Fuck-Your-Shit-Up

Why we don’t try to reason with feminists

Where is the counter argument?

I’ve been an outspoken MRA for a few years now, and I’ve noticed that despite the overwhelming opposition to any argument for male rights, there are no substantive counter-arguments. No arguments whatsoever. Opponents of men’s rights have no trouble reciting false facts, debunked talking points, fabricated studies, and obvious lies in support of their religion of female victimhood and male villainy, but lies are not arguments. They’re just lies.

  • 1 in 4 women is raped, sexually assaulted, battered or abused – is a lie [1]
  • The wage gap – is a lie [2][3]
  • Women’s historical oppression – is a lie
  • Rape culture – is a lie[4][5]
  • The inherent violence of masculinity – is a lie
  • The inherent goodness of femininity – is a lie
  • The idea that feminism is about equality – is a lie


By contrast, whenever I or any other MRA fields an argument in defence of mens rights, or critical of feminism, it is never met with a counter argument. The arguments of MRAs are met with accusations, shaming language, insults, threats, blackmail, violence, censure, censorship, cooked up criminal charges, vandalism, imprisonment and other calumny.

My article critical of the institution of marriage was answered by feminists accusing me of being gay,


…of being bitter, of having a small penis, or social ineptitude, of financial impotence, of living in my mother’s basement, of body odour, and of tenancies to hatred, violence, and pedophilia. Of those critical of my article, none actually addressed the substance of the argument made. None.

My article deconstructing the feminist goal of reversing the burden of proof in accusation of sexual assault was met by feminists who called me a rapist, a bigot, a woman beater, a loser, a violent criminal, and a sociopath. Not even one criticism addressed the substance of my article, and Jessica Valenti likely still wants women to be killed.

One of the first articles I wrote exploring the relationship between central banking and the funding stream of organized feminism was answered by a feminist on a different continent whose best rebuttal was to re-present each point of my argument – leaving out, and adding, key points to make them easy to refute in a straw-man attack–then to call me a stalker. A stalker on another continent.

In response to my arguments, I have been variously subject to shaming attacks, censorship, straw-man arguments, false accusations of violent crimes by people thousands of miles away, accusations of pedophilia, of rape, denounced as a psychopath, a serial killer, as maladjusted, as a loser, as a racist, and all manner of villainy. Almost none of my philosophical opponents have fielded anything approaching a substantive argument, or have addressed me with anything except lies and abuse, and a few threats of death too.

I wont make any pious declarations of my own lack of violent, criminal or deviant behavior. Why bother? I also will not shut up and go away. I will never shut up.

I. Will. Never. Shut. Up.

What I will do for my loudest and most amoral critics is to offer a few suggestions

  • Admit that your position is unethical, and that you are purely self centered and devoid of anything like an ethical compass
  • Admit that your continued insistence on women’s eternal victimhood is designed to take adult agency away from the members of the sexual demographic you supposedly care so much about
  • Admit that you want to force women’s and men’s behavior into a mode of compliant service to your own greed and sadism
  • Admit that your ethic is built on lies and violence
  • Admit to yourself that even though you lack the muscle and the courage to commit violence yourself, your philosophy depends absolutely on violence done by others on your behalf
  • Admit that those who do violence on your behalf, when they have scrubbed the field of anyone who dares to disagree – those enforcers will turn on you
  • Recognize that when your political will has been imposed by force on everybody around you, you will discover that you are locked into a tiny cage as well

You see, I recognize that in spite of my optimism and my repeated attempts to open dialog or discussion with the ideological opponents of the men’s rights movement – there will be no civilized discourse between us. The reason is that feminism’s active proponents have no interest in truth, nor in justice, nor in human rights, nor in protecting anyone from harm, least of all women. Despite a nearly omnipresent narrative of “protecting women” mainstream feminism is a sham which depends on escalating social carnage to maintain a control on public conscience and to secure streams of funding.

I recognize that the opponents of the men’s rights movement are organized,


…violent, hateful bigots, and the only reason you cannot be correctly called criminals is that your ideology now controls the courts, and thus the definition of what it means to be a criminal. I also recognize that soon, individuals doing nothing more corrosive than simply speaking out, will soon be named criminal.

A man I held in high esteem recently died, and I will repeat a statement of his now. “When your conscience says the law is immoral, don’t follow it.”

Past and present efforts to silence, shame, marginalize, and subvert the efforts of men’s rights activists demonstrate that what we are saying about our opponents, the enemies of human rights, is not exaggeration, or conspiracy theory, instead it is understatement.

I’ll restate what I said earlier.

I. Will. Never. Shut. Up.

The fact that shutting me up, and shutting up other MRAs is a major goal is illustrative of just what we oppose. The truth does not require state funded enforcers. Now, in addition to not shutting up, and in light of my, and other’s increased understanding of just who and what you are who oppose the men’s movement – namely that you are violent, lying hypocrites lacking interest in truth, and consumed with a self serving philosophy which relies on escalating harm to those you pretend to protect. I don’t mind telling you, I am no longer here to debate, or to reason, or to converse, or to hope you may be reached by logic or evidence.

I am here to fuck your shit up.

And in that, I am not alone. Now I don’t mean to stoop to the use of lies or violence. You are practiced at those tactics, and frankly, I don’t need them. You may also wonder, what can a few disgruntled MRAs do that you should be concerned about? And to that, I can only say – watch, and learn.

[1]: http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/2011/02/one-in-four-lie-demolished-once-and-for.html

[2]: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704415104576250672504707048.html?mod=wsj_share_reddit

[3]: http://consad.com/index.php?page=an-analysis-of-reasons-for-the-disparity-in-wages-between-men-and-women

[4]: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv09.pdf

[5]: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv10.pdf

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
  • Blodewerdd

    I am quite sure you have heard this a million times and do not agree with it, but what you describe is actually misandry, and not feminism as the dictionary defines it. And by that definbition at least, feminism is about gender equality (I agree, not the best name for that, but that IS what the definition says). Now, in hopes that this hasn’t infuriated you too much, I will carry on to your other arguments.

    1. 1 in 4 women is raped, sexually assaulted, battered or abused – is a lie [1]

    I am ambivalent towards this. I can not present a proper argument or number, just experience, so I do not expect anyone to regard it as proof. In my country, this number is around 1 in 10, from what I know and from what I, myself, experienced. It maybe more of less in other countries.

    2. The wage gap – is a lie [2][3]

    I agree. This has never happened to me and this is not exactly the most revolutionary country in the world. The equality of chances is a slightly different subject but I won’t go into that for now.

    3. Women’s historical oppression – is a lie

    I am not sure in what respect you do not consider women to have been oppressed in the past. I consider being denied an education, the right to vote, the right to inherit and the right to ownership quite oppressive, and there’s plenty of proof that this was the state of things until a while ago – I can present proof if needed. I have encountered this opinion in anti-feminsts a lot. Just because some women were pampered and because chivalry existed, you cannot say that oppression was a lie. Even the most pampered women had as little rights as the low-born. Most were nothing more than beloved and decorative pets.

    4. Rape culture – is a lie[4][5]

    While I do agree that it’s a very strong expression and haven’t really encountered it myself, I do hear a lot of “well, it’s her fault, wearing them tight jeans”. So let’s say that I don’t agree on it being a rape culture, but more of a culture that likes to blame the victims.

    5. The inherent violence of masculinity – is a lie
    6. The inherent goodness of femininity – is a lie

    Completely agree with you here, both are total and utter bullshit.

    Maybe I should call myself a humanist rather than a feminist, as other anti-feminists have suggested, but I’m not ready to abandon home that we might yet turn this ship around. I (and other feminists – not misandrists) support women’s AND men’s rights, and do not wish neither to shun the responsibilities that come along, nor to oppress men.

  • Coriolanus

    Aaand someone deleted my comment. So much for the “ballsy, free thinking MRM”.

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

      Nobody deleted your comment, chill out dude. New commenters are usually held in pending, and sometimes our spam filters have a mind of their own. I’ve cleared your comment, and if you have any more trouble just let us know.

      In any case, I would suggest spending a little more time around here before making sweeping generalizations about what kind of reactions you’ll get. We argue all the time around here. We believe critical analysis and debate from a rigorous, logical, fact-based mindset is helpful, personal attacks not so much. ;-)

      • Coriolanus

        Pray excuse my cynicism, it was merely a feeling of disappointment from watching a couple of posts (apparently) evaporate.

  • SkepticWithRaisedEyebrow

    Can someone please provide an alternative link to the information in source one?

    I am a recent rape survivor, on anti-depressants, and I’m afraid of even opening the link. I’d like to see the material, but the name of the site gives me reason to believe the way it is couched and discussed will be very destructive to me. That is to say, victim blaming.

    • http://whitemaleheteroetc.blogspot.com/ Flavus

      Reference 1 is just links to three other pieces, which all together offer little more than some methodological criticisms of the Ms. report, some different statistics measuring substantially different things, and a lot of Sturm und Drang about radical feminists. There are some problems with the Ms. report, but we’ve had much better data available for 20 years now, so it’s kind of silly that anybody still thinks this is news.

      The latest CDC report finds the lifetime incidence of rape for women in the US to be about 1 in 8 under the strictest definition, “completed forced penetration,” or 1 in 5 if attempted and drug or alcohol assisted penetration are included. You can read it here: http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/nisvs/

  • andreia

    Im am young (23) but at an age that I consider to be asking questions that are not so self centered. Lately I have been reading both MRA and feminist blogs/websites/societies/videos etc. and really what I came to the conclusion is that I am a equal rights activist.
    It may sound as I am trying to cop out of the true matters, but it seems to really surprise me all this division of men and women rights, when in fact this is what has been the cause of all ailments in the first place.
    Why always pick in the bad side of the coin and never the best? Both groups are really guilty of doing this type of behaviour. Both groups should focus on the good of each other.
    I am in no way blind that, and unaware that both have made mistakes and actually still do, but it really gives me a very low hope when I see the separation especially when both groups can bring so much to the table.