Goldwag

The continuing education of Arthur Goldwag

Arthur Goldwag is still a liar, and still an unskilled one. In his May 15 edition of easily refutable nonsense, The SPLC advocate began with the following:

“The last issue of the SPLC’s Intelligence Report presented a scathing portrait of “a hard-line fringe” of the Men’s Rights Movement (MRM): “women haters whose fury goes well beyond criticism of the family court system, domestic violence laws, and false rape accusations,” whose rage is “directed at all women, not only perceived feminists.”

 

In those opening 57 words, Goldwag sells a number of falsehoods, a few of which are worth examination.

“…the SPLC’s Intelligence Report presented a scathing portrait of …”

Wrong, the SPLC presented a sloppily assembled misrepresentation of conservative organizations, including the Concerned Women of America, the Libertarian-leaning John Birch Society and Glen Beck, as well as second amendment activists. The SPLC’s hastily constructed list of disjointed enemies also included a pick-up artist calling himself Roosh V, an organization called Stop Abusive and Violent Environments, whose mandate is to aims to improve the effectiveness of domestic violence policy, as well as some elements of the men’s rights movement, including this site.

“…a hard-line fringe” of the Men’s Rights Movement (MRM)”

This intentional mischaracterization is intended to discredit this site and it’s contributors as outliers. Far from being a fringe, AVfM is the largest and highest-trafficked men’s rights site on the web. AVfM also hosts the largest online collection of original, men’s-rights-specific literature anywhere in the world. The contributing authors come from across the planet and represent numerous political, sexual, economic and ethnic backgrounds and points of view. To call this site a “fringe” of the growing human rights movement, the “so called men’s rights movement,” is a gross falsehood.

“…women haters…”

Oh dear, that old canard trotted out again?

This is based on the tired and sloppy argument (since Goldwag presents no other) that opposition to feminism and hatred of women are the same thing. Feminism, the ideology, and women, the group of people identifiable by their sex, of course are not the same, and not just because one is a biological demographic while the other is an ideological construct, the proponents of which are of any sex.

It is not even true to claim that feminism is a movement which serves or benefits women -although admittedly, most feminist advocates believe they are benefitting women. Treating an entire sexual demographic as if they are permanent children, powerless, locked into victimhood as a matter of identity – does not help them. It makes them easily manipulated stooges of whoever pretends to flatter and coddle them. Also, by pandering to the pseudo-celebrity privilege of victim-identity politics, it makes them easy to shake down for donations. Doesn’t it, Artie ol’ boy?

Interestingly, even as Goldwag clings to the notion that feminism and women are indistinguishable, he also manages to locate and cite a MRM blog[2] correctly pointing out that “Women are not feminism.” Goldwag, in his efforts to cherry pick and misrepresent quotes, managed to miss that this painfully simple idea has been a regular part of the rhetoric at AVfM[3][4] since its inception.

From the pages of AVfM…

“…implication that feminism and women are interchangeable synonyms is no more insulting to real feminists than [the] facile implication that criticism or disagreement with the ideology has no possible source except hatred towards women”

“This is why in my own writing, my answer to accusations of misogyny (the hatred of women) is to explain, as to a child, that a group of people (women) and an ideology (feminism) are not actually the same thing, and that opposition to an ideology, particularly one based on hatred or violence – does not translate to hatred of women.”

The logical refutation of the false claim that opposition to feminism equates to a hatred of women is documented at least as far back as 2007 in a document called the Anti-Male Shaming Tactics Catalog[5] This fallacy is listed in the catalog as “code black” or the Charge of Misogyny.

In spite of repetition on Youtube, on AVfM, on this guy’s blog[2], that is, repetition of the fact that feminism and women are two different things, one being an ideology, and the other being a group of people, Goldwag still can’t help himself. He categorizes his own article, in which he admits this most obvious fact, under the category “anti-woman.” Really.

The last falsehood (at least from the opening paragraph) is this choice nugget :

“…whose rage is directed at all women…”.

There are two lies here, but because I’ve already addressed the endlessly recycled lie that opposition to feminism is equal to hatred of women (feminism and women can also be distinguished by the spelling of the two words. Feminism starts with an F, for example)… rage will be addressed.

This is another circumstantial ad hominem. If individuals are angry, they usually have a reason. Sometimes the reason is difficult to discern, and must be guessed at. Someone mistreated and abused through childhood may carry anger through the rest of his or her life. To some, the source of that anger may be hard to ascertain. On the other hand, much of the black civil rights movement of the 1960′s was fuelled by anger, and the source of that anger was plainly obvious. Black civil rights activists were vocal, and repeatedly explained in excruciating detail that being denied civil rights and treated as subhuman was a major source of black anger. Similarly, the current men’s rights movement is also driven by a degree of anger.

Human beings dismissed as violent and hateful when they complain of the denial of basic human rights are quite naturally also angry at being lied to and being lied about. Arthur Goldwag, who writes for an organization which once protected human rights is now participating in the campaign of lies designed to silence human beings who are struggling for those same rights.

By characterizing legitimate anger as “rage,” Goldwag is attempting to kill two birds with one lie. First, he is attempting to pathologize the anger; to reframe it as dangerous and unhealthy. Second, he is attempting to lead people away from the issues driving the anger and deny human rights advocates an audience willing to listen objectively. Rage, used to describe human emotion, implies fault in the humans experiencing it, and elicits scorn for those expressing it. The word: rage, chosen by Goldwag, also implies violence, doesn’t it? He can’t quite get away with saying so directly, as the MRM is an avowedly non-violent human rights movement, but building a case for fear of human-rights bloggers works even by implication.

All of this from Goldwag’s first paragraph. 57 words conveying almost as many lies, however, a complete parsing of all of Goldwag’s dishonesty is not the point of this discussion.

Surprisingly, he does mention a radical feminist blog discussed at AVfM several times in the past, on which the radical feminist bloggers advocated male targeting eugenics, infanticide, boy-targeted child abuse and other hate fuelled violence and murder.

Following the SPLC’s first sloppy attempt to vilify the MRM, the fastest growing human rights movement in Western culture, the eugenics and murder enthusiasts at Radfem Hub began fund-raising on behalf of the SPLC, and Artie Goldwag himself confirmed the support of the SPLC for these prospective eugenicists and killers, by tweeting a link directly to their page featuring SPLC fund raising.

the SPLC supports murder advocates for donations
Who is a hate movement Arthur? Who? Have you looked in the mirror? Goldwag claims that AVfM’s founder and publisher, Paul Elam – and his colleagues (that would include me) read or represented Pam Oshaughnessy’s eugenics advocacy as a well-developed plan, calling us “obtuse” for the misrepresentation. However, he doesn’t cite any actual claim of a “well developed plan” on our part, probably because we never made any such claim. Obtuse is the word he used. Okay Arthur, if you say so.

Goldwag, although he mentions the eugenics enthusiasm and other hate driven violent rhetoric at Radfem Hub, somehow forgot to mention that after AVfM exposed that group of radical feminists open call for mass murder, and after they began fund raising for the SPLC, he endorsed their site and it’s content in a tweet to the SPLC fund raising page at radical hub. Oops. Obtuse, Arthur? Who? Us? Gentlemen and ladies, this is comedy that writes itself.

According to Cathy Brennan, the owner of radical hub site featuring calls for child murder, extermination, and eugenics – and where male human beings are discussed as an agricultural product, she said:

“I don’t hate men, [...] I have a father, I have a brother, I have a son. The war that Paul Elam is waging is in his head”

 

Such is what she offers for proof she doesn’t hate men. She is related to some. Will this work as a defense against the charge of misogyny as well? I have a mother, therefore I can’t hate women?

This statement is also somewhat at odds with the private registration of the domain-name “paulelam.com” by Brennan, and the redirection of that domain name to the Radfem Hub hate and violence advocacy blog. Apparently Mr. Elam’s head covers a lot of territory, including at least some of the terrain in the head of Brennan herself.

Oh, and in addition to having a father, a brother and a son, Brennan also has a blog which calls for their genetic modification. “If we can do it with corn, men should be easy.”

Brennan also claimed that the infamous manifesto by Valerie Solanas calling for male extermination was a piece of Swiftian satire, not to be taken seriously, and that interpretations of that “satire” as a serious call for hate and killing reflected failed comprehension by “so called men’s rights advocates”.

This claim ignores the fact that the author of the Society for Cutting Up Men Manifesto followed her authorship of that famously incendiary hate and violence by shooting the artist Andy Warhol, among others. It also ignores the continued references by modern feminists to the document which began with: ”The male is an incomplete female, a walking abortion, aborted at the gene stage. To be male is to be deficient, emotionally limited; maleness is a deficiency disease.”

SCUM Manifesto derived conferences and projects continue to be held by funded and organized feminists worldwide, including a 2011 conference in Australia[6], and a Swedish theatre company adapting Solanas’s hate manifesto for Swedish school children using a realistically staged public execution of a man to promote their event, followed by the call, “Do your part.”

Brennan claims to view the manifesto calling for male extermination as nothing more than satire. This claim contradicted by promotion of Australia’s feminist “SCUM” conference on Cathy Brennan’s blog, Radical Hub. Oopsie, caught you lying again, Cathy. Arthur Goldwag somehow missed this connection, too. Blame those darned misogyny coloured goggles.

Of course, all the rhetorical mummery from Goldwag and his fellow rent-seekers at the SPLC reflect the fact that while the Southern Poverty Law Center once served an important task, helping to greatly diminish the power of the KKK in the United States in the 1960′s and 70′s, that former human rights organization did their job so well they’re now grasping for continued relevance. Ironically, because those human rights struggles were fought from the political left 40 years ago, that still left-leaning law firm, with their two palatial high rise office complexes and gigantic budget cannot see that the fastest growing human rights movement in America today is the one they’re fighting against. And why? Because men’s activist don’t express themselves in a way in which bigots would approve. The SPLC has become the monster they used to slay.

Arthur Goldwag can’t see this, because he is an ideologue, and because he is a liar.

[1] http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2012/05/15/intelligence-report-article-provokes-outrage-among-mens-rights-activists/
[2] http://www.ofmb.org/2012/03/word-on-radfems-splc-and-ugly-hypocrisy.html
[3] http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/clementine-ford-calling-fellow-feminists-stupid/
[4] http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/feminist-lies-feminism/fear-and-loathing/
[5] http://www.dumpyourwifenow.com/2007/03/01/the-anti-male-shaming-tactics-catalog/]
[6] http://allecto.wordpress.com/2011/07/24/scum-conference-draft-program/

About John Hembling (JtO)

John Hembling is Policy Director and Editor-at-Large for AVfM. John is also the co founder of the Community Organized Compassion and Kindness Foundation, which is dedicated to the human rights of individuals through justice and compassion. As "John The Other," he is also the Sword of Damocles, dangling like the promise of death above the irrational ideas of gender ideologues, white knights and other social diseases. JtO is FTSU personified.

Main Website
View All Posts
  • Rad

    manufactured reddit hate page? paulelam.com redirect?

    Reactions like that only confirm you’re doing it right.

    Keep at it.

  • http://jmnzz.wordpress.com Jared White

    I like how he says the radfem quotes were cherry picked…while those who supply him with his “information” about the MRM are Futrelle and the SRS reddit.

    I like how SRS has to create throwaway accounts and make hateful posts and comments and then link to them as if actual MRAs said them.

    The MRM is made up of nothing but woman haters! Just wait until I’m done writing all of the bad things they say and THEN you’ll see!

    Pathetic…

    The thing I like the most is how BLOG COMMENTS are supposedly worse than the actual legal discrimination men face thanks in large part to feminism.

    Yeah. The MRM is bad because of some blog comments. But all of those laws that strip men of their civil rights that feminism supports and is responsible for?

    Well just don’t look at all of that.

    LOOK AT THESE MISOGYNISTIC BLOG COMMENTS!!

    • Paul Elam

      • http://jmnzz.wordpress.com Jared White

        Couldn’t have said it better myself, Paul.

        Oh wait… :)

    • DruidV

      This is one of the easiest, and most demonstrable examples one can use, to help deconstruct the femunist’s flawed, hypocritical way of thinking. (Because it really isn’t logical thinking at all, it’s feeling projected as fact.)

      Logical fallacy is the very cornerstone of modern femunism, and nothing screams it to the masses quite like comment mining for proof of how “bad” we MRA’s all truly are.

      Even if was widely accepted that we are indeed “bad”, because of our comments (it is, in fact), it still never occurs to these enlightened elite that perhaps there is some very real reason for all that “hate” (truth) the MRM “spews” (presents in a calm, logical manner).

      While the A.O. files actually are a very good and quite revealing look into the baseless hatred for males embraced and accepted by nearly every western female old enough to speak now, I think it’s safe to say that within the MRM, we at least make an honest effort to deal with “Just the facts, ma’am…”.

      Of course, truth is not lending itself to the position of our opposition and they can feel the temperature dropping in the room with each passing day, as they try to pass off and push their viktymhood onto others.

      It has indeed begun to wear very thin.

      That pointing out their fallacies is perceived as hatred from us, is merely the mighty powers of their projection, hard at work as well as more factual evidence for us, to boot.

      As always, the truth will out, eventually. (Nothing stopping us from continuing to speed up this process tho…)

  • http://fathersunionaustralia.com/wp/ quolls

    Feminism is bigoted, treacherous, treasonous and despotic!

  • Rper1959

    Thanks for this JTO, I am interested in ” Cathy Brennan, the owner of radical hub site ” you mention? I have not heard of her before , and don’t recall her being noted in the agent orange files.

    I have some weeks ago submitted a complaint to the Australian Sex Discrimination Commissioner naming the radicalhub site and local feminist Betty McLellan as respondants. The grievances against the site were it’s comments policy and general incitement of hatred toward men. I was under the impression that the domain owner was an Australian? If you have more details on this please let me know and I will send an update to my complaint to the Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission.

  • napocapo69

    A stunning example of hatred of males.
    Smearing of MRAs, no evidence of misogyny and absolutely no signs of criticism of feminism and females attitudes. Males are bad!
    Thanks for the article.

    This man deserves a good wage.

  • Codebuster

    The SPLC has become the monster they used to slay.

    These people harp on and on about Thomas Ball inciting violence in his manifesto – I haven’t been following his story in any detail, so I’m not qualified to comment further about him. However, the simple fact is that in this increasingly global pogrom of sexism against men, war has been declared on men by governments the world over, along with the likes of the SPLC, and I am reminded of that famous Thomas Jefferson quote: “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.” Of course the SPLC and feminists will try to paint Thomas Ball and anyone else who disagrees with them as abusive thugs and/or misogynists. Clearly, they are not American patriots. They are the new tyrants and they will lie to achieve their own ends.

    Expect these goons to lie and to deny. Whatever the truth is about Thomas Ball and, for example, said allegations of child abuse… one thing we will know with 100% certainty… these goons will take whatever happened out of context, they will fabricate lies around it, and then milk it for everything they can. Always.

    • Poester99

      The SPLC’s all about the money now, any Justice they manage to seek, even by accident is a distant second to the big dollar signs in their eyes.

      • http://fathersunionaustralia.com/wp/ quolls

        Exactly, it’s a money machine.

  • http://fathersunionaustralia.com/wp/ quolls

    Feminism is bigoted, treacherous, treasonous and despotic undeclared war.
    Feminism is about control and manipulation, its crowning achievement is ABORTION, an ideal is the sum of its maxims, the axiom of feminism it is an abortion, if a feminist believes in abortion by this premise accept their maxima of self abortion.
    Feminism’s self destruction is inevitable!
    As was Russia’s psychopathic socialist model, Russia is a rich culture, continent and country, it’s down fall was a false psychopathic ideology, as is feminism psychopathic.
    We are exposing large flaws in their ideology more and more, hopefully we can destroy it before it destroys us.
    The real evil if the corrupt bureaucracies and judiciaries that are infected and praying on kids.

    • http://fathersunionaustralia.com/wp/ quolls

      Like all war, is upto you, move fast and break things.

  • http://avoiceformen.com backdatdonkeyup

    SPLC is an organization I had never heard of until this year, co-incidentally just days after my computer started becoming an MRA (for reasons of plausible deniablilty, now that I am a bona-fide hate group proponent(How exciting)).
    There is a list of new acronyms I reflexively scowl at now, If I were to walk into a feminist sabbat I would be the eyebrow-dancing kids off the cadbury commercial (or, /watch?v=6Zx39v3JUUI).
    btw, Does anyone know what feminism is fighting for anymore? And what is the best resource to give someone to shoot down the pay gap myth.

    • scatmaster
      • DruidV

        Funny how the irony of this article is far too ironic for any of us to ignore as it lands squarely upon the oppositions’ heads, yet is still vehemently ignored and instead couched in flowery, “empowerment for vyktymized wimminz!!!” language.

        “Pedestrian” would be a compliment to this line of reasoning.
        “Sophomoric” is a far better descriptor;

        Quote:
        “because women choose low working hours, more time off, more safety, convenience, more freedom. This might be a wise choice, but it is not good for maximizing income.” End quote.

        So, let me see if I’m following correctly here:

        Apparently, being a slacker who is afraid of her own shadow and who values just doing whatever the Hell she wants to, whenever the Hell she wants to; like for example fucking off all day on her computer/cell phone/fingernails, while on company time, or just bailing whenever the Hell she wants to, leaving others (Men) pick up her slack, is somehow deemed “wise” by these same people who also feel the need to inform us that if she should choose to behave this way, she may actually earn less.

        Still a bit confused by that utter convolution of thought, I must admit.

        “Wise” is not my first choice of adjectives, here.
        The word “retarded” springs readily to mind tho…

        • Lee

          Hmm..I’m not sure that’s what they meant. When you agree to work for an employer, normally you start off knowing things like expected duties and hours. I believe what they meant was that women tend to be more attracted to the jobs that are not as demanding, are safer and more flexible despite the lower wage, whereas men tend to be willing to work longer and harder etc. for higher wages.

  • AntZ

    Thorough and powerful.

  • http://mrafront.blogspot.com/ MRA.

    “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. But we did call out specific examples of misogyny and the threat, overt or implicit, of violence.”

    SPLC labeled the MRM as misogyny which by definition is “hatred, dislike, or mistrust of women.”

    Now tell us Arthur what part of what you wrote you don’t understand ?

    By the way we know the reason behind the SPLC, Agent Orange file, so don’t come now trying to make up the true, using excuses from Cathy Brennan as facts, Agent Orange files are not about a bunch of women hating the male sex online, is about women with political power power and in charge of children AKA boys hating the male sex.

    • Kimski

      “so don’t come now trying to make up the true, using excuses from Cathy Brennan as facts”

      We’ve seen that before, haven’t we?
      A woman goes on trial for killing her husband or children today, and is let off the hook based solely on her own testimony.
      It seems to be the rule more than the exception, that society refuse to hold any of them responsible for their own actions.
      And that is exactly what we’re witnessing being played out here: Cathy Brennan and the rest of the RadFems obviously has ‘issues’, and should therefore not be held accountable.

    • ThoughtCriminal

      “By the way we know the reason behind the SPLC, Agent Orange file, so don’t come now trying to make up the true, using excuses from Cathy Brennan as facts, Agent Orange files are not about a bunch of women hating the male sex online, is about women with political power power and in charge of children AKA boys hating the male sex.”

      What the man said. We already heard about how you got the word from your homegirls at the radfemhub,then they paid you to mangina up and write a hit piece on us because they were too incompetent and morally corrupt to do it,and because frankly,when compared to them we look like the boy scouts.

      • http://mrafront.blogspot.com/ MRA.

        Arthur is doing what every other white knight does, come to the rescue of the femis on Radfem, Radfem can’t make a reasonable response to us, and Arthur is just PRETENDING to make a response by them.

  • Kimski

    Arthur Goldtwat and his associates are just another bunch of pigs trying to get their snouts in the trough. By doing so, they are effectively selling out basic human rights for one half of the demographic, along with any credibility the SPLC might ever have had.

    “Also, by pandering to the pseudo-celebrity privilege of victim-identity politics, it makes them easy to shake down for donations. Doesn’t it, Artie ol’ boy?”

    Priceless.

    I can’t help wondering how long this hate ideology of feminism would survive, if it were denied the finances stolen from men, who have absolutely no incentive to support their own degradation to second class citizens in western societies?
    As with so many other things, ‘the empowered and entitled’ are not even able to pay the bills, for what they demand for themselves only.

    My guess as to how long would be something along the lines of: ‘Now you see it, now you don’t.’or ‘a blink of an eye’.
    It has always been a lot easier to make demands, when someone else has to pay the price.

  • http://forsakeneagle.blogspot.com/ ForsakenEagle

    How they can be the very thing they hate and not even realize is beyond me. Maybe they do realize it, but rationalize that since they are OBVIOUSLY the good guys they can do whatever they want. SPLC supporting eugenics and gender-cide? I think Goldwag would like to send that very message.

    Through these bigots into the light of day. Who knows, they might even catch fire being the societal vampires they are.

  • Arvy

    “Arthur Goldwag is still a liar, and still an unskilled one.”

    Oh, I dunno about that. History tells us that the “skill” required for successful propaganda consists largely in reiterating a big lie constantly and incessantly. Goldwag seems adept at implementing that lesson.

    Neither facts nor logical argumentation have anything to do with it. And that’s someting that many in the MRM seem often to overlook in their enthusiasm (skill?) for presenting themselves as rational opponents.

    Not suggesting that we should all be liars. Just pointing out that success often involves types of skills other than those we may be inclined to admire most.

  • Murphy

    What’s also fascinating is that the SPLC article is attracting a vast amount of critical comment from a most unexpected source: feminists.

    http://ladyatheist.tumblr.com/post/23206225919/southern-poverty-law-center-quotes-anti-trans-bigot

    I swear to God I cannot stop laughing.

    It must have all looked so easy to Arthur when he first wrote the SPLC piece, “this is great, this is GREAT…”, he must have chuckled to himself, “I’ve written loads about conspiracy nuts and hate groups, but no-one’s ever heard of the illuminati, and these guys are great, it’ll be like shooting fish in a barrel.”

    And then all hell broke loose. The fish started shooting back, bullets flying everywhere. “Don’t worry, stick to your guns,” Arthur must have said to himself, “remember – you’re the Goldwagster – I’ll just draft a little follow-up piece.”

    And then the feminists start shooting from behind, “fucking hell,” says Arthur, “where the fuck did that come from? What the fuck’s a transphobe?”

    Dear oh dear Mr Goldwag, what have you done sir? Quoting a bigot in your defense? What WERE you thinking of?

  • FacelessFather

    The SPLC just handed the MRM a huge victory. The mere act of responding to the outcry is an admission of our growing clout and the legitimacy of our movement. Please keep up the good work SPLC..we grow fat from your irrational fears.

  • keyster

    The “privilaged white male class” is held to a different standard. As long as the MRM chooses to subjectively criticize and analyze women as group, they will be labeled a “Hate Movement”. And to PC Thought Police liberals when you criticize feminism, your are by extension criticizing women.

    The Double-Standard is NOT going away anytime soon.

    Just like when you criticize the NAACP or National Action Network or The Rainbow Coalition, you must HATE black people. Or if you’re against gay marriage you HATE gays. Or if you’re against government funded contraception and/or abortion, you want to “deny women access to health care”. OR if you’re against VAWA you must be FOR violence against women.

    See how it works?

    These protected “Victim Grievance Groups” are all fighting predominantly the same identifiable enemy; hetero-normative privilaged white male hegemony. But you’ll NEVER hear any of the “legitimate” ones come out and say WHITE PEOPLE or MEN, like they once did (before anyone had the courage to throw it back in their faces).

    As the MRM evolves it also needs to refine it’s positioning to take a more “sophisticated” tone, or it will remain among the New Black Panthers, the White Power movement and the RadFem Hub – - on the loony fringes.

    Feminism and certianly women in general, CANNOT be the opposing force against men and boys. They’re a protected class and men and boys are not. The narrative requires a carefully neutral tone or the MRM will continue to be dismissed, if not ridiculed.

    As soon as the Purple Cow starts getting attention he needs to adapt to it.

    • Paul Elam

      I only partially agree. First, if we stopped critiquing standards for modern femininity; indeed if we had never done it at all, the charges of misogyny would never have missed a beat. Don’t make the mistake of thinking that if we play by their rules, they will suddenly become honest and fair. BIG mistake.

      Also, it is not the job of the MRM, IMO, to “evolve” into a less honest and truthful message so that brainwashed morons and wrap their minds around it.

      One thing I think will never change is that our job is to appeal to men and women who can see with their own eyes what is happening in the world. They only need to stumble on the messengers that live here and other places. That seems to be happening more all the time.

      Ours is not to change for the world, but to offer the world a place it where it can do the changing.

      It is a harder road than the path of least resistance, but that was always a given.

      AVfM will continue to harshly critique what this society has become where it concerns the socialization of both sexes; the values we teach men and women, and how that plays out on the stage of our social, political and legal existence.

      The less than stupid (our bread and butter) will, as they always have, see that the critique is of society, not just women or men as a group.

      If we back down from that, we back down from the very thing that attracts those interested in the truth, and we lose those smart enough to see the difference.

      • keyster

        This means the MRM will have to similtaneously destroy Political Correctness (their rules) in the process of defending men and boys. That’s a tall order for one nascent, under-funded social movement.

        Holding women accountable to equality will never work, because of the double-standard and it’s enforcement by Thought Police like SPLC, Women’s Media Center, etc.

        Mainstream social movements informs one that “honesty and truth” is a nebulous concept. Positioning and words that work is key. It has to “mature”, “professionalize”…eventually.

        Abject misogyny might be popular to a few, but it can’t be a part it. The raw, open and honest, no holds barred FTSU commentary limits one to only the already indocrinated. That’s OK if you’re looking to appeal to a globally disparate group of misanthropic intellectuals.

        The Question, which I have yet to find the answer to, is that how does a Social Movement made up of the identifiable Oppressors, position itself as yet another victim class? ….the counter to “women as victims” narrative?

        It seems no matter what you say or do it’s not getting through. The MRM is being kept boxed-in by forces that are in order of magnitude more powerful. “If you’re FOR men’s rights you must hate women.”

        Men are scared shitless of making women mad.

        John Edwards
        Bill Clinton
        Eliot Spitzer
        Strauss-Kahn
        Clarence Thomas
        Various CEO’s and politicans

        • Paul Elam

          “This means the MRM will have to similtaneously destroy Political Correctness (their rules) in the process of defending men and boys. That’s a tall order for one nascent, under-funded social movement.”

          Yes, but that was never part of the plan in my mind. We also have to be careful with concepts like “abject misogyny.” Since misogyny in any form on this site only exists in the minds of the opposition, it goes without saying that the abject part doesn’t apply either.

          We are building subculture here, and doing it by our rules, not theirs. That subculture may well morph into something more substantive down the road. I am hopeful that it will, but not counting on the blue pill masses to be so swayed.

          I don’t want to take over the world, just create a slice of it where men are safer and feminists/tradcons not so much, intellectually speaking.

          • keyster

            Yeah, I didn’t necessarily mean just AVfM.
            I see the slow shift.
            I see the refinement/discipline of the narrative taking place everyday in the writing AND comments.

            “First ridcule them and then marginalize them, and keep the pressure on.” -Saul Alinsky

        • DruidV

          “Holding women accountable to equality will never work…”

          May I borrow your crystal ball, sir?

          Assuming certain ideas will “never work” and then projecting that assumption as fact, onto others who think differently, is one of the inescapable traits of a naysayer. That’s not good anywhere, but most especially here.

          Keyster, again with all due respect, you continue to pooh-pooh differing viewpoints with this type of your own “nebulous” affirmation of what you are sure will transpire tomorrow.

          Please refrain and reconsider.

          You do not know what lies even five minutes ahead, any more than anyone else here does, so stop pissing into other peoples’ cornflakes if you disagree with them. At least be respectful of others who wish to achieve the same thing as you, yet choose to not follow your own personal beliefs or subscribe to your own personal worldview whist going about it.

          It’s okay to disagree with someone.
          Naysaying however, does nothing to boost morale around here, which is already very low, nor is it likely to change minds. At best it is merely devisive.

          If you disagree with someone else’s point of view, no matter how offensive you personally may find it, you should at least have the common courtesy to treat them with respect, that is if you want to be treated with respect in turn. If for no other reason than out of respect for yourself.

          All your naysaying and condescension really are, is extremely rude, sir.

  • Lee

    None of this surprises me. However on the hatred of women “directed at all women, not only perceived feminists” – I think he is talking about the common MRM view on how women generally behave today. You know, self-absorbed princesses that embrace the bigotry that feminism promotes without even thinking about it…

    • Paul Elam

      Indeed, but we would have to paint a much more rudimentary picture for Goldwag to understand it. Just like he clings to the myth that anti-feminism is anti-woman, he also thinks that critique of the modern socialization of women, and the results of that socialization, is anti-woman.

      He. Just. Doesn’t. Get. It. He lives in a self aggrandizing bubble where women are incompetent, childlike victims with no personal agency, and big strong men like himself are ever at their rescue. It’s modern misogyny in its most common form. Goldwag is just too ignorant and grandiose to know it.

      Also, the lawyerspeak coming from him is laughable.

      He represents the SPLC, calls us a hate site in several articles, tweets a Radfem post titled “SPLC Names Men’s Rights Activists as Hate Group,” and then has the lack of integrity to claim that AVfM and other MRA sites have not been put on a hate list by his organization.

      Anyone remember, “That depends on what the meaning of is is.”?

      Arthur Goldwag is a lying sack of shit.

  • http://patricestanton.com/ wholebrainartist

    Again, some of the best journalism anywhere. Alas, if only the “pros” could use such analytical skills – not to mention write as clearly as those who contribute here.

    Too often I’ll “see” the many things illogical or just plain wrong in articles but lack the ability to de-construct as clearly as you do, John. Your articles are always a joy to read. Except for their depressing nature, of course. :-)

    About a previous Commentor’s call to adopt a more “sophisticated tone.” Based upon a literal definition of the word, I for one would contend loudly that this site should never make its messages/content more “highly complicated” with the intent to appeal to “worldly-wise persons.”

    Pure straight-shooting (which I’d say characterizes the AVfM site in general) as in this piece will show to anyone honestly seeking the Truth that there is no attempt at subterfuge or bullshittery, nor is there any need to con-volute the facts to make the case for a change towards true Human-Rights and away from today’s lopsided and destructive “system.”

    But then, as a female, I’m probably just seeing things through me-sogynistic lenses…

    • Lee

      ‘me-sogynistic’ – I like that term. :)

  • napocapo69

    The definition of being antifeminist of wikipedia
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antifeminism

    Wikipedia feminst pages are likely the source of information of that “mangina”…

    • Adam

      The same site which declined hosting a page for the honourable Thomas Ball (RIP). No surprises.

  • re-construct

    The new Southern Poverty law center is but a pizza stain on the shirt of its former self.
    Its the modern white gender-feminist establishment (who now run the southern poverty law center) that are breaking the patriarchies of the working class, and subjecting them to the perpetual matriarchal underclass of un-educated laborers.
    The white Gender-feminist establishment might say “Its not us” that are breaking other peoples patriarchies, and subjecting black, white, and latino working class families into a perpetual matriarchy of ignorance, violence, ect, ect,..
    I say, if its not you that are “Constructing” the matriarchy for the underclass, then who is it???
    I say, if its not the gender-feminist establishment that are “constructing” the perpetual matriarchy of un-educated laborers, then who is it??? the guys that works the night shift at the 7-11??? or maybe its the construction worker that breaths concrete dust all day to feed his children that is doing it???

  • http://www.cyclotronmajesty.net CyclotronMajesty

    Anger directed at women is totally appropriate, natural, innate and biological. Anger is the appropriate response to arrogance and deception, weakness oppressing strength, shameless imitation, hypocrisy, parasitism and delusion. Anger directed at ALL women (or anyone) is totally acceptable and essential to any open healthy thriving society (of which ours is not). All emotions (and I mean ALL) and passions are 100% acceptable experiences, anyone in denial of that is the victim of a neurosis and some kind of fascist and enemy of the human race and experience.

    This guy is locked into some kind of leftist fascist derivative of neurotic moralism, so he can beat the hell out of anyone outside his private box. And so he is ignorant, a fool and a coward, and cannot face up to the effects of the shit he lays down on others in the name of righteousness.

    You expect someone who is mistreated and oppressed to smile and be polite about it to their oppressors? Some do… sure. But having that as a criteria makes you a fascist, and inhumane archon.

    Legalize male emotions. All of them.

    SPLC go hate yourself.

    • Adam

      I would clarify your statement with; We should be free to express all reasonable emotions to the people around us.
      Indignation and rage at those who malign and treat you as disposable.
      Admiration and respect for those who sacrifice their time for you, fight for your rights or treat you with respect.
      More examples etc etc

      “You expect someone who is mistreated and oppressed to smile and be polite about it to their oppressors? Some do… sure. But having that as a criteria makes you a fascist, and inhumane archon.

      Legalize male emotions. All of them.

      SPLC go hate yourself.”
      Pure gold.