Gloating over Earl Silverman’s corpse

Some people within the community of the men’s human rights movement have referred to the late Earl Silverman as a hero. I regret that their description is accurate, even as those using the term may not understand it from the same perspective. A hero, understood from a men’s human rights point of view, is a willing self-sacrifice: a disposable human, buoyed to his own destruction by commitment to a society which disregards his humanity, but which praises his willing participation in his own death.

I don’t think Earl was a hero, he was something else; something bigger. But as the news of his suicide has reached the mainstream, commentary from publications like Huffpo and The Atlantic Wire have another flavor entirely. They are gloating over his death.

Alexander Abad-Santos of The Atlantic Wire produced as smug and satisfied a piece of yellow pixels as any journalistic smog I’ve ever seen.

According to Abad-Santos’s headline, (likely written by his editor) Mr Silverman’s legacy is one of feminism bashing. Those who insist on calling attention to the ideology informing hard opposition to recognition of men as human beings with rights should expect to continue being called out on their ideology’s foundation of hatred and violence, but that wasn’t Earl Silverman’s work. That’s our work, but let’s not digress.

Silverman’s legacy was one of providing shelter and help to human beings that the rest of out society is content to see abused, homeless, and disregarded to their deaths. The approximately half of the victims of domestic violence who happen to be male. The ones Abad-Santos calls a myth.

reciprocal rates of DV by sex


The Atlantic Wire contributor takes a stab at defining the Men’s Human Rights Moment, scratching the surface with mention of family law, military service, and domestic violence, but then falls on his face, citing attempts by the SPLC to fund-raise in 2011 by pretending the MHRM is a modern equivalent to the racial supremacist organizations Morris Dees made his name opposing in the 1970s.

Contrasting such foolish fear mongering, a small detour into ideological attack on the MRHM, is worth revisiting.

“It should be mentioned that the SPLC did not label MRAs as members of a hate movement; nor did our article claim that the grievances they air on their websites – false rape accusations, ruinous divorce settlements and the like – are all without merit.” [1]

Arthur Goldwag of the SPLC managed to drop this admission in his backpedaling after being pasted by Reason Magazine, Business Insider and the American Spectator for the SPLC’s irresponsible fear-mongering about the MRM in late 2011. Isn’t it peculiar how “professional journalists” keep referring to the SPLC’s incompetent attempts to paint the Men’s Human Rights Movement as a malevolent force, while consistently omitting mention of the public spanking that pack of well heeled lawyers took, and Art Goldwag’s subsequent admission of the reality of the issues addressed by the MHRM?

Santos next attempts to re-establish the myth of domestic violence as a sexually one-sided issue. He cites a 2010 study by the CDC, in which lifetime victimization rates are compared between men and women. According to the CDC’s 2010 National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey, 1 in 5 women versus 1 in 71 men are victims of rape in their lifetime. So where’s the problem in the CDC’s report?

By focusing on lifetime victimization, the CDC report[2] taps into our culture’s narrative of victimization. Women’s victimization is re-enforced by the prevalent cultural narrative, thus women remember their victimization, and even may escalate the severity of any incident of victimization. Men, by contrast live in a narrative in which they are perpetrators, and never recipients of violence or abuse. Because of this, and the fact that people conform their memory to the cultural narrative they inhabit – it is no surprise at all that a lifetime rate of victimization shows overwhelmingly female weighted incidence. In fact, the choice to describe a lifetime rate, rather than a single year, or a lesser period demonstrates purpose in the CDC report. Even the Stats-Canada report selects a 5 year baseline, rather than a shorter period, and increasing the smog of cultural memory. In spite of this, the report still indicates sexual parity in victimization.

However, the CDC’s report does also include single year comparison of male versus female incidence of sexual victimization. For women’s victimization in a 12 month reporting period, 1.1% of women reported being raped. By contrast, 1.1% of men reported being “made to penetrate” through violence, or coercion.

But even the male to female parity is hidden in the CDC’s report, as table 2.1 on page 18 of the CDC’s 2010 survey mentions “made to penetrate” but leaves the number out of the table. To hide this number, coerced and forced sexual encounters involving male victims are broken into smaller categories and samples, making them ignorable. This is purposeful in the report, hiding and erasing male-victimizing rape.

Meanwhile, credible research on domestic and sexual violence continues to show reciprocity[3].

This isn’t even the worst fallacy in this whole, sick narrative. What if only 1 in 71 men were victims of sexual violence, while a comparatively huge 1 in 5 women are victimized? Putting these together , and assuming truth in the false claims of gender ideologues, then 7% of sexual violence and rape impacts men. This is a grossly and deliberately low estimate, but even if it’s true – why isn’t 7% of our culture’s effort and resource being directed to that 7% of male victims?

It is because men are not human, and don’t matter. The purposeful burying of male impacting sexual or other violence is utterly craven. For those of you male readers subject to past or ongoing domestic violence, take it quietly, because you don’t exist. Also, female readers with a male colleague, friend or family member subject to past or ongoing abuse, your male family members don’t exist either.

Alexander Abad Santos asks in his Atlantic Wire article “[Earl Silverman] killed himself because a men’s abuse shelter shut down?”

And now, as to a slow-witted toddler, this inane question will be answered. No, he killed himself because after 20 years of seeking any public help addressing the real problem of male-impacting domestic violence in the form of shelter or other services, he met almost nothing except obstruction, denial and a callous indifference from an industry with the public slogan “don’t ignore it”.

The domestic violence shelter industry takes great pains to ignore roughly half the problem, because the female victim/male perpetrator narrative is the one which makes money. In fact, the current model of male-only abusers and female-only victims is so deeply false that continued fidelity to it is guaranteed to keep domestic violence happening, supplying an ongoing stream of damaged bodies and minds.

It keeps the money flowing too, doesn’t it Alexander?

Fighting domestic violence by pretending it is sexually one sided is about as useful as fighting a structure fire by spraying water on only the north and east facing walls, and letting the south and west walls burn freely.

What of the grief and exhaustion of a man who tried for two decades to get the funding for one single men’s shelter in a nation with hundreds of publicly funded women’s shelters? What about his suicide death?

“Well, isn’t that a shame?” is the gloating commentary from Abad-Santos and the Atlantic Wire. This recalls the spontaneous and sarcastic recital of “Cry me a river” by the Toronto feminist protester “Big Red” on mention that men commit suicide at a rate four times higher than women in Canada.

Of course, Abad Santos cultivates his own plausible deniability with the benevolent granting that oh! Some men really are abused, and somebody really should do something to raise awareness. But not too much awareness, because as we all know, compared to women, the menz problem is a teeny tiny one.

Citing Salon’s Mary Elizabeth Williams he adds: “Yet where Silverman came up short was in perpetuating the Men’s Rights movement’s fiction that there’s any gender equity as far as violence and victims.”

So it’s right back to not existing for the male half of the victims of domestic violence. Suck it up guys, and if you’re going to kill yourselves, don’t leave your corpse somewhere inconvenient. If you’re male, you’re disposable, and nobody gives a rat-fuck. Citing Abad-Santos again:

“Is there still a backlash? Well, MRM advocates and activists are upset with the news.”

Well, nobody gives a rat-fuck about a Earl’s grief, exhaustion and suicide except Men’s Human Rights Activists.

Well, sure, men are subject to DV, but its a lesser problem, despite the research showing reciprocity of abuse.

Well, as long as nobody important is ever allowed to feel a twinge of conscience, 80% male suicide is no big deal.

Well, as long as the money keeps flowing, using a fraudulent model to pretend to combat domestic violence is just fine. Right?

Well, as long as nobody NOTICES that the DV industry preserves the status quo for the money.

And Abad Santos finally points to AVfM which, he claims

“sort of turns on feminism, and turned gender equality into a perpetrator.”

No, we don’t “sort of” turn on feminism. We identify it clearly as the prevailing ideology of gender in western culture, and further note its core foundations of violence and hatred. Concerning “…turned gender equality into a perpetrator,” gender equality is nowhere to be found, except in the equal rates of domestic violence known to everybody from Erin Pizzey, the founder of the first women’s shelter – and, all the way to Mary Koss, whose fraud informed the CDC’s number-cooking 2010 report.

Abad Santos closes with “Surely, this was a man going through financial hardship, who struggled to keep his passion project afloat, who took his own life. But nobody has to believe that feminism can kill, or facts that aren’t true.”

“passion project”

Earl took his hobby too seriously. Maybe he should have built model railroads instead, or bonsai. Maybe stamp collecting.

Despite all the lying, denial and obfuscation, what neither Abad Santos not any other gender ideologue can conceal is the panic to prop up a false narrative which doesn’t just produce male and female carnage, it makes its proponents money. The innocent-decorative-female victim, and the big-bad-violent-male-aggressor is the public message which grips emotions and opens wallets. That narrative must be preserved, no matter how much human carnage of male and female victims it produces.

The panic among its proponents is that this old, false narrative is increasingly recognized as a fraud, perpetuating human harm for the cash it generates. The domestic violence grievance industry is ever more obvious as an industry of human damage for money. Silverman’s corpse was just small change.

But Abad-Santos was at least partly correct. “nobody has to believe that feminism can kill”.

Indeed, nobody has to believe it, even while our male friends, our sons, our brothers, and male colleagues die. We can still deny, and all it will cost is a few dead friends and relatives.

For those who, unlike the gender ideologues in the DV industry, somehow manage to give a rat-fuck about the invisible half of the victims, or about addressing the current broken, ineffective, and one-sided non-solution of pretending only half the problem exists: you can help to fund the re-establishment of Earl’s shelter as the Earl Silverman Center.


But if that seems like too much effort, you can just gloat over the damaged and the dead, like Alexander Abad-Santos. See if somebody will pay you for it.


  • AVFM seeks app writer volunteer

    Are you an MHRA? Can you write apps for iPhone and Android? Are you willing to do that for AVFM on a special project? Please contact us.

    A Voice for Men seeks a volunteer with solid app writing experience to help us develop an app that will be linked to the AVFM brand. If you have the qualifications and are serious about following through, we would love to hear from you. Your efforts could be of great assistance to this website and to our cause. Please contact Paul Elam at for more details...

  • Wikimasters, Editors, Translators, and Writers Wanted *Apply Now*

    Fight Wikipedia censorship! Add to and improve the AVfM Reference Wiki. Volunteers needed for writing, proofreading, and organizing. Some knowledge of the German language will be helpful but *not* required.

    Please create an account and then follow instructions here

  • Imdefender

    Well John why don’t you tell us what you’re really thinking ?

    I find the Tag “Really Sick Feminist Shit” quite fitting

    • Near Earth Object

      Your sense of humor, imdefender—it is very welcome.

      Correct. The tag is quite fitting.

      I see that your computer is holding strong. Good!

  • Howard Gordan

    Feminists’ mantra of there being a “war on women” by anyone that dares to expose the truth about discrimination against men have now extended that to those that die for men’s causes. Yes dead men too oppress and hate women it seems.

    • DarkByke

      You don’t need a week. They already were…..

  • Near Earth Object

    “Surely, this was a man going through financial hardship, who struggled to keep his passion project afloat, who took his own life. But nobody has to believe that feminism can kill, or facts that aren’t true.”— Alexander Abad-Santos

    Break the quote down and focus on the latter half:

    “But nobody has to believe that feminism can kill, or facts that aren’t true.”

    Focus on the last four words:

    “…facts that aren’t true.”

    What is a fact, Alexander Abad-Santos?

    Let me help you with that—fact: “something that actually exists; reality; truth”.

    Substitute the word fact, with the dictionary definitions above and you get:

    1. But nobody has to believe that feminism can kill, or ‘something that actually exists’ that aren’t true.

    2. But nobody has to believe that feminism can kill, or ‘reality’ that aren’t true.

    3. But nobody has to believe that feminism can kill, or ‘truth’ that aren’t true. (my personal favorite)

    But nobody has to believe that feminism can kill, or apples that aren’t apples.

    Nobody has to believe that feminism can kill, though feminism kills.

    * * * * * * * * * *
    Nice piece John!

    • feeriker

      But nobody has to believe that feminism can kill, or facts that aren’t true.”

      “Facts that aren’t true?” Hey, Abozo-Santos, are you familiar with the term oxymoron, moron?


    • Sanguifer

      “Facts that are not true”, a.k.a. “bullshit facts”, a.k.a. a figure of speech that comes up about 50 times in every article here about the “facts” about DV that feminist bloggers, writers etc. provide – and a quite valid one.

      That is quite petty of You two.

      • Near Earth Object

        Your argument was all but lost after you wrote this:
        “…comes up about 50 times in every article here…”
        Lost after you wrote this:
        “…quite petty of You two.”
        And irretrievably lost after you wrote this:

        If Alexander Abad-Santos is unable to write what he means, and mean what he writes, then what is the value of what he is communicating?
        Not much—nothing!
        Just like your reply.

        Enjoy the balance of your day.

  • externalangst

    Anyone in any doubt that Feminism is a hate movement? Their sleazy sycophants aren’t just following orders.

    • JJ

      Manboobs Futrelle, this douche in Canada, and others are all gloating.

      At least so they think.

      But what they fail to notice is that we have grown significantly these last few years. They murdered Earl, but it only steels our resolve. I can’t afford to give much, in a vicious custody battle and pursuing an engineering degree, but I will give to Earl’s shelter what I can.

      In the future, I will be donating a portion to this on a regular basis; I imagine others will too. It starts out small with sycophantic pussies like this douche and futrelle taking their potshots because we can’t hit back to hard; at least not yet.

      However, if and when we are in a full grown movement in the future; Dave and his super-pussy friends will be no where to be found.

      These assholes are only brave kicking people when they are down and being pushed around by those stronger than they could ever be themselves.

      When we are more unified, and monolithic in force; Manboobs Futrelle and this cock bag in Canada will become Crickets in a quiet field of feminist non existence.

      They won’t dare raise their heads to gloat, nor brave an apology; they know it won’t be wanted or needed to be heard.

      • lensman

        Could you please provide a link/screenshot/scan for the whole “Futrelle gloats” thing?

        Sorry, it’s just this is something I file under “I have to see to believe”.

        • JJ

          Hi dave.

          • lensman

            You can ask Paul Elam, or one of the site’s administrators to check my IP address, and verify that it comes from a Greek ISP.

            Look, Futrelle could be privately having a karaoke champagne party over this for all we know. But unless there is some solid proof, an article, a forum post, a comment, or something of the sort, something that you get a record via screenshot (Press PRTSC) or scan, it’s a really bad idea to say something like “Manboobz Gloats Over This”.

            I am not doubting the rest of what you say, but if you’ve spotted Manboobz gloating over a man’s suicide, you should make a record of this and share it with everybody else here.

            As I said I really want to see this.

          • JJ

            Thanks for the reply. Have deleted that part of the comment.

    • Near Earth Object

      “Anyone in any doubt that Feminism is a hate movement?”

      Seeing red: the same old hate movement
      by Alex Hunt [His 1st AVfM article]

  • externalangst

    Just been reading the comments on Alexander Abad-Santos’ article at The Atlantic Wire. The comments were around 45 to 1 against Alexander’s hit piece. Most gratifying. The times are changing.

  • tom b

    I’d also like to add that in a recent BBC article which sites “The suicide rate among middle-aged Americans rose 28% in a decade, a new report from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has found.” they completely left out the fact that most of these suicides are MEN. Nowhere in the article did it identify men.

    • Theseus

      Yeah, isn’t that a huge steaming pile of double standards? Can you picture any scenario where any article in the western world, would ever leave out a detail like that if the numbers were reversed? Shit they would be screaming it from the roof tops!

      I am so sick of the reaction from willfully ignorant idiots when you point out these indisputably gigantic double standards to them…like the reaction to male suicide rates, women on national TV laughing about male genital mutilation, T-shirts that tell little girls to throw rocks at male children ( it’s so funny tee-hee). Yet you will get these fools that say: “Duhhhh,what male disposability? Duhhhhh” even after you have gone to the trouble to give them all of the above mentioned examples. It’s like someone looking at you with a straight face and acting like black is white and up is down.

      • JinnBottle

        “…women on national TV laughing about male genital mutilation, T-shirts that tell little girls to throw rocks at male children…”

        These are the two that still have me standing amazed, after all these years: the former because it says practically nothing about feminists (professional men-haters), but says worlds about the average idiot-box-watching, American woman and what she has become…or what she has been all along??

        The latter because, *isn’t there a goddam fucking law somewhere, anywhere, that puts someone goading **children** to deadly violence, against other **children**, in gaol, rather than in clover??*

        • Theseus

          These two examples are so foul that I have an extremely intolerant attitude with any person that makes like these things aren’t a big deal.

          Any man that sat home and laughed gleefully at a woman having her clitoris cut off and ground up, would be considered a monster. So, I say that all the women in the audience and across the nation that did exactly that (especially that cunt Sharon Osborne), are fucking amoral piece of shit scumbags. But a large number of these self same idiots have an expectation that men should protect them, and drop what they are doing in order to put them first. Unbelievable.

          • JinnBottle

            I had thought & expected that, after that “Talk” segment and Osbourne’s backhanded non-apology, she would have gone into hiding in some cave back in Australia, at the very least. But a couple of months ago, I walk in, my wife was watching “Dancing With The Stars” or somesuch shit, and there she is, in all her overfed, sly feline glory, *judging* on that program.

            That clinched it as far as wondering about the true nature of the average Anglo-Amercan woman.

            Speaking of the original “Talk” episode, and its non-apology followup:

            Asian-American Bitch Whateverhername is (on the original segment): “Men: Hold onto your seats, because we *are* going to ‘go there’….”

            AAB (on the followup fuck-you apology segment, a week later): “Let’s move on.”

            Only, American TV-watcherwomen never seem to.

        • Theseus

          “Let’s move on”

          Kettle to pot, come in pot.

          I’m a pretty fair person and try as I might, I can not picture a scenario in where a male counterpart to Osbourne in a similar situation WOULDN’T be a pariah. He would have a target on him, feminists and the media would still be railing about him and the other participants in the show (with all the drama and outrage to shake the world), he would have IMMEDIATELY been shit canned from that show along with the rest of the panel, and he would never, never, never, work in Hollywood, or the film/entertainment industry again.

          Oh, BTW the “artist” that got rich off peddling filth like the rock throwing T-shirts basically tried to take a “It’s just a joke” tact to some of the criticism. I do remember however, that one reporter directly challenged that attitude and hypocrisy in an interview….it was basically something like “OK if it’s all in fun, I assume that you are going to be coming out with something about girls in a similar vein, right”? Of course the so called artist just dodged the question and gave some jibberish for an answer.

      • tom b

        Update on the stats I’d mentioned. Yahoo posted an article …

        “Eight million Americans report suicidal thoughts, and 1.1 million will attempt suicide. An estimated 38,000 will succeed in killing themselves, according to the CDC. Most are male, by a four to one margin, and are single and lack a college education.
        “Men tend to be more lonely and have a harder time maintaining and replacing relationships than women, especially when they get into middle age,” said Draper. “Men are busy working or tie their relationships to work and when they lose their job, they lose their relationships.”

        • Ben

          Men tie their relationships to their work, so when they lose their jobs they lose their relationships? It actually said that? That doesn’t even make sense no matter how much you strain. How about: women tie a man’s social value and fitness for dating to his earnings, so when he loses his job, she loses attraction to him and dumps him. Therefore when men lose their jobs, they lose their relationships.

          There. I made it make logical sense.

          Can you honestly picture a man losing his job and coming home to say, “honey, we must break off the relationship at this point; I lost my job and I associate my job with you. Sorry, but you must leave. My job, my girlfriend, they are just sort of clumped all together, you see, sweetie?”

          • tom b

            Definately adds another dimension to it

    • feeriker

      This CBS News article online from the earlier this week actually does break it down by sex, but only in passing. Clearly they’re trying to stay away from the obvious implications of what this disparity points out, but given that CBS is one of Amerika’s four primary state-serving propaganda/disinformation fonts, that’s not surprising at all.

      • prince_tybalt

        Seemed to me like the picture facts highlighted women more than men. I didn’t bother reading the facts attached to them, just the people in the pictures.

  • Iron John

    “The panic among its proponents is that this old, false narrative is increasingly recognized as a fraud, perpetuating human harm for the cash it generates. The domestic violence grievance industry is ever more obvious as an industry of human damage for money.”

    It sure as heck is. I wonder what the feminists will do when people figure out that feminism is not actually a social movement at all. Feminism is actually a drug, like crack or speed. It is an emotional addiction. An addiction that comes in two very potent forms:

    Hate and Victimhood.

    Look on any feminist forum, website, blog, and you will see substance abusers of all kinds. Junkies who can’t function at all without their daily fix. A fix which is provided to them by a network of dedicated dealers who make sure the customers keep coming back for one more hit no matter what damage they do to themselves and the communities they are involved in. And maybe that is the real goal of the manufacturers of this pharmaceutical grade stimulant.

    We the M(H)RM need not be in the business of battling evil, but rather in the rehab business. If we can do that, feminism doesn’t stand a chance. No more junkies, means no more cash. No more cash, means no more carnage. And no more carnage means we can all go home and have normal lives again.

    More on this later…

    P.S. I would like to thank Fidelbogen and Typhon Blue for helping me realize this idea.

  • Dr. F (Ian Williams)

    To Alexander Abad-$anto$ of The Atlantic Wire, my letter to you through the Ca$h-regi$ter Tran$lator.

    Dear Alexander Abad-$antos of The Atlantic Wire.

    A$ an MHRA, dedicated to raising awarene$$ to other$ the horrendou$ way thing$ are right now for half of the population in the we$tern world, I a$k you look at a fi$cal matter you might not have con$idered and that i$ thi$.

    Your well meaning articulation a$ publi$hed recently on The Atlantic Wire of your reality as you genuinely $ee it, doe$ not addre$$ a fi$cal payment that will be demanded one day from a different reality. Thi$ matter need$ you attention.

    One day, in your lifetime, that other ver$ion of reality will tell you of an unplea$ant fi$cal re$ult borne from ma$$ abandonment.

    Abandonment will come from many who $ee an ideology in a different way your reality present$ it, and will therefore by ethical con$ideration choo$e to ab$tain from working harder to $upport immediate family member$ who al$o $hare your current reality.

    Abandonment will come from many who differ from your reality and choo$e not to contribute to a governance that relie$ on dispo$able unit$ ri$king their live$ to $upport that governance.

    Abandonment will come from many who have cho$en a new reality where they con$ume le$$ accoutrement$ required to help $upport that governance.

    Abandonment will come from many who lay down tool$ in the industrie$ of dome$tic violence, the court $y$tem, $chool admini$tration, adverti$ing, media entertainment and other indu$trie$ currently $upporting that governance.

    The abandonment will occur en ma$$e and I a$k you to con$ider this impending reality with it$ different fi$cal reality in the light of your recent publication on The Atlantic Wire.

    My motivation for thi$ letter to you i$ for your consideration only, and will not be $hared by anyone beyond your wall$ that retain your current reality.

    Your$ truly.
    Ian William$

  • Dean Esmay

    In a fitting tribute to Earl, Strix and I have done a massive update to the wiki on the subject of domestic violence:

    But there’s room for plenty more in there. Indeed, surveying what’s there, it’s hard not to start misting up: we’re talking about decades and decades of research here all pointing to the same thing: women are actually somewhat more likely to initiate domestic violence, and the overall perpetration rate between men and women is more or less the same, with only minor apparent deviations around the world.

    The fact that this has been so overwhelmingly well-documented and so effectively brushed under the carpet for so bloody long is unspeakably horrible.

    • Near Earth Object

      “The fact that this has been so overwhelmingly well-documented and so effectively brushed under the carpet for so bloody long is unspeakably horrible.”

      … and a crime against hu(man)ity.

      I appreciate all that you do, Dean, and I really like that you have liked this article to AVfM wiki. In time, it would be great to see that become a kind of standard practice. Article > more on this and related subject matters at AVfM wiki.

    • Ben

      That is freaking outstanding, Dean. Thanks! I just graduated and am still looking for a job, so I don’t have money for a donation or I would send one.

  • herman melville

    As long as the DV movement specifically and feminism generally are ignoring science, I suppose the question has to be asked, “What’s next? Creationism? Flat earth? The four humors? The earth is 4,000 years old?” I mean, why not? As long as we’re free to ignore the scientifically researched facts about DV, why stop there? As Richard Hofstadter pointed out, anti-intellectualism has a long history in this country and now we know, as he could not, that the DV movement and feminism have a well-earned a place in it – right there beside McCarthyism, evangelical Christianity and other movements who cheefully ignore science when it conflicts with their cherished beliefs.

  • http://none universe

    “The fact that this has been so overwhelmingly well-documented and so effectively brushed under the carpet for so bloody long is unspeakably horrible.”
    – No fucking kidding.

    ‘But…but…it’s not us feminists who did this. It was…those…those…’
    No amount of feminist deniability in recognizing women’s own surveyed self reporting of contributing to husband battering will hold up under the paper trail of individual feminists misleading the public over the issue of spousal violence being falsely engendered by one sex (male) as perpetrator only. You’re on the hook, girls.
    Feminism and individual feminists perpetuated the most active role in thwarting efforts to publicly recognize the more accurate peer reviewed literature regarding husband battering by violent wives thus depriving husbands of a equally available transition from their violent domestic companions. Perpetuated by individuals under the influence of a philosophy allegedly espousing “equality between the sexes”, yet.

    Earl Silverman was treated similarly by both an ex-wife and the adherents and practitioners of a provably false ideology. One violated his body. The others his worth and dignity. Both essentially tossed him to the elements outdoors.

    A , ‘We’re sorry. We wuz wrong’, from the feminist collective isn’t going to cut it. There’s blood and misery on their hands. You fucking feminist jerks and assholes – you owe this culture big time. Let me count thy ways. After prolonged public humiliations involving the dissemination of studied accuracy leading to your mass purging from public institutions we then continue with your money! Into the hands of your targets and into the public purse.

  • Robert St. Estephe

    Default dogma: When a woman kills her first husband we should assume it is due to her being a victim of domestic violence. When she afterwards kills her second husband we should assume it is due to her being a victim of domestic violence. When she afterwards kills her third husband we should assume it is due to her being a victim of domestic violence. … Fourth … Fifth …

    Dogma cannot survive when taboos in research are violated by those who refuse to be subservient hypnotized drones.

    The “Black Widow Serial Killers” list (the first time such a list has ever been attempted) now has 162 entries. (The list is based on the tiny fraction of digitized newspaper now available. More of these old papers are appearing every day.)

    It is a fact that many women are violent towards women (using acid, knives, guns, razor blades, meat cleavers, ice picks, hammers, etc.). Why is it so easy for people to believe that a woman will — by some sort of cosmic magical power — lose her violent instincts ONLY when in the presence of a husband or male sexual interest? Why is it so easy to believe a woman will find it impossible to tell a fib ONLY in the context of accusations of domestic violence and rape, yet we do not expect her to be 100% truthful in other contexts (anymore than we expect this of men in general?

    Collectivists just push “change” through indoctrination (government education control, lies, propaganda campaigns, “theory,” cultural constructivist fake historical narratives) to promote their authoritarian Great State utopian fantasies.

    The hoax of Herstory is collapsing.

    • feeriker

      The hoax of Herstory is collapsing.

      “Herstory” – LOVE IT!

  • scatmaster

    Great move changing the accompanying picture to this article but what happened to her 'yella' teeth.

  • Reis Drogman

    Gents and ladies, i thought i would leave this here. Its for a particular member here. I came across this quote from the femithiest:
    “Femitheist DivineSaturday, April 27, 2013 8:13:00 PM

    Lol, well, I don’t know if I’m supposed to mention this or not, but after the last time I came back, I made a mutual agreement with someone that I wouldn’t talk about them if they didn’t talk about me. There were also some legal “threats” made (lawyer-related).

    Since then I have maliciously abused that agreement, lol. They have half-kept their word, or at the very least, they haven’t tried putting up my info anywhere again, aside from the MRAs who recently tried to harass me in real-life a couple months ago (and failed).

    I don’t suspect my name will be going up anywhere on AVFM or RH, so I’m not too worried about it. I’ve pretty much come to realize that I can do and say just about anything I wish, lol.

    I have screen cap of the quotes as well.


  • Andrew S.

    I once made the mistake of trying to explain to the Manboobz degenerates why I found some solace in the Men Rights blogs and other anti-feminist blogs.

    I told them how my mother had killed my father and then killed herself. How my feminist mother had always put herself and what she wanted above her own children. How she was the most important person in her world, and when the relationship with my father being to crumble she once again put herself above anyone else and took my fathers life, then her own.

    I tried to explain to this group of empathy lacking sickos that my feminist aunts who were in various feminist/government/social justice fighting careers had basically shunned me and provided me with very little support when I needed it the most. And how when I went to my local mental health center to get help I found it found it full of feminist man hate, while also I developing a serious movement disorder because the feminists that were being employed didn’t care about my treatment. And also gained over 100 lbs when my brilliant feminist shrink thought she knew the right drug to treat my neck disorder.

    Of course I was called a liar and various other things, which I’m sure would not surprise anyone. No one was going to show me any compassion or any empathy I was told. One of them even had the nerve to tell that even if was telling the truth that it didn’t matter to me because I was a statistical anomaly. Of course I should have countered that in the grand scheme of things a bunch of mostly white middle/upper class Western women crying about the “glass ceiling” and other non-existent problems is a statistical anomaly in the history women suffering.

    The major key in fighting feminism and their hatred of men is continuing to show their lack of empathy and compassion for men. Most men will always side with women, and pretty much all women will always side with women, but if you can continue to show how little compassion they have for men and boys that this will be the key to get men to open their eyes.

    Of course I think you and other sites do a good of this, but I think 90% of the message should be “They don’t give a shit.”

  • Redfield

    John great article … Our Prime Minister recently made the statement one in three women would be raped in their lifetime in Australia.

    A cursory calculation on these figures assuming we have 12 million women in this country, and if you take a lifetime to mean 70 years, and you take an age range from 10 – 70 years (60 year spread), and 4 million women, this would mean an average of nearly 67,000 rapes in this country per year to bring it to the 1 in 3 horror statistic our PM quoted (in a lifetime). A quick glance on Wikipedia quoted a figure of 6378 recorded rapes/attempted rapes on women in this country in 2010, a disgusting outcome no matter how you look at it!
    But it is nearly an inflation of 1100% on the actual recorded rapes/attempted rapes and probably much more because this figure gives no breakdown between rapes/attempted rapes! So what our PM is saying on average, there are over 60,000 unreported rapes in this country every year? Well if this is true then I will put my time and energy into making the world safer for woman … But if it is a groundless statistical calculation fraudulently manufactured to elicit and misdirect public spending, is this not fraud and misuse of public money??

  • prince_tybalt

    Isn’t 1 in 71 1.41%, not 7%.

    Doesn’t take away from your argument (though “why isn’t 1.41% of resources…” in this case).

  • Drew Vox

    Has anyone written a story that basically responds to the common feminist argument “not all feminists are bad”? I hear this a lot and would love to see how others have destroyed this ridiculous argument. It seems to me that simply by identifying as a feminist you, by default, support a movement that regularly causes inequality for men.

    Here’s a response I received just today on this very subject: “I choose to identify as a feminist because I focus on those issues. I think it’s possible to be pro-equality, but to focus on the issues of a certain group of people.
    Just because some people assign certain harmful objectives to a movement doesn’t make those part of it automatically.”

    Anyone? Bueller? Fryyyyye?

    • prince_tybalt

      I typically refer to the “bad” feminists as “self-identified” feminists.

      To go with my usual christian/ideological example, if I talk about the west-boro baptists, I can call them self-identified Christians, so other Christians don’t feel lumped in with them and don’t feel the need to defend themselves (“Not all Christians are like that!”).

      Feel free to then discuss “bad” feminist view points vs their own/your own.

  • A Concerned Man

    Well at least they didn’t “aggressively film” anyone….

    • Near Earth Object

      The self-proclaimed “Dashing, quickdodging, maintaining zen” Rob Chamberland writes:

      “…a small group of men, among them one lone woman…”

      “The smaller group was easily identified as 7 or 8 folks involved with the women-hating MRA (Men’s Rights Activist) website called A Voice For Men (AVFM).”

      “I won’t discuss the lone woman.”

      At the risk of being accused of “targeting” Rob Chamberpot…

      How can Cheat refer to MRAs as women-hating, when they are accompanied by a women, which he does not want to discuss?

      This creature really does need to shave his face and start walking backwards…shit stems from his mouth.