JTO goes under bus

Finally, a more skilled opponent.

For years, Men’s human Rights Activists have been asking for some opposition beyond the boringly predictable shaming and accusatory rhetoric of the feminist public sphere. A Voice for Men’s founder and publisher Paul Elam and I have both written several articles each attempting to provide guidance to oppositional writers in fielding a more effective attack against the movement for male human rights.

We really do hope for those opposing this movement to sharpen their pencils, as the exercise of repeatedly swatting aside empty accusation and ineffective attempts to invoke shame do little to develop our own skills, or advance the public discourse. Sadly, until the present, all such advice has gone unheeded.

In 2011, despairing of the flaccid character of the opposition’s rhetoric, I wrote an article originally titled “Where is the Counter Argument”. It’s conclusion was that in the continued light of no substantive effort at any honest opposition from either the mainstream or feminist spheres, I was no longer interested in the apparently futile project to cultivate honest debate.

From that article:

“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.


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.”

But finally, it appears the Men’s Human Rights Movement has raised enough eyebrows that somebody other than a complete dunce is willing to bestir themselves to do more than copy-paste “rape apologist” from their clipboard of thought-stopping cliches.

Enter R Tod Kelly, a journalist presently writing for Newsweek. He interviewed me via Skype this morning for an upcoming article to be published by Newsweek/The Daily Beast. As I expected him to do, he questioned me very politely. I also expect him to savage me mercilessly from his keyboard. Well, not just mercilessly, I expect him to do so effectively, with a minimal reliance on regurgitated cliches like rape-apologetics, misogyny and small-penis/mother’s basement and other insults so common in the writing of those typically opposing the Men’s Human Rights Movement.

Kelly, for his part, is not an idiot, and he’s going to get a few things right, probably. I mentioned the workplace death rate at least a few times in our call. Here it is again: 93% of those killed on the job in north America are men. And even after years of talking about this number it still shocks me. I mentioned the male-weighted rate of suicide. 4 male corpses for every woman dead by her own hand. I also mentioned the devastating impact of false accusations on men, and the flippancy with which such accusations are delivered in a social climate where being female maps to the public perception of victimhood, particularly at the perceived hands of a male offender.

I spent a little over an hour in my Skype call with Mr Kelly, and we had what I think is a most productive discussion. The conversation ranged from the utility and power of even informal false accusations to the long term economic and social consequences of feminism in a big-government society. Kelly asked me about the origins of my own interest in men’s human rights issues, and we even plumbed some speculative theories connecting central banking, the funding of early feminist organizations and the complicit silence of mainstream journalism during feminism’s rise to pre-eminence. (Tin-foil hats and all)

However, although R Tod Kelly will likely mention some of these issues, he’s still going to try to mow me down from the driver’s seat of the number 10 express to downtown. Wait, what? Didn’t I just say we had a productive and friendly discussion lasting over an hour? Well sure, but Kelly asked me for the interview by email, in the following terms. It’s a long swath of text to include in this discussion, but still only part of what Mr Kelly covered in his email.

“The editors and I agree that the both the need for a men’s rights movement and the uphill challenges the movement faces might be better communicated by focusing on a single person’s battles.

A few weeks ago I think I might have considered other people, but right now I think the perfect person to focus on would be you.

You are, if I may say so, probably the most intriguing person in the movement today. You are, I believe, one of the only (if not the only) paid staff person in the entire movement. You are young and passionate, articulate, and most of the movement regards you as a leader. I have seen a number of your videos, including a local TV interview you did, and was dutifully impressed. Most of the people I have spoken with are happy to write on the internet and let it be; none of the other younger members of the movement I have encountered other than you has gone the extra step to begin work on starting a non-profit to advocate formally. I know that folks like Paul have had a lot to do with what the movement is today, but I believe that you more than anyone else might help sculpt what the movement becomes in the next 10-20 years.

So you know, my thought would be for the article to focus on your story – how you got involved, where you’ve had successes and failures in bringing about change – and then use your personal story to springboard to the larger movement.”

Admittedly, some readers might, in a fugue of naiveté, view this torrent of naked flattery as positive indication that Kelly would give this movement, or myself as an actor in the movement some sort of favorable treatment.


I was young and stupid once, too. The bottom of the bus is where I’m about to be, in whatever treatment Newsweek or The Beast offers up — despite Mr. Kelly’s assumption of my pathological narcissism and his over-the-pathetic-top attempt to manipulate me.

Some possible spin:

I’m a conspiracy theorist. The straps on my tinfoil hat are too tight. It’s the Bilderbergs, the Rockefeller group, the new world order, Alex Jones and David Icke’s lizard-man overlords from planet X.


I’m paranoid that all sexual encounters carry the potential of entrapment, all rape accusations are false, women’s sexual organs are sinister, and all the wimmin-folk wants to steal my sperms!


I’m a sexual loser, a professional failure – and barely one step from living in my mother’s basement – addling myself with porn because no real woman will step within 100 meters of me.

O wait. No, it cant be that one, that’s straight out of the shaming tactics catalog.

How about: “Money for nothin’. Chicks for free”?

Possibly, I’m a swindler, scamming the general public with the pretense of human rights activism while pocketing all the loot to fund addictions and disgusting sexual habits. After all, the paypal account associated with Vancouver’s local men’s rights activist group is listed as the grandiose sounding American Human Right’s Education Foundation. And despite that official sounding name, there is no 401c charity or nonprofit group with any legal recognition whatsoever. And hey, I’m also one of the only activists in this movement taking home a paycheque (if I am generous enough to call it that). Surely that can be spun into a story that we’re all in it just for the dollars. Or maybe only I’m in it for the dollars.

I’m actually hoping this might be included in the attack, simply for its novelty value.

Another approach might be the standard dismissal of evolutionary psychology. It’s my opinion that general public indifference to male-impacting pain has its roots far deeper in our brains than simply an ideology of gender popularized and mainstreamed in the last half century. That ideology trades heavily on some natural tendencies shared by our hominid ancestors. That’s one of the factors making the public recognition of issues affecting male human rights so challenging.

I can hardly wait to meet my doom under Tod Kelly’s keyboard. But at the end of our discussion, he mentioned that he’d be in my town within the next few days, and we’re all buddies for the moment, scheduled to meet for beers some time this weekend. I’m looking forward to it, but I’m scheming to make Tod cover the tab.

Feature image public domain, wiki commons. 

AMMENDMENT: [Sunday 20 October 2013] R Tod Kelly, writing for the Daily Beast has finally delivered, and published his article. After waiting for months for his attack – he did what none of us expected. He wrote a thorough, well researched and comprehensive summary of the entire Men’s human rights movement, including Paul, who Kelly calls a rock star, and myself he calls a superstar. Admittedly, he also offers some criticism of the movement and of me – but Kelly’s article is inarguably the best addressing this movement ever published in the mainstream. The Superstar characterization was obviously over the top. But clearly, I’m not the only writer occasionally indulging in hyperbole. And I was wrong in my prediction of the same old attack. Well done Mr Kelly, very well done indeed.

To everyone besides Mr Kelly, go read it. Seriously.

  • AVFM seeks app writer volunteer

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

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

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

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

    Please create an account and then follow instructions here

  • OneHundredPercentCotton

    From the back of the bus to under the bus – it promises be a long wild wild ride, JtO.

    Truth is on your side.

    No matter how bad it gets…that’s still the best place to be.

  • napocapo69

    “divide et impera”…

    Let’s see the article.

    By the way, I’ m not a for conspiracy theories as well, I’m more for the confluence of different interests, and the support to gender ideology by the strongest financial powers is proven. Most of the of the influential feminists we had in Italy in the last years, covering powerful positions in institutions and media, have a seat at the Bilderberg, or UN.
    Believe or not exporting feminism is a good business for the OECD (OCSE).

  • greg

    Newsweek/DailyBeast recently ran article by NCFM advisor Phil Cook regarding DV.

    We’ll see what happens here.

  • Mike Buchanan

    John, very interesting. You may be right about the coming article, but we’re still at the stage that all publicity is good publicity, I think. I recently had an hour-long interview with a ‘Sunday Times’ columnist and in a full-page article there was one small paragraph on J4MB, and she mis-quoted me. But it helped increase exposure, increased blog hits etc. We even got a couple of new donors.

    I’m 100% with you on evolutionary psychology. Denial of gender-typical differences is a cornerstone of feminism, but it looks more ridiculous with each passing year, the more we learn about about gender-typical men’s and women’s brains.

    Onwards and upwards!

    Mike Buchanan

    (and the women who love them)

  • Robert St. Estephe

    John, I’m placing a brief text here that underscores the fact that MHRM is an idea that attracts many women. I think this info is useful to have at hand when dealing with those who think the MRHM is a post-60s notion.

    The background for the following text is that Liga Für Menschenrechte (literally, League for Human Rights), founded in Vienna in 1926 by Sigurd Hoeberth with an explicit program to promote the rights of males, and with international ambitions (contacts with MRAs in US, England, etc., planned int’l convention), split into two groups: Justicia (which wanted to have no women as members) and Equitas (which embraced female membership). I’m not sure how Jutiscia met its end, but this is (despite the writer’s sharply condescending tone) the story of how it folded —

    FULL TEXT (Article 8 of 8): Rarely does a mother consider a son’s choice of a wife worthy of the distinction conferred upon her.

    Equitas, the world league for the rights of men, with headquarters in Vienna, was made up largely of women members, a majority of them mothers of marriageable sons. The purpose of Equitas was to defend men against the encroachment of women, whom it charged with being in league to pre-empt all world power and dominion.

    Equitas’ offices bristled with such potent warnings as “Singer Shoots Her Husband, “Husband Poisoners of Nagyrev,” “Orgies of an 18-year-Old Girl.” A weekly journal, “Self Defense,” kept members and public informed on status of men’s rights in various parts of the world. Now Equitas has folded to make way for a woman’s shoe store in the quarters it occupied.

    Mothers find their sons do not share their apprehension concerning the dangers besetting the path of an eligible young man. Equitas could furnish its members no recipe for convincing a young man in love that the object of his affection is a designing creature plotting to reduce him to a state of dependence or even slavery. Unlikely as it seems, the time may come when men will be compelled to band together in defense of their rights, as women were forced to unite in a concerted drive against man domination, and Equitas may rise again.

    [“Mothers’ Club to Save Sons Closes Doors,” syndicated (Newspaper Alliance), The Milwaukee Journal (Wi.), Oct. 10, 1930, p. 10]

    How ‘bout that closing sentence, fellas?

  • The Real Peterman

    I’m picturing John in a white jumpsuit and helmet with red and blue stars across them. “Who wants to see me get thrown under a bus?” he shouts.

    • Ray

      “Under the bus,” or in the trashcans of Western societal institutions, it appears there’s always room for one more member of the disposable sex. :-/

    • Unregistard

      Oh wow, a Super Dave Osborne reference. Now I can’t imagine JtO without the white jumpsuit and a dramatic pose.

  • 86

    Call me naive and a flatterer as well, but the part of his letter that he quoted seems 100% correct and leaves me with hope for his article.

    I have to say that before making avfm a semi-regular stop, I kept on hearing “JTO, total misogynist abusive jerk”, “JTO, total misogynist abusive jerk”, “JTO, total misogynist abusive jerk”, and was completely blown away by the contrast of how you appear in videos to how feminists and feminists panderers characterize you.

    (I wish you had written this post and “placed it in a sealed letter send to you and a few others” to show that you had predicted the outcome.)

    Hey, all of that said, I would donate money to send you and other AVFM writers to workshops on how to create effective, well-edited, articles and videos. Sadly, much of what I see from this site is better than TimeCube and could use some semi-ruthless editing.

    • Paul Elam

      Not trying to be a smart ass here, as what you are saying is pretty spot on, so I invite you to fund us for an experienced and ruthless editor.

      This is a volunteer operation enjoying unprecedented success for a men’s rights website despite the lack of professional assistance. We are outpacing well funded feminist sites despite our lack of professional expertise.

      We have a dedicated, awesome staff of individuals that would be more than happy to learn from someone who knows the craft inside and out. Perhaps you can make that happen, giving you what you want and solving many of our issues.

      As you can see by our banners, they only go to other MHRA type sites. We have no paid advertising, as caring about men and boys remains a business killer, and we count on those that enjoy our work, but want it to be better, to contribute to helping us make improvements.

      The donation button is in the top right of this page, in dire need of your personal attention. You can designate the money for whatever purpose you like, and I will show you proof of how it was spent.

      • Ty Henry

        As a side note, just paid a contribution 2 days ago

    • scatmaster


      Mr Elam called you out dude. What say you???

      Yes, I am not one who could do some editing.

      Can ya tell?

  • Dean Esmay

    As a writer if I got that letter I’d be instantly suspicious, and I’ve been around a long time and I know all the dirty tricks journalists can use. That said, I hope we’re wrong and we get an honest piece here, even if it is critical. And I hope it’s not filled with the lamest responses like “yeah men kill themselves more often but women threaten to kil themselves more often, so it’s the same thing” and “well yeah but men are stronger so when they hit they’re more dangerous.” I won’t hold my breath but it would be nice to see something more substantive than that shit, or the typical “just a bunch of crazy whiners” or “misogynists” bullshit. Guess it’s all good though, whatever it is.

    • scatmaster

      IMO, whilst any publicity is good publicity.
      I would have asked for a column for rebuttal if warranted.

      Ya, right. Would never happen with the MSM!!!


    JTO – How much money do you need and “shut-up and take my money!!!”

    • scatmaster


      said in his best Dr. Evil impression.

      Or 25 bucks a month through PayPal.

      • MGHOW_AU

        DOH! Since I can’t promise a monthly donation, I’ll do a repeat of my “summer donation drive” donation
        $30 USD on it’s way

        • MGHOW_AU


        • scatmaster

          Good on ya mate!!!!

  • theoutside

    I agree that all coverage is good. But from such a rag as Newsweek….

    well, we’ll just have to wait and see….

    Document everything, etc.

    And, last but not least — CONGRATULATIONS on being seen as a leader. :)

  • Mark Trueblood

    I’m noticing some shifts in the mainstream narrative lately.

    On general men’s issues:

    Men have no issues —> Men have issues but they should wait in line for women’s issues to be solved —> Men have issues but they are caused by the Patriarchy so its their fault —> Men have issues that need addressing, but since many of the people addressing them are big bad meanies we’re still going to ignore it —> Men have issues that need addressing, and many of the people addressing them are interesting to gawk at

    On female-on-male domestic violence:

    Women never do anything like that —> Women do that, but it is only to protect herself —> Women do that, but it doesn’t hurt men —> Women do that, but we’re going to pretend that far fewer men are affected then women so tough cheese —> Women do that, and maybe we need to start discussing the issue.

    • Astrokid

      Re: Men have issues that need addressing, but since many of the people addressing them are big bad meanies we’re still going to ignore it

      I have heard some say that.. Yes, Mens issues are important, but the MRAs are no good handling that. These issues should be pitched in a polite fashion in the marketplace of ideas.
      The fuckwits havent read through the history of the MRM.. that this has been tried before.. and the psychological and State issues that make the task so difficult.

      And then the issue of feminist deviousness and foulplay, such as the suppression of gender symmetric DV acknowledged in an Ally Fogg post recently. They dont mention that again, do they? Just pretend it never happened, and back to feminism as usual. Feminism can never be at fault. Disgusting.

  • Ray

    Congrats on getting the interview JTO, and good luck getting “objective” coverage of men’s human rights issues.

    Of the fifteen leading causes of death in America, according to the CDC, men lead in 12 categories, are tied with women in two categories, and women lead in only one category. Yet there’s an Office of Women’s Health at the federal level, the state level where I live, and the county level where I live (L.A., CA), but no Office of Men’s Health in any of those locations. Why?

    In this upcoming article, will we find an Office of Men’s Health “under the bus.” Perhaps MarxSpeak will point one out to us (under the bus), since propagandized, Marxist ink appears to want that to be the only place for men’s valid issues. After all, under the Marxist race/class/gender paradigm men are all privileged by Patriarchy. Therefore, males and their valid issues, don’t matter.

    • Robert St. Estephe

      No need to get accurate coverage. A big-audience venue means that many will learn of the movement and of AVfM who do not today know it exists. Those big media readers who are orthodox (mangina, white knight) will go away from a hit piece (or inaccurate piece) with the same views they had before. But there will be many readers of it who today have no idea that the MHRM option exists they will decide to look into it. (saying “Wow, a voice for people like me! About time!”)If the MHRM is not in its its interpretation of today’s culture misguided (and I do not think it is) then the mere announcement that both the movement in general and AVfM in particular are in existence will be a recruitment tool. (And personally I don’t mind if newcomers choose go with a faction of MRM that doesn’t like AVfM — as long as they begin to pay attention to the growing world of anti-misandry).

  • Pierce Harlan

    JtO, best wishes. My two cents: the intriguing thing about the mainstream media is that it has developed an uncanny ability to treat those issues (1) that everyone agrees are problems and (2) that predominantly impact men, as not really being “men’s rights” issues.

    Example: Brian Banks and Hofstra false rape claims. The Innocence Project lawyers involved in the Banks case explained that Brian’s case is not an isolated problem. The Hofstra case’s outcome led to a symposium where news people agreed they “moved too fast” (no kidding, Sherlock!). The best example: Duke lacrosse. Bottom line: everyone agreed these cases manifested problems that are not isolated when it comes to men accused of heinous crimes. Yet, the mainstream news media refused to treat them as “men’s rights” issues.

    At my blog, we advocate for women wrongly accused with the same tenacity we advocate for men (in the past few months we’ve done several stories on women who were wrongly accused of making false rape claims). The reality is that men have a monopoly on being wrongly accused.

    But the most important point is this: I don’t deny that rape is a problem. And I don’t change the subject to false rape claims every time rape is brought up. Why can’t false rape claims also be part of the public discourse? False rape claims pose unique issues that are important to its victims — why must every discussion of false rape claims devolve into “rape is far more common”?

    In short, why can’t we acknowledge that there are issues that primarily affect women, and issues that affect men? For example:

  • Kimski

    Make him work for it, whatever the outcome may be.

    Best of luck.

  • jerrytheother

    They’re going to make it personal, and ignore the issues. Michael Moore did that to me about 20 years ago. See my story here:

    • Astrokid

      Now that Michael Moore is getting divorced, lets see if he gets taken to the cleaners are reevaluates his position.

      I am looking forward to NCFM making its archive of old-time media interviews available to everyone in digital format. We can show those to journalists/public to illustrate that we have been raising these issues for a long time.

      Any thoughts on this article by Cathy Young from July 1994? Making sense of the men’s movement.
      While she understand the big-ticket issues, she figures that we often have a victimhood complex.
      Unfortunately, masculism also has a tendency to adopt the less constructive traits and tactics of modern feminism, including polarizing rhetoric, exaggerated claims of victimization as the basis of political demands, and the tailoring of facts to fit ideology. If the movement becomes simply feminism with a scratchy face, it will be rightly derided as an attempt to convince the world that white heterosexual men are victims, too. But if men’s advocates are consistent in applying principles of fairness and equality, they will have much to say of value to women as well as men.

      At its worst, masculism can sound like the ne plus ultra of political correctness: The pantheon of the oppressed is completed by the admission of straight white guys. (That leaves us with no oppressor, but an impersonal entity like “the sex/gender system” might do.) Men’s advocates often rail against the victim mentality, but they are hardly immune to its temptations: High-school football is “male child abuse”; circumcision is socially sanctioned violence against infant boys comparable to female genital mutilation; women who walk around looking sexy yet remaining unavailable are abusing men; and anyway, men’s higher mortality rates are unassailable proof of victimhood.

    • Robert St. Estephe

      Mainstream media journalists have now achieved a status perviously owned by shysters and pimps. There is no lower profession in the world than mainstream media journalist.


        That’s for sure, even Paul Joseph Goebbels would blush!

  • prince_tybalt

    WTF, JTO is young? Damn, I’m a sperm in the movement then :P.

    I just did an interview with a Toronto Star reporter. I’m wondering how that will be painted.

    • scatmaster

      Since its nickname is the Red Star I think we know which way the interview will be “painted”.

      • prince_tybalt

        Which is why I read it. I identify heavily with the left (especially being a social worker). Given articles I’ve read by Rosie Dimanno, that is where I would have my concerns.

        The reporter I spoke with seemed to have moments of clarity to some things I brought up, and shock at others. I mostly spoke about Warren Farrell’s concept of the glass cellars of man and how that is where I work on a daily basis (I work with predominantly gay men at one job, and homeless men at another).

  • Ty Henry

    Speaking if MSM, I got my first diss on Twitter from a Nationally known writer, no surprise he’s the Canadian National Post’s National Sports Columnist, Bruce Arthur. Keep in mind, I never used the word “misandry” in my pieces. He’s from Vancouver; no surprise, considering the level of feminist militance (and cowardice) emanting from north of the border. I offered to discourse with him via email as to what he found objectionable about my latest piece. You’ll see his responses

    What a coward.

  • J Galt

    John, as a factually rational stoic your integrity is sublime and deeply passionate. Effervescent of attainable masculinity and respect. Counting you as a brother in arms exceeds the ten fingers and the ten toes. I hope the beer loosens your indignation as a palpable rhythm of the maleness you share with us all. Rightly he should foot the bill if his intention is for a quick screw of one with a finer dignity.

    Maybe one day interviews of this kind will be held on this site by a cross section of those that represent us in their efforts and writings. Open to the observation of a community unwilling to be pigeon holed. Where each question and response is accompanied by up-votes and down-votes to congeal a deeper sense of us all. Or maybe you could post his inquiries so that our editorial staff could respond with the added oversight of voting on their comments. Something that included the readership and excludes the heroics of individuals. Teach them something new John. Openness consistent with your integrity. Let’s go under the bus together or not at all.

  • Bolo

    With all the shaming and ire JtO has drawn from feminists, I suspect he’s made out of mercury by now. A T-1000 MRA, now that sounds fucking cool to me.

  • TheSameDog
  • harrywoodape

    Today 80% of Earth’s human interaction is digitized and stored (texts, phone calls, emails, etc) for examination by private intelligence firms and…well…the NSA.
    Journalists in major mass media publications – such as Newsweek are inseparable from intelligence networks – they are entrusted with persuading and subverting the masses to believe what Newsweek’s owners (think very big) want us to believe about the world we live in. If I mention Watergate and that Carl Bernstein began focusing on CIA penetration and control of US newspapers when he was shut down – then you will know what I am talking about.
    Therefore, never trust a journalist in mainstream media. Even if they appear blissfully unaware of what they are doing or how things work…you can bet their editor has a grip on the stories and spin they are directed to tell and focus on.
    They are seeing if you can be charmed, flattered, and just learning about you John. To see if you can be subverted or influenced. To see if you will give away something.
    I think you are very intelligent John, but we are all human. I wouldnt drink alcohol with this person.