptom” as sex is usually viewed as a bad/weird/gross thing in a repressed society, unless it’s forced on you in which case you get a full-on pity party and ride on the victim-wagon.
        Again, it’s all just a theory, but this is how it rationalizes false accusations. No pity or special treatment for false accusers, no genders mentioned or implied, just potential explanations as to why they may be doing what they’re doing within the context of a rape culture. The theory is not against you guys, though it has been twisted and produced things that harm men by those who would wish to exploit the parts of it that can be construed as pertaining to women.

        It took until the 1960’s to outlaw a form of murder. It took until the 1960’s for lynching to be.. Jesus Christ. Excuse me while I rage in the corner over there. What the fuck were legislators doing, twiddling their thumbs as racists killed knowing they were within the law?

        I don’t know how a black man would think or react to such a situation as I’m not one, but I would like to see any kind of proof that this is it. Anecdotal proof works. I’ve certainly used a lot of it.
        Whoa whoa, why are we assuming women are always blaming men in those situations? I could definitely see the majority of feminists doing that, but women in general? That statement doesn’t seem fair.

        Again, I could see the majority of feminists doing that because they don’t want their power over rape accusations to go away. I could also see a particular type of selfish victim-playing woman doing that for the same reasons. But women in general? That statement also doesn’t seem fair.

        I’m not saying any of this isn’t a problem or that it doesn’t happen. I just take issue with the broad stokes and implied assumption that all black men and all women do those things in those situations. Let’s keep away from that so we can focus on the fact that it happens and needs to stop.

        • OneHundredPercentCotton

          “twiddling their thumbs as racists killed knowing they were within the law?”

          Lynchings weren’t ALWAYS racially motivated – just as false accusations aren’t always racially motivated. ANY male was – and STILL is – vulnerable to a false accusation. Talk about broad strokes and implied assumptions.

          Over 300 men have been exonerated by DNA – mainly black men. Does that “prove” racism”? Not directly. The rapes were not “false” – since a black man actually DID rape – the convictions were “wrongful” because of mis identification and careless or intentionally wrongful police and prosecution work. Racism by way of “you all look alike”.

          I already provided TWO “anectdotal” examples of how men -and women – blame men for false rape accusations with the Duke La Crosse case. Billie Holiday wasn’t blaming white women for lynchings – she was blaming “southerners” – including, if not mainly, WHITE MEN for their reaction to BELIEVING a false accusation. (Lynchings occurred in almost ALL 50 states, btw, not just “southern” states).

          Duke LaCrosse: “Chan Hall, a member of the NCCU student government, made explicit what appeared to be widespread sentiment at the forum when he told Newsweek that Duke students should be prosecuted “whether it happened or not. It would be justice for things that happened in the past.” ( information is from the book Until Proven Innocent).”

          If THAT isn’t blaming white MEN for false rape accusations against black men “in the past”, I don’t know what is.

  • Peter Wright (Tawil)

    This post is in reply to CeCe above (cant seem to find the reply button next to the post).

    CeCe, I find some, but not all of what you are saying reasonable, at least more reasonable than the comments of a lot of the feminist bigots who turn up here full of vitriol.

    One thing I’m having difficulty understanding is why you underline several times the fact that you have not declared yourself a feminist in your posts (true enough), but you nevertheless provided a link in your avatar to the article you wrote entitled “Journey to feminism”. In that article you celebrate your feminist status and share your reasoning about how you got there. To members here feminism is a dirty word because it is associated with misandric behaviour more often than not, and several of the members here would have clicked the profile link you provided and learn that you “wear the feminist title proudly”. So don’t be too hard on them for assuming you subscribe to feminist reasoning – because you clearly do.

    With that said, I’m still willing to read what you have to say here because you seem to have some compassion for men even if that compassion is tainted with some misandric assumptions. Another thing, I wager you are stuck on the dictionary definition of feminism as referring to advocacy for equality between the sexes. Here is an alternative definition of feminism you may find acceptable…. if you choose to read it let me know if you think it is a better definition than the one you currently have:

    Refuting the Appeal to Dictionary
    Pig Latin (esp this page which provides a tight definition)

    • CeCe

      Hi Peter, I admit I was being disingenuous in not admitting to being a feminist outright (while also not denying being one), because I already knew that “feminist” is a dirty word here, due to its connotations. I’ve been actually thinking about writing another blog post about what feminism actually means to me and how I personally define it, and why. I guess that’s what I get for not expanding on that. I honestly didn’t even think of the idea that people would reach my blog posts from my profile. It was stupid and ignorant of me, and I sincerely apologize for being dishonest in that regard. “They” do say that the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and I did have good intentions in not revealing holding feminist ideals; I had rather hoped that I would be judged on what I do believe, rather than any labels by which I define myself. It probably sounds silly, and maybe it is, but it is the truth. I’m willing to admit when I’m wrong, and I was wrong about this.

      So here’s how I define feminism (and how various dictionaries define it):
      -the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men. (top definition on dictionary.com)
      -The doctrine — and the political movement based on it — that women should have the same economic, social, and political rights as men. (Cultural Dictionary)
      -A movement for granting women political, social, and economic equality with men. (The American Heritage New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition)
      -the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes and/or organized activity on behalf of women’s rights and interests (Merriam Webster)

      As for your links, your first one was very interesting and has a degree of truth; feminism does mean different things to different people, and there are different movements within feminism. Some are all about female supremacy (matriarchy as opposed to patriarchy), while others are about equality. And if you ask a feminist exactly what feminism means, they should be able to tell you the definition, and then how they personally apply it, instead of making you guess. To me, if they can’t, they’re being lazy and dishonest.

      I also do see your point in the second one; the problem is that dictionaries do seem to mostly define feminism the same way (though of course in practice it can vary significantly by person, just like almost any other ideology), while patriarchy always involves male supremacy. Therefore if one says they’re a feminist, they can still believe in equality between the genders, while if one believes in patriarchy, they must believe in male supremacy, since that is one of the main tenets of patriarchy. If one were to say that they’re a patriarchist (is that a word? It should be!) but believe that men and women should be equal, it’s rather like saying that one is an atheist but they believe in God. However, you can call yourself an MRA while also agreeing with some tenets of feminism, and/or believe in equality between the genders, and the two ideas are not at odds at all. And vice versa.

      In truth, however, I don’t believe that women who argue for female supremacy should call themselves feminists, because they are not. They are bigots and misandrists, plain and simple, attempting to lend credence to their views by labeling it “feminism”; I liken them to “Christians” like the members of Westboro Baptist Church, or the KKK. Equality, however, is a lofty goal, and that is what feminism is supposed to stand for (and what I believe that most who identify with MRA stand for also). And from what I’ve read on feminist blogs and websites, the vast majority of them argue for exactly that.

      So again, I do apologize for not coming outright and saying it, but I’m sure that you can understand why. I’m sure that if you were commenting on a feminist blog to say that you do agree with some of what they say, you wouldn’t want to admit outright to being involved with MRA (which is just as “dirty” in some feminist circles as feminism is here), just like if you were commenting on a liberal blog to agree with some of what they said, you wouldn’t want to admit to being a conservative, or vice versa. As I said, I’d rather be judged based on my beliefs than my labels, particularly if those labels have negative connotations for a group I’m trying to understand. I figured if I came right out and said “I’m a feminist!” immediately people would jump on that and assume that I hate men or I believe in female supremacy, or that I’m a bra-burning, non-shaving lesbian (who also hates men), rather than that I’m a feminist who follows the dictionary definition (and who wears bras, loves shopping and makeup, owns more shoes than I should, is married to a man, enjoys hetero-oriented sex, and actually likes dresses and skirts).

      Also, you said that some of what I’ve said contains some misandric assumptions. Please let me know which of my statements contain them so that I can see where I’ve gone wrong in my thinking. I don’t believe that I’m a misandrist in any way, shape or form, but I could be mistaken about that.

      • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F (Ian Williams)


        You suggest to us that you are not a feminist. You are gas-lighting us here and you have been tinkering with the truth. You have been suggesting you may or may not be a feminist and you are absolutely. I called you out and you poo-poo’d it with obfuscation.

        However, you said this on your blog:

        “So yes, I am a feminist. I wear the title proudly, because not only does it mean that I believe that women are equal to men, I also believe that most men are capable of so much more.”

        That excerpt was taken from an article you wrote called “Journey to feminism”. All of your credibility has evaporated because when I look at your grav I now see a glowing question mark above your head.

        Cut to the chase with this please:

        “So yes, I am a Nazi. I wear the title proudly, because not only does it mean that I believe that the Aryan race are equal to Jews, I also believe that most Jews are capable of so much more.”

        That second paragraph is you in 1940, and like the Nazi’s they too looked at each other and said, “Who me? Nah, I never went along with that Nazi crap in the first place. I always fought for the Jews.”

        Subsequently when you say you might be ‘foolish or naive but not dishonest’ that means you lied again. You lied because you said you are not dishonest but you are dishonest with us as I have shown you and everyone here.

        Maybe you are gutless, and that was your motivation for editing out the truth by promoting uncertainty of your adherence to the ideology? Who knows but I see it as great news and here’s why;

        More and more we are seeing feminists defending their being a feminist by saying things like, “Wait. Here me out. I am a feminist because…”, or “Yeah I admit I am a feminist but there’s a reason for it” and you went a step further by having us not sure if you are in the first place. This is a great indication of our work here.

        Five years ago there would not have been this sort of behaviour from feminists, and now they scuttle away and put their F-Badge in their purse before they engage us here. So, In the words of Loy Finly your hero;

        You utterly disgust me.

        Our tolerance for liars is at zero.

        The first thing you said was that you have lied (“disingenuous” as the milder euphemism) and that is the only thing where you have told the truth for sure. Even though let’s not forget that Peter and I forced the issue by linking your blog (that told the truth there and not here) and there was nowhere for you to go.

        Banned as your platform has been rescinded.

        Ok everyone, the sacred cow has wandered off the road and it’s time to get back to doing what we do best.

        To all others here is the truth of this matter right here —> http://aseekersmusings.wordpress.com/2013/05/24/journey-to-feminism/

      • Peter Wright (Tawil)

        @CeCe: “Hi Peter, I admit I was being disingenuous in not admitting to being a feminist outright (while also not denying being one), because I already knew that “feminist” is a dirty word here, due to its connotations.”

        You are going to get a lot of downvotes for that concealment. Honesty is the policy here, and newcomers are dismissed when found lacking.

        @CeCe: “So here’s how I define feminism (and how various dictionaries define it): [defs]… feminism does mean different things to different people, and there are different movements within feminism.”

        Feminism as a word is inherently sexist, regardless of how one defines it. It is a gendered word. Anyone identifying as feminist immediately orients around a female referent (femin-ism). The same is true for those who align with “masculism” – this word also includes a gender reference.

        While its true that feminism can mean many different things to many different people, the term doesn’t get us into neutral territory… actually the contrary. Branding yourself with the word ‘feminist’ when advocating for equality is akin to branding yourself a Black Rights Advocate when you are advocating for equal treatment of all people regardless of skin colour (including, for instance, advocacy for people suffering from the pigment disorder albinism). It’s a blatant contradiction.

        Discussions about feminism involve a speaker and a listener. A dialogue if you will. Whilst you might have a unique definition of feminism, the listener will hear the gendered reference in the word femin-ist.

        Words are not only what we choose them to mean. Words like feminism have a life of their own quite apart from the speaker, and we need to remember that we don’t just make words up or ever have them fully under control and that they are independent powers which have power over us. Words have whole mythologies, genders, genealogies, etymologies, histories, qualities, and vogues, complete with their own guarding, blaspheming, creating, and annihilating effects. Such aspects of words transcend the definitions we give to them, feminism included. Therefore the apology declaring feminism can mean a thousand different things to a thousand different people goes only so far, i.e. whilst we can highlight the variety of ideas that attach themselves to ‘feminism’, the term itself has incontrovertible semantic referents – i.e. anyone identifying with those semantic referents (calling themselves a femin-ist) has used gendered language and struck a partisan stance.

        It must also be admitted that ALL feminists are united by thier belief in the misandric notion of ‘Patriarchy Theory’ are they not? There is more unity of ideology among individual feminists than you are willing to admit.

        It’s ok in a free world to broadcast one’s alignment with the female or male gender and to combat the associated problems. But for those interested in the welfare of all human beings I recommend we rid ourselves of those totem gendered badges like feminism and masculism and employ more holistic terms like egalitarian, equalitarian, human rights supporter, etc.

        @CeCe: “…dictionaries do seem to mostly define feminism the same way (though of course in practice it can vary significantly by person, just like almost any other ideology), while patriarchy always involves male supremacy. Therefore if one says they’re a feminist, they can still believe in equality between the genders, while if one believes in patriarchy, they must believe in male supremacy, since that is one of the main tenets of patriarchy.”

        Without getting too deeply into the definition of patriarchy, a number of analyses show that it can refer to many different things – just as you claim of feminism. Patriarchy has been defined in more nuanced writings as any or all of the following: 1. complete rule over society by men, to the complete disregard of women’s humanity; 2. benevolent rule of society by men who use that power to consider how to care for women’s needs (ie. benevolent patriarchy), and; 3. as male slavery to women whereby men are forced to do all the dirty work strictly for female benefit, ie. slavery and servitude (see TyphonBlue’s excellent youtube channel for the later). These all ring true for me.

        I’m not sure why patriarchy has been emphasised in your post, but for the record AVfM is primarily aligned with human rights, not with the promotion of patriarchy. Here’s a short definition of Men’s Human Rights Movement FYI: http://reference.avoiceformen.com/wiki/Men%27s_Human_Rights_Movement

      • Turbo

        “In truth, however, I don’t believe that women who argue for female supremacy should call themselves feminists, because they are not.”

        Yes, they are !!!

        “Equality, however, is a lofty goal, and that is what feminism is supposed to stand for”

        Show me anywhere that this is actually the case, other than some dictionary definition or other feminist website definition.

        “And from what I’ve read on feminist blogs and websites, the vast majority of them argue for exactly that.”

        Talk is cheap. You need to define people by what they do not what they say.

        Feminist have fought tooth and lacquered nail to prevent men from having equal parenting rights for 40 years. This is just one of many examples.

        If you just stick your head out of your feminist cocoon for a millisecond you will see the truth. In fact I do not believe that you do not see this, you are just hiding from it.

        If you want to identify as a feminist you must accept the reality of what you are supporting. It is in no way equality.

  • http://www.imnotamensrightsactivistbut.wordpress.com Isaac T. Quill

    @ CeCe “I don’t believe that I’m a misandrist in any way, shape or form, but I could be mistaken about that.”

    Here’s a crib sheet to help you out – A Voice For Men Wiki – Misandry

    This is also quote useful, though a bit theoretical for some:

    Misandry originates as a cultural problem, to be sure, and therefore entails moral problems. In addition, though, it entails emotional and other problems. Though not social scientists, we find it very hard to imagine how any boy can become a healthy young man in such a contaminated cultural environment, just as we find it hard to imagine the analogy for young girls, blacks, gays or those who belong to any other target group. It would be folly, therefore, to ignore feminist ideology, let alone misandry itself, in the interest of political expediency.Nathanson, Paul; Young, Katherine K.,,
    Masculine Identity in a Toxic Cultural Environment

    Some say check your Privilege. For me It’s check you morality, your culture and your mindset – and going to a dictionary Quoting equality whilst #FBRape and it’s instigators are PUBLICLY calling for community standards that serve women and not men… well it shows you Morality in action and exactly why Feminism is Toxic when anywhere near the word Equality.

    Misandry is made manifest in more than words just as feminism is more than a vagina.

  • crydiego

    In reply to CeCe

    I have read all your comments because and felt you might have been overly attacked but I keep coming away feeling something has been missed.
    In your first post you said: “I fully believe, however, that any pages promoting violence against *either* gender should be removed. Promoting hate against either gender is wrong.”
    On the face of it, it’s hard to not to agree. It sounds good to be for some form of Facebook censorship when the page promotes violence against either gender. And, although you didn’t say it, I’m reasonable sure you would also include anything that glorifies or praises violence against either gender. Or, that promotes, glorifies, or praises anything that promotes, glorifies, or praises violence against any gender.
    However, we really can’t stop at gender, can we? You would most likely include race, religion, etc, etc. I’m sure you know where I’m going with this. Eventually we end up protecting Polka music and blond jokes. Do we expect them to take down whole pages because they represent and promote hate movement even if they just show pictures of kittens?
    This is the paradox of free speech, -you let it all in or you start to exclude it all. Facebook has been bullied into heading down the road of controlling what people say on their site. A road that leads to them being responsible for what is posted on their site as much as those that posted it. In the future they could be sued for not living up to their own standards.
    I’m for free speech, warts and all. Sometimes it is a high price to pay but worth it. Then you and I can easily agree that any pages that promote violence against any gender is wrong and be friends.

  • Advocate For Everyone

    “Lynchings weren’t ALWAYS racially motivated – just as false accusations aren’t always racially motivated.”

    This is certainly true, but how many cases have you heard of that cite the lynching of a white person who hadn’t gone through the justice system and been deemed worthy of hanging? Does it equal the number of black lynchings you know of that lack the judicial system? Does it equal the number of black lynchings you know of that included the judicial system?
    Lynching is a racially charged subject no matter how you approach it the same way feminism is a negatively charged subject for anyone on this site. It has implied connotations within the word that are very tough to escape. There is a reason for this. Lynching and false rape accusations are connected, no doubt, but while false rape accusations were a distinct motivator for a lynching so were false assault accusations, false pedophilia accusations, “he/she criticized the way I [x]”, “he/she questioned my authority”, “he/she looked at me weird” or even “we haven’t had a good lynching in a while” in some twisted areas. I connected lynching to racism because the majority of it is connected to racism and mass hysteria working in tandem while it was condoned by society.
    I assumed that we both understood it was an unspoken, but understood fact that some form of racism played a large role in most lynchings, but not necessarily all. I guess I shouldn’t have done that.

    With the Duke La Crosse case everyone blamed the men because everyone thought they had raped Magnum. People generally believe rape accusations the moment they hear the potential victim speak. This is nothing new.
    Because Billie Holiday made no explicit mention of white men causing the lynchings in “Strange Fruit” we can’t say if she was referring to white men without making some kind of leap. Yes, “southerners” includes white men, but it also includes black men, black women, white women, latino men, latino women, etc.. To state that she was referring mainly to white men is an assumption. It is not one without reason, but there’s no way to be certain that’s what she meant and that invalidates it as proof. If I’m completely wrong and she did say at one point that her intention with “southerners” was “mainly white men” please point me to it.

    I don’t know why the topic has shifted from “rape culture is no longer an exclusively feminist belief” to “white men are blamed and punished for false rape accusations in the past”. I don’t recall mentioning that at any point or doing anything to solicit the topic from you other than asking that we not assume how every black man or woman thinks and blames when presented with a false rape accusation past or present.

  • Advocate For Everyone

    Crap. Either something is up with my computer or the site is being disagreeable. I wrote that as a reply to OneHundredPercentCotten above, even being able to write it in a reply box, but it ended up here. I am neither allowed to edit or delete it.

  • Victor Zen

    Hey folks. Note the second addendum at the bottom of the article added as of today, June 29th, 2013.