Media

Winning the war of words

A few months ago, I posted an article on AVfM talking about the use of language within the MRM. In particular I mentioned my own preference in avoiding use of the word mangina. My stated reason was that the word – appropriately insulting to collaborating male feminists – lacked in explanatory power to members of the general public.

Another reason I left unstated was beyond addressing an audience of informed men’s rights activist readers, the writing on this site has an unceasingly broad audience of the undecided public. In addition to providing A Voice For Men who’ve realized they’re effectively silenced and ignored in most other public venues – this site has the goal of illuminating the phenomena of male dispossession in an increasingly misandric culture.

One of the measures of our success is the appearance of mainstream writing which lifts content and ideas directly from articles on this site and others. When MRM writing appears in places like the washington post, huffpo, and the times online – we’re winning.

This returns us to language, and the impact of how we use it. A great example of how to alienate an undecided audience was provided by our dear comrades over at feministing dot com. In an August 25 article called “Fear Factor: Mansplaining edition,” Chloe Angyal used the term in apparent ignorance of how revealing it is. “Mansplaining” for those recently arrived on the planet is a term employed by feminists to belittle and deride any argument fielded from a male perspective. An explanation is something to consider, reject, or understand. However, by employing the comical and derisive term “mansplain” – any argument can be dismissed without consideration.

Lets assume person A and Person B are debating two different theories of economics.

Person A presents their case and lays out the logic. Person B then presents an alternative argument, laying out a logical path to their own theory. It happens that person B is black, or African-American, or whatever politically correct term you like. Their surplus of melanin has no impact on the argument presented by person B – and in fact, they may have presented a stronger argument in this debate. Person A responds to the argument of person B by ignoring the details and denouncing the entire train of logic with the comical characterization “nigger-splaining”. The audience laughs, person B’s argument is not considered.

This is nothing new from big feminism, but the term shines a bright light on the hatred and sexism underlying an ideology claiming to pursue “equality.”I’ll thank the editors of feministing for so neatly outing themselves, and for the salutary lesson to writers and activists actually pursuing human rights.

With respect to my esteemed philosophical opponents, it could be that your purpose is to serve as a warning to others, and that is a noble purpose. However, as a contributor and writer on a MRM-themed site, I have to assume an audience sufficiently astute that bludgeoning readers with hyperbole, distilled hatred and obvious sexism would be counter-productive in presenting my views. When building arguments based on truth, and with a broadening audience, one of the goals of my writing is to encourage borrowing of content by mainstream channels. In pursuit of this, I’ll be developing what Fidelbogen has recently and beautifully described as rhetorical discipline.

This does not mean I will be softening my stated position. In fact, I’ll offer none of the concession to sensibilities of the wacky-cheese-fries eating public accommodated in previous content on this site.

The increasingly diverse audience of MRM writing on AVfM and elsewhere signals a change in the landscape. The issues addressed in men’s movement writing are increasingly adopted by writers for major media outlets, and this presents an opportunity which will be missed if we don’t shape our rhetoric to a wider audience. That means, my brothers – I will be sharpening my pen – and I encourage you to do so also.

About John Hembling (JtO)

John Hembling is Policy Director and Editor-at-Large for AVfM. John is also the founder of the American Human Rights Education 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 ideas of gender ideologues, white knights and other social diseases. JtO is FTSU personified.

Main Website
View All Posts
  • Get Your Tickets for the International Men’s Conference in Detroit!

    This June in Detroit is your chance to meet nearly every leading figure in the men's rights movement. More importantly, it is your turn to take a stand for what you really believe in...

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

    Fight Wikipedia censorship! A Voice for Men and WikiMANNia are working to increase knowledge of men's issues internationally through two wikis: the AVfM Reference Wiki for scholarly references, and WikiMANNia for general-interest men's issues. Volunteers are needed for writing, proofreading, and organizing. Those willing to step into a leadership role are also sought. Some knowledge of the German language will be helpful but *not* required.

    To apply to join the AVfM Reference Wiki team or the WikiMANNia team, please write to editorial_team@wikimannia.org...

  • Robert Full Of Rage

    There are times when a spade needs to be called a spade. While I understand we have to be careful not to alienate people who are on the fence, we have to be careful we do not conform to suit other people. I know the majority of people at AVFM will always bleed anti-feminism, but I know there will be a small minority of people in other forums who will insist we use kid gloves, not be so angry, and hold our tongues. I will not do any of those things because I am not a politician who is trying to be someone I am not in order to appeal to as many demographics as possible. Either you view feminism as a hateful ideology or you don’t. If you do, then welcome aboard. If you don’t, then you will be my enemy. The male gender has been getting hit over the head with a tire iron for the past several decades. The majority of women have become tyrants who have a license to do anything with no or almost no consequences. I can understand if other people don’t want to be dark, but people like me who express deep-seated rage are needed. People who embrace misandry need to be afraid. They need to know the jig is up, that we will be taking back what was wrongfully stolen from us. We will have our justice.

    “Give them nothing, but take from them everything!”

    King Leonidas, “300″ movie

    • keyster

      “…who will insist we use kid gloves, not be so angry, and hold our tongues.”

      Nothing wrong with anger and using your tongue in a room full of MRA’s.
      Bold, direct and uncompromising speech feels right to us.
      But we’re not the only ones reading it anymore.

      Being written off as “a bunch of raging loons” has been a problem for the Men’s Movement for years. If you don’t at least adopt and demonstrate mainstream sensibilities you’ll never gain credibility through media channels.

      The reason being is that if you lack a sense of mainstream sensibility, you might just be looney (or undisciplined and unprofessional, lacking a certian sense of decorum) in the presentation of the message you’d like to convey.

      I don’t like it either, it sucks, but that’s the way it works.

      • Robert Full Of Rage

        Don’t worry Keyster, I am not a raging loon. I tailor my attitude and words to my environment. If I am on a college campus, I will not use vulgar language and I defend the MRM in a calm manner. If I am on AVFM, I can be edgier because people will understand my anger and not label me a loose cannon. If I post on Shrink4Men, I watch my language and go into more personal detail. The stereotype of the MRM being filled with hate-filled misogynists is just another tactic used to discredit us. While I would never want to do anything that would discredit the MRM, I understand that sometimes people need to be put in their places. If I am pushed, I will push back. I don’t think there is one correct answer. The MRM needs diplomats, enforcers, and everything in between.

        I wasn’t trying to discredit the article written by Manuel Dexter. I just think we need people who are willing to get dirty (nothing against the law) as well as people who are able to reach people who otherwise don’t understand the anger that exists within the MRM and its origins.

        • Iron John

          Robert,

          Just an idea here. Your rants are outstanding and need to be heard far and wide. Why not record them periodically in a voice audio format that KARMA MRA MGTOW could play on his radio station? This would provide him with a steady stream of new MRA material to broadcast and you would a get medium for your message that no one could interfere with. Maybe he could play them in between AFVM radio shows? What do you think?

          Sincerely,

          IJ

          • Robert Full Of Rage

            I am going to ask for help the next time Paul posts an article. I hope to get some help because I am not good with technology.

    • Atlas Reloaded

      I think we are just now grabbing the hand swinging the tire iron and wrenching it out of the hand.

    • ForsakenEagle

      I guess I know which side of the fence I am on. It is good to be aboard.

  • keyster

    It can be done, it just takes more effort on the part of the writer (or commenter on what’s been written). It’s a form of intellectual/creative laziness to use platitudes with invective. It’s easier, more efficient and besides, we have day jobs.

    What’s worse is that while it doesn’t necessarily offend or outrage casual interlopers, it instead smacks of a lack of professionalism and “rhetorical discipline” needed to build initial credibility with fence sitters, questioners and journalists. You have to project mainstream sensibilities or you’ll be catagorically dismissed and ignored. That’s the way the “GAME” is played in blue pill land.

    If you can offer up the most scathing rebukes of feminism or subjective analysis of women as a group minus the invective tone, (that only serves to distract and divert the reader from your original point), you’ve mastered the rhetorical discliplne necessary to take the outreach to the next level.

    I’m going to read Fidelbogen’s excellent article on this again, and read it every so often to remind myself of this. Thanks Manuel.

  • Paul Elam

    This is an excellent article, as are the first comments. I am going to try to put up a response piece to this later today. I think there is much more to this dialog that needs to be explored.

  • tm

    “The MRM needs diplomats, enforcers, and everything in between.” +1

    The article is excellent.

  • Muk

    Eff those sister-lickers!

    • Muk

      Eff those femifisters!

      • Muk

        Eat a dick, femifascist!
        (This is the extent of my Rhetorical Discipline, btw)

        • Paul Elam

          And is that the extent of your contribution to the MRM?

          • Muk

            Lol, not in the least
            This one time, I had to send my phone in for warranty repair
            So they gave me a loaner
            I changed the home page and bookmarks on the browser to mrm sites
            I have contributed

            Edit: oh oh oh! I’ve submitted a few articles to AVfM too!
            But I guess they wasn’t good enough
            No problem
            I’ll get better

  • http://lifespeculiarities.blogspot.com/ Izzey

    You can give a homeless man a shave and haircut…and maybe even a new suit. But he will still be homeless. And later, lying down in that new suit in the street, will make for an even greater shame and mockery of his predicament.

    I would rather suffer the stench and unruly facade, when lying down in the dirt. It is the truth.. in its truest form.

    This is a thinly veiled suggestion of censorship to me. I look forward to more dialogue on the subject.

    I have three (new) articles written for the site, and am now second-guessing every single one of them.

    Are we to become the New York Times…USA Today?
    I do not say this very often, but I am scared.

    Conforming to the masses in a ‘spit and shine’ etiquette will remove the spontaneity of speech that makes this site so great…even when the speech is not politically correct or intellectually challenging enough to engage some of the higher I.Q’s here….it is still from the heart. (from most)

    Much like the rage in mine.

    I respect the message, and think I understand it completely. But now I think it may make some people hesitate before speaking their mind. Even if there are some people here that get banned for improper conduct; not tolerated…we still learn from them. (before they go)

    Please tell me I read ‘into’ the article wrong.
    I’d rather be very wrong, and even publicly embarrassed here, than to fear the worst.

    Izzey

    • Paul Elam

      “Please tell me I read ‘into’ the article wrong.”

      You read into the article wrong. :)

      We are never going to “become” The Times or USA Today. But we are going to get better at doing what we are already very successful at, which is pushing the message of refuting misandric culture into the mainstream media, forcing people like that to write about it.

      We do that through provocation and that will not change, ever. But we do that because that is what works. The goal here, as much as I love this website, is not to make a a “great” or “neat” site, but an effective one.

      We always must remember the activism, above everything. The question is not what feels good, or even what writers here want to say, but what works for the MISSION. And the raw, unrestrained manner of some of our material is something that has unquestionably worked.

      Is there a way to shape some of that material to make it more effective? I can’t say with 100% certainty, but I can say if we are unduly resistant to exploring the question and facing the answers, then we just begging for the problems that such avoidance will almost certainly bring.

      I am working on a piece about this later that will offer up more for discussion.

    • http://www.avoiceformen.com Manuel Dexter

      Hi Izzey, I recognized writing this piece that It might be taken as a disguised move towards censorship. This is not the intent – nor do I think there’s any merit in moderating the real and justified rage many of us experience. However, it might be useful to distinguish between an un-schooled brawler swinging wildly and depending on pure force to win in a scrap, and a disciplined student of martial arts methodically dispatching a numerically superior adversary.

      Im advocating a little less unshaved hairy “yo ho and a bottle of rum” and a little more rhetorical kung fu.

      • Merlin

        I think you have some valid points here and I really don’t have a problem with it myself.

        It’s interesting to note we are up against an opposition that uses a child-like phrase such as “Mansplaining” Hmm, it sounds remarkably like the sort of made up street language that a child at Kindergarten would use with regularity because a single pupil invented it and the lemmings considered it cool and hip.

        If that’s the best they can do we don’t have much to worry about…

  • http://menzmagazine.blogspot.com/ Dan Moore (Factory)

    I’ve read Fidelbogen’s essay on rhetorical discipline, and I agree in large part. I love a good turn of phrase as much as the next guy. But it’s important, as Izzey says, to keep in mind the breadth of the audience, and who we need to connect with.

    And how we need to do that.

    AVfM is as popular as it is because of the FTSU attitude, the in-your-face arguments, and the refusal to back down. Mostly in plain language articles, peppered liberally with invective. There is a time and a place to say “Fuck You”, there is a time and a place to call Bullshit…and that time and place is here and now.

    This type of approach is great for defining the issues as well. It helps stack the evidence up in an orderly fashion. It is much needed, to be sure.

    But the irreverent, ‘fuck you Establishment’ approach has it’s pluses as well. It attracts attention, it creates social muscle, it inspires and motivates action. It is the heart and soul of the Mens Movement, the engine, as all social movements have a reason for being. Without that angry approach, the Mens Movement might as well sink back into the BBS’s of old, and give up.

    Anger motivates us. Connecting with that motivation on a base emotional level is as important for our movement as it is for any other, and high-falutin’ language isn’t always the best way to connect.

    • Ted

      “AVfM is as popular as it is because of the FTSU attitude, the in-your-face arguments, and the refusal to back down. ”

      Yes.

      “But the irreverent, ‘fuck you Establishment’ approach has it’s pluses as well.”

      Agree with that, too. But I note you wrote “the fuck you … *approach* “. IMO, you need the approach without actually writing “fuck you”. Because we all know how that can be used to discredit you – you are simply handing your opponent a free opportunity to deflect the argument.

      So how can you avoid saying “fuck you”? My advice is to try to suppress the urge to jab at your opponent. I find that difficult, but that way leads to the ad hominem (by you) – potentially a weak position. Instead, just counter with facts that you know will enrage them, and deliver in a matter-of-fact tone.

      For example, in talking with a feminist who doesn’t suspect what’s coming, idly observe, in a calm, rational tone, that men are not equal to women – women give birth, men don’t. That’s a fact, and anyone trying to argue against it is doomed. The results can be highly satisfactory, and no expletives need be involved.

      • Never Blue Again

        Just Agree 100 % …!!

  • Atlas Reloaded

    Great article Manual, andthe term “man-splaining” has always been despicable to me.

    • tm

      Maybe we should use ‘cuntsplaining’ about feminist arguments? :D

      • Atlas Reloaded

        Assuming that we could argue that feminists can ever explain anything.

  • http://whatmenthinkofwomen.blogspot.com/ Christianj

    The man-splaining is a bit of a furphy (Aus. Col. for BS) as in my experience the opposite sex has never really been that interested in male issues to begin with as clearly demonstrated over the decades. The question of rhetorical discipline should continually be poked and prodded but it will be the more talented writers who are able to adjust their message and arguments as others may find that a little too difficult to adjust to. So in reality, it’s food for thought and I look forward to the next instalment from Paul to broaden this discussion..

  • JinnBottle

    I was looking at writing on something like what Dexter wrote – language and communicating clearly, especially as AVfM…not “goes”, but *comes into* the mainstream. The only facet of the language here that came to mind that should be up for discussion, I think, is the rather free, and increasingly widespread use of the ACRONYMS ["Actually Chases Readers Off, New Young Men 'Specially"] <– see? like that. I bet you weren't familiar with that one….That's alright tho, cos I wasn't, either – till I just pulled it out of my ass a minute ago.

    Not that that's where the "AVfM", "MRM", "MRAs" and an increasing number of other acros come from: But my point is that we may get to a point where we're speaking in code without realizing it. For instance, I discovered AVfM two months ago – and I still don't know what "so-con" means, for example. (Am I even spelling it right??)

    In the end, it may come back to who sets "policy" around here. My general impression is that Paul Owns this site, and that he has a few others like Dexter, JtO, Doctor T – those with whom he's intouch via more immediate and personal media – like phone. Is this just me being a man and naturally ASSuming a feuhrerprinzip? <– (See? *there*'s some shoptalk for ya!) – Or is it more like, Paul's like Saint Peter and his immediate associates are like, AVfM's first Bishops? :D

    • Paul Elam

      Good comment, and FTIY, your piece is next on my list.

    • Paul Elam

      Oh, and socon means social conservative.

      • http://lifespeculiarities.blogspot.com/ Izzey

        I had suggested a while back for the new people (and some of us that still do not know it all)
        that someone should make up a glossary of ‘terminology’ around here.
        Most people will not ask what something means…because they are too proud to admit they don’t already know it. So they are not truly understanding what the seasoned veterans are saying, and therefore understanding only partially what is being discussed.

        I posted at the bottom of the thread, but just wanted to say this before I retired for the evening.
        ‘nite Paul…all.

        Izzey

  • Benq

    OT but I don’t know where else to put this, and I want it to get as much visibility as possible. We know that traditionalists aren’t real allies of the MRM, but they have been planning on stabbing us in the back all along:

    The vast majority of MRA’s are tools(there are a few exceptions like W. F. Price and Welmer). The men in the PUAsphere have noted so and so have the men in the Tradosphere and the AltRightsphere. Now that they’ve served their initial purpose it’s time to Night of the Long Knives them.

    • Paul Elam

      meh, it’s just one comment in a long thread. Besides, the douche bag didn’t even know that W.F. Price and Welmer are the same person.

  • Stu

    I sort of feel like Izzey. I don’t know about all this “we have to be exclusively intellectual, well spoken etc” The academically and intellectually inclined within our ranks……such as MD might be losing sight a little bit of the fact that the vast majority if the masses…….are not. Don’t worry too much about if the general masses understand a term like “Mangina”. They have more chance of understanding that straight off the bat then much of the turbo charged vocabulary and complex ideas expressed by some……….hi Keith :)

    I’m also sure the without the masses of less verbally competent, high anger, high rage, knuckle draggers lol…..the elite with be nothing but talking heads and paper tigers. Nobody is afaid of people that are only willing to engage in polite conversation and will not resort to stronger methods to have their damands met. I want the powers to be to know that the streets are filling with very angry men, and we have leaders, and if those leaders are ignored……we will not be ignored.

    Btw Paul, bit slack sending you a fundraising donation. I’ll send $250 today. That’s on top of my monthly….so I still beat Izzey I think….and that’s what counts. lol

    • Paul Elam

      Help me out here because I am confused. Where did you read this?

      “we have to be exclusively intellectual, well spoken etc”

      • Stu

        Sorry, I shouldn’t have put that in quotes. It’s not, it’s a general view I’ve seen expressed by numerous people on MRM sites. It gives the feeling of an attempt to shut people up who aren’t fitting their idea of the correct langauge.

        • Paul Elam

          Trust me. That will not happen here.

    • Paul Elam

      Thanks Stu, much appreciated. I think when you see my next article it should alleviate any concerns that you, Izzey and others might have. We are not going to take the edge out of the work here, but may try to sharpen it a little, and not with intellectualisms, but with continuing to stay in peoples faces.

      This is FTSU on its way to the next level. It will be a slight adjustment to some, but my bet is that 98% of the regular readers of this site will be thrilled with it.

    • scatmaster

      That is what I took from the article as well Stu.
      I almost felt as if I was been shamed because of my intellectual capacity. I know that was not the intent but you are indeed speaking to a wide audience now and not all of us are as smart and as well read as you, Keith, et al. I think you will find that the majority are people just like me.

  • Tim Legere

    A country, an army, a team, an organization, a family …. they all ultimately suceed because they work TOGETHER with their unique and different talents. We can too!

    • HurleyHacker

      Tim,

      Little disagreement. Sure we can work together to garner strength and a force to be reckoned with. These words are just empty slogans. Onward and upwards towards what.? How many times have you been arrested for your stance? how many times jailed ? did any men rally around you?.
      There is a point when you get out of the fire before it consumes you. Jail isin’t so scary but the reasons you get there are. No constitutional rights and protections for a father. I know the ultimate answer is the destruction of the country as it stands now. corruption and sloth will destroy this country from within,. I am for speeding that up. How are we going to work together to make this happen?. I have been trying to awaken men and fathers since the Early 90′s. I will never see it in my lifetime. We just don’t get what is at stake.

      Just dunno anymore and pretty much feel it is every man for themselves.

      • Tim Legere

        @Hurley,

        You stated …

        “I have been trying to awaken men and fathers since the Early 90′s. I will never see it in my lifetime. We just don’t get what is at stake. Just dunno anymore and pretty much feel it is every man for themselves”.

        I am a recent convert to the MRM (I took the “red pill” a few years ago) and found and “lurked” this site for some time … reading, observing and learning. It seems that things are changing … not just here … but in the media, in governments and in society. Its agonizing slow but can’t you feel it? Lorena Bobbit’s heinous act was thought of as hilarious 20 years ago, but the recent “Talk Show” debacle was met with disdain and challenge. The world still needs to change significantly for men.

        How long will it take? Will we see it in our lifetimes? Maybe not. Feminism brought us to this point after 40 years. It may take as long to reverse it. However, its worth the fight to change the world … for younger men like Ben, and Robert, and for our children and grand-children.

        Don’t feel that you have to “go it alone” Hurley. Draw inspiration from other’s stories here that refuse to give up.

  • rebtus

    @ Izzey,
    For a log time I did not know you were a woman until someone mentioned. But you write better than many men. Your post was one of the best out of the group IMO.
    Sometime ago I saw another site that invited intellectual giants to contribute. But since many of us are or have been working stiffs, I did not join.
    Perhaps vulgar words should be omitted. But Paul FYSU gives a kick in the butt for us who are beginning to lose faith.
    Another poster pointed out overuse of acronyms. I had also tough time figuring out the long ones. As to so-con, its my understanding that they are socially conservative but not necessarily fiscally. Neo-cons are former liberals who I trying to redeem themselves from advocacy of socialism.
    There is a pun in politics.” Conservative is a liberal who has b been mugged. Liberal is a conservative who has been indicted”.

  • Stu

    OT

    Another one. She says her husband run off with another women. And a few weeks later she was sying she loved being single, and was in love with another man. They ended up finding the body of her husband buried in her pig pen……she had shot him……and of course…..now is saying that he was violent, abusive, blah blah blah. Why doesn’t anybody believe these people that kill their husbands…..then claim all this abuse. It’s as if a woman killing a man is proof that he is an abuser….when it actual fact she has committed the ultimate violence…..sick world. Even if it’s true, why do they have the right to be judge, jury, executioner, and issue penalities that even the highest court in the land can not impose…..even if proven guilty.

    http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/8351816/wife-charged-over-pig-pen-body

    • Robert Full Of Rage

      Most women have been conditioned to not feel any empathy for men. Most women can never imagine what it is like to be men in countries overflowing with misandry. As far as most women are concerned, all men are guilty for being male and deserve to die. They fantasize about violence against men like you or I might fantasize about coming home to a home-cooked meal after work. They see any threat against women, whether real or imagined, as a reason to condemn all men and celebrate our demise.

  • HurleyHacker

    I thought War was declared on Feminism and Misandry a way back? Men are burning themselves to death, children ripped out of their Father’s arms, lives destroyed. If these actions do not speak volumes to what this war has wrought then how on earth does a magnificent researched article win many converts.? Although I would agree with the author and this approach I feel most of it is too late. We needs boots on the ground and in the face of those who seek to destroy us. The Dark Side plays and fights dirty.

    I read everyday and my education grows by the fine authors and information here and elsewhere. We need diplomats, emissaries, writers, and thinkers when this war is over.

  • orry

    I’ll probably get a few thumbs down with this one,

    First, let me say that I enjoy reading and have a tremendous amount of respect for all of Mr. D’s articles. Except this one.

    To this article I say BULLSHIT! (with all due respect)

    It is precisely the attitude of Paul and others’ writing styles on this site that convinced me to get up off my ass and do something. Now, for me, I won’t be submitting articles anytime soon like so many others because I’m not the writer/thinkers like TDOM, Keith, Dr. F, Paul, Manuel, et al. I truly enjoy the diversity of the writing on this site. With Paul’s attitude, TDOM’s “thinking outside the box”, and Keith and Dr. F absolutely making my brain hurt to the point of melt. It is precisely because of the intellectual differences in the articles that keeps me coming back. I think it’s what keeps others coming back too.

    Tone it down? Be politically correct?….I say to hell with censorship of any kind! I think it’s the diversity of the articles that reach so many readers on so many different levels that makes AVFM one of, if not, the best site in the MRM. I think anger, rage and attitude are vital components to the articles here and all over the manosphere.

    BTW, I don’t give a rat’s ass what feminists or the mainstream think of the language/acronym’s (Let somebody else go and create their own PC MRM site and see how far it gets them). Feminists didn’t get to the point they’re at today by being nice, quiet, subdued, virtuous, polite and politically correct. Fuck that! If we don’t stand up and shout like men, we’ll be labeled a bunch of whimpering, whining pussies by the very people we are trying to reach. Totally counter-productive.It’s time to bruise a few uneducated egos, man style.

    “Planto Vestri Vox Vocis Auditus”
    “Make Your Voice Heard”

    Go ahead and thumb me down. I’ll know I got your blood pumping/boiling.

    • Paul Elam

      I gave you a thumbs up for honesty and the willingness to speak up, but you have reacted to things that are not in the article, IMO.

      We are opening a dialog here with readers and activists about content and what road AVfM will take in the future. There was not a single mention of being PC, and I don’t see the words “tone it down” anywhere except in your comment.

      What I get from MD’s piece is that he is going to sharpen his arguments and cut down on some hyperbole to make his points more effective. Sounder advice never came from a writing coach. I will wager that had Mr. Dexter just started posting articles under his new approach that no one would have noticed or assumed them to be PC or watered down. His sin here, appears to be nothing more than telling readers that he intends to work harder at being more effective and why.

      I understand the reactions of many in the MRM to even a hint of capitulation, but I don’t think it behooves us to see it where is does not exist. And it does not in exist in this article in any way, form or fashion.

      • orry

        I quoted nothing from the article. It was only my interpretation.

        • Paul Elam

          Understood. It was your interpretation that I was addressing.

      • tm

        “I will wager that had Mr. Dexter just started posting articles under his new approach that no one would have noticed or assumed them to be PC or watered down. His sin here, appears to be nothing more than telling readers that he intends to work harder at being more effective and why.”

        This sums it up perfectly.

    • http://www.avoiceformen.com Manuel Dexter

      Hi Orry,

      Censorship is not at all what I intend, not of myself, and certainly not of anyone else. I also wouldn’t call what I plan to do “toning it down”. In fact, I mean to take a considerably more aggressive position in my writing and rhetoric. I will be more selective in my use of blue language because what I’ll be conveying is likely to make opponents of men’s rights much more angry and upset than I’ve done in the past – and i mean to give no opportunity for evasion, or excuse to avoid the substance of discussion.

      Also, although I’ve announced it here with encouragement to other MRAs to adopt a similar strategy, Its certainly not saying “do it my way”

      My intent is to expand the reach of this site, and increase the effect of the argument. It’s not to placate anyone in the mainstream media – or play nice with the enemy.

      When it comes to the ideologues promoting male apartheid, disenfranchisement and feminist domestic policy, I don’t plan to merely fuck their shit up. I mean to raze their dishonest, antihuman, and violent ideology to the ground.

      ~M.D.

  • http://lifespeculiarities.blogspot.com/ Izzey

    To all that replied here,
    I have been reading the comments, and have so much to say about this, that it will have to be written as yet another article in respnse to both Manuel Dexter’s and Paul Elam’s. (as well as the fine commenters here)

    It will offer up another perspective, especially coming from one of the women that stand here with you…proudly.

    I have to write it up in the morning. but the whole thing is already in my head.
    It comes on the cusp of having my book read by a publisher, and what he said packs a punch that is worth repeating, and is relevant to the established dialogue in both articles.

    See you all tomorrow,
    And thank you,
    Izzey

    • http://lifespeculiarities.blogspot.com/ Izzey

      Replying to my own post here.
      I wrote the article and then retracted it later. I am an emotional writer. (Most of you know that) The article actually would have done more harm than good. I meant no disrespect by it, I felt a fear here, that I had not ever felt here before. My concern was for everyone, not just myself.

      ‘Change’ always scares me. Feeling like I am being told to change, when it took years to be comfortable in my own skin because of the life I have lead…petrifies me, as well as pisses me off.

      I have read all the comments on both threads, as well as the piece Fidelbogen wrote.
      I know my intial fears were unwarranted now. I will continue to be Izzey, and maybe take pause sometimes, to not be so quick on the ‘knee-jerk’ response I deliver on occasion. (I won’t swear not to swear) The mission/message is important…most important, and I will never lose sight of that.

      I like the dialogue that has been established so far, and look forward to more. I look up to many of you, and feel like I have a whole bunch of brothers. (and a few extra sisters)

      Manuel..thank you for your gracious reply to me. I am a huge fan of your writing, and respect you.

      See you all when I can.
      I will post one of my other articles soon enough.

      Izzey

  • DarkByke

    Another great article, agreed +1

  • http://avoiceformen.com KARMA MRA MGTOW

    Feelings vs Facts – Richard Dawkins & Bill Maher vs Oprah Winfrey & Eve Ensler

    From: St37One | Mar 24, 2010 | 8,099 views

    How the deliberate feminization of education and society is undermining civilization as we know it. Dawkins and Maher take note of the alarming trends

    Ref: http://youtu.be/xiKgA2JI2J8

    Brilliant video!

  • Peter CH.

    Feminism managed to immunise itself from much criticism and challenge by creating a blizzard of rhetoric and terminology that people became very frightened of .

    Knuckle dragger, misogynist, abuser, sexist, bare foot & pregnant etc. etc.

    The men’s movement , as well as telling the truth with clear reason and common sense , will somehow also need, sooner or later if a momentum of winning change is to take hold with the greater public, widely understood terms and phrases that will also have ominous connotations that people will not want to be labelled with – for very clear reasons.

    Detailed debate and long explaination is not always possible. Such things are beyond many people anyway. Pungent words and phrases need to be there to hand provided people know what they stand for. In this context terms like ‘White Knight’ and ‘Mangina’ – suggesting a form of dire foolishness that is inflicting both conscious and unconscious damage upon themselves and others – are , I believe, very useful and appropriate tools for MRA writing.

  • Auntie Pheminizm

    A free local sports paper hereabouts, written for a youngish audience, lards nearly every issue with at least a dozen “fuck-shit-ass” spices. I find it irritating. The writers are often good, but come across as lazy and low-brow. I don’t mind a few cusses now an again, but when you use them all the time they lose their impact. And cause me to feel the writers have limited vocabularies…and so, understanding.

    That being said, the MRM too often errs on the other side: sounding meek, mouse-like, and milquetoasty. They also talk about change taking “a long time” and equality “probably not occurring in our lifetime.” Well, WTF! It makes me wonder how aggrieved they are. The women’s movement’s key group is called NOW, remember, not SOMEDAY. If their is no urgency in our hearts change will take forever.

    In the early days, when there was plenty of time to protest, scouts of feminism appeared. Men did nothing. Worse, they humored “the little ladies.” Thought them cute, their “pretty little heads” filled with mush.

    When feminist skirmishers followed, guys still did nothing.

    Those forces were followed by hoplites, lancers, light cavalry, cannon, nukes, etc. until not a HUGE feminist army formed.

    Then feminist fortresses were erected. Local laws and whole nations were conquered because men never showed up on battlefields.

    The same men who did nothing then continued to do nothing, now saying “How can we fight anti-male laws, judges, etc.?” Well, as I’ve said before, Martians didn’t create misandry. Women’s’ groups did… abetted by men who refused to fight.

    Now, not all feminists were rabid. Yet many who became “authorities” were. They certainly didn’t pull punches. They called men “pigs” and “rapists” and “slave-owners.” They claimed men were not cost-effective, the Y chromosome a useless appendix, penises evil appendages. Plus they proudly shouted that womyn were A-N-G-R-Y.

    And they got attention. And the world into the social shite it’s in today. Men who stopped the Hun let Honey steal their kids.

    So, sure, we need researchers and so on. But we also need firebrands, populizers, figthers, etc.

    We also need media-grabbing events. For every “Clothesline Project” (allowing wimmin to write unproven male aspersions on tee-shirts hung on rope lines at colleges) we need a creative counters: like a “Closed Mind Project” whereby we write facts debunking feminiist lies on the cardboard outlines of female heads, hanging THEM on clotheslines, too.

    For every “Take Back The Night” march we need a “Stop Benighted Feminism” marches.

    To wit: we need to be well-informed, provocative, creative, effective. We need op-eds in major papers. Spokespersons on TV. Pro-male movies like “Men Don’t Tell.”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_gLDF2dGLY

    I’ve been around feminists enough to know they don’t hesitation to lie about and malign men…often personally. You will never sway them, BUT you can stop them by giving back as good as you get. You don’t stop bullies when they are bullying by being “nice.” You make them pay a price. And you let others see you doing it. If the bully later comes around to wanting to talk, fine. But don’t count on it. DO, however, know that other bullies will now worry. And the abused feel hopeful.

    So don’t worry about visitors coming here and being put-off by “bad language.” Most don’t blink when they hear feminists call men “bastards” and so on. Those on “our side” won’t mind strong language; many, in fact, will welcome it. Plus one can always apologize. But keerist, remember: men have been holding their fire for decades. DECADES! And things have only worsened. Feminists STILL shell us.

    Ergo, we deserve a few months/years of venting all we want.

    We’re in the soup we are today because zillions of men failed to act when there was time. I hold most men’s groups responsible for that. After all, their raison d’etre was to advocate for men. They not only fell down on the job, they fell asleep. That a few groups just now STARTING to fight back and change laws is little consolations. A generation of fathers grew old separated from their kids. Hundreds of male soldiers died while women majored in Women’s Studies.

    If you are a Western democracy and are only now rousing yourself to skirmish with Hitler you are worse than useless.

    You don’t stare at poured cement hardening on your lawn, then complain how hard it is to get rid of it to grow grass. You don’t let it be poured in the first place!

    To be fair, feminism had many gender-based advantages. Many of its early founders stayed home while their husbands worked. That gave them time to write and socialize/meet with other women. Post-WWII they could blubber about boring life in suburbs while their husbands worked despite PTSD. Feminists also enjoyed society’s indulgence of female emotional expressions (coupled with the shaming of any men who dared oppose them). They also availed themselves of male socialization… which taught guys to stuff feelings, never act hurt or sad, and to never-ever-ever-EVER hit back at (even verbally!) females who angered/attacked them.

    Plus most men were raised by mothers who had real power over them (physically, emotionally, spiritually, and economically) for years. That early love/fear comes up when they oppose women who attack men.

    So where are we today? MIT helps girls with science; Simmons College does not help boys to be emotionally expressive. We save tits, not prostate glands. We teach girls soccer, not boys to care for babies. We give women the vote, men rifles to protect societies that give women the vote. We give women the benefit of access to both home and office; men the burden of working-working-working. We let women rant and rave and make-up misandric factoids while insisting men be cool, calm, reasonable…every back-up every argument with stacks of studies (all of which feminists will mock or ignore).

    Gentlemen: we are over-run and nearly defeated. Why continue playing “fair” with those cutting off our balls? Men NEED to vent early and often, loudly and long. Over time our feelings will level out (provided the CAUSES of our anger are addressed). I suggest we err on the side of letting feminists “have it both barrels.”

    This site is one of the few that has some oomph to it. Paul is a large part of that. Too many other websites, like too many men’s groups, have timid, tepid non-leaders.

    Now suppose, for shits-and-giggles, Paul goes on TV facing off against Gloria Steinem. Suppose further that she recites a dozen male-bashing “facts” and asks Paul what he has to say about “them apples”? I’d LOVE it if he stood up and said, “Gloria, I’m glad you asked. Because HERE’s what I think of your nonsense…” after which he drops his drawers and farts in her, as Monty Python put it, “general direction.”

    First, it would make international news.

    Second, millions of men around the world would roll on the floor, laughing insanely.

    Third, feminists would be put on notice: “Maude, those MRAs are effin’ crazy! You never know WHAT they’ll do!”

    Fourth, Paul would get hundreds of calls from reporters, talk-show producers, etc.

    Fifth, Paul could then, during one-on-one interviews, talk calmly about what the MRM is about…because he’d have the world’s eyes-and-ears then. He’s not have to worry about being distracted or upstaged by a fembot.

    Okay, okay. I’m not saying he SHOULD do that, just saying it wouldn’t be the end of the world if he did. Politicians lie and worse and still keep their jobs. Why? Because people accept apologies. And/or like watching train-wrecks. Etc.

    That is, the world often makes way for strong personas. Bill Clinton stayed president after lying to Congress, having sex with an intern, and boning (as a married man!) numerous bimbos. Meanwhile, Senator Bob Packwood was driven from Congress not because he harassed women, but because he ineptly came on to them…and didn’t tell his accusers to eff-off.

    Not everyone feels comfortable in the spotlight. There’s a place for everyone in our army. We just have to remember WHY armies exist in the first place. And also that many famous fighters were flawed.

    So, let’s not worry too much about being “nice.” Let’s find effective ways to fight back so men can live full, satisfying lives.