Lemon fruit tea

Back from 20/20 in New York

Hello everyone. I wanted to give you an update from my trip to New York yesterday, and offer some predictions on what will be happening with the interview I did with ABC News 20/20.

First, let me say it was a very tiring day. I am amazed at times by the possibilities of the age I live in. Still, waking up in Houston, flying to New York City, taping an interview and then being back in Houston in time to sleep in my bed is one hell of a whirlwind day.

The interview itself was, how do I put this, every bit as skewed as I expected. I spoke first with ABCs Elizabeth Vargas, a seasoned, tough, no nonsense anchor that managed to conjure up a fair amount of nonsense for the interview nonetheless.

She did pretty much as I expected. She dwelled, obsessively so, on cherry picked bits of my most provocative writing, insisting that it was not satire (by her own edict I suppose), even as I informed her repeatedly that it was satire, and pointed to the fact that I had also said that in the articles. Those few examples were all she wanted to talk about, which I know surprises you to no end.

When we did discuss the issues faced by men and boys, she either dismissed them as trivial or acted like I was crazy for having brought them up in the first place.

She just kept insisting that I was promoting or inciting violence, that I hated women and supported rape.

To be fair to her, there were portions of the interview where she asked some very intelligent questions and allowed me more than sufficient space to answer them. How much of that winds up on the cutting room floor is anyone’s guess.

I will also say that she did not appear to take any of this personally. Outside what was taped she was affable and professional, as was producer Steven Schnee and the camera crew doing the shoot.

Perhaps most interesting was that after the interview with Vargas, they placed me in a hotel café with feminist activist Jaclyn Friedman, one of the people responsible for the Facebook “anti-misogyny” campaign that quickly devolved into the Facebook anti-free speech campaign targeting people who dissent from feminist dogma.

This woman was a piece of work. After seating us at a table together, with cameras rolling, I was treated to a string of false accusations. Friedman claimed that I was responsible for mass shootings, for women fleeing their homes in fear for their lives under the direction of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and of course for rape apologia, violence against women and all other social maladies. I don’t recall whether she blamed me for 9/11, but things got kind of blurry after the first few accusations.

She of course offered no proof of any of this. Go figure.

At one point during the “discussion,” after Friedman had said (for the third or forth time) that she was done talking to me, I wished her luck and suggested that she and those of her ilk would need it in the future.

She said something to the effect, ‘I can’t believe you just made a threat on camera.’

Well, at least we know they sent a real feminist to confront me on my evil ways.

The bottom line is this. I am betting that the interview with Vargas will be reduced to her bravely and admirably standing up to my hateful calls for violence, rape, pillaging, killing kittens and seeking to relegate women to the sammich mines for eternity. The numerous points I made will not fit their time constraints for the piece and will thus be excluded. Either that, or they will kill the segment entirely.

Now again, I am only guessing here, but it is an informed guess based on what is now a good bit of experience talking with people in the media. If I am wrong I will waste no time in issuing a highly visible apology to Vargas and to 20/20.

As I have said before, this is the unfortunate reality of what we have to deal with. Since we live in a culture that finds the pain and struggles of men both inconvenient and repugnant, we are left to draw attention to that pain and those struggles in ways that sometimes offend those who top the list of those who do not want to hear it. As I tried to impart to Vargas several times, without the harsh satire, the acerbic commentary, she and I would not be talking. AVFM would be just another blog addressing problems that the world doesn’t give a damn about.

So, we take those lemons and make lemonade around here. We are prepared to handle the visitors that come from this bit of modern journalism and provide them the opportunity to investigate who we are and why we do what we do. As it already has in the past, it will result in growth and support. It will enable us to continue to carry the message that men are human beings, and that men’s rights are human rights.

I don’t know, but if you ask me that is some pretty good lemonade.

Support us by becoming a member

AVFM depends on readers like you to help us pay expenses related to operations and activism. If you support our mission, please subscribe today.

Join or donate

Sponsored links

  • Jared Spencer

    Better you then me, sir. I say that because I sincerely believe you are better prepared, informed, practiced and poised then I am to even imagine such an undertaking. At that, I shall tip my ( ever- present) hat to you, sir.

    • Theseus

      You got that right!

      Good grief, what a gauntlet.

  • http://sportsdroppingsusa.blogspot.com Ty Henry

    Paul, did they inform you ahead of time about Friedman, or was it an ambush?

    By the way, I LOVE the post-invective pearl-clutching on her part

    • Fredrik

      They use threat narratives by habit, we deconstruct them by training (thank you Typhon Blue).

  • 4thtroika

    Bravo, Paul. Look foreward to seeing this.

    • 4thtroika

      As well as your analysis.

  • http://equalitythroughtruth.blogspot.com/ Jean Valjean

    Regardless of how the interview or the cutting goes I think it is a huge success to even be featured on this program.

    If they are unfair to you then in the long run it will hurt 20/20 and Vargas’ reputation.

    Good for you for getting on the show. I hope Friedman was as rabid as she sounds. It won’t look as good as it used to.

  • Stu

    Sounds like they have their threat narrative all planned, and will use it to incite violence against us.

    The lemons are bitter, but he sugar is coming, in the years ahead, when these arse hats have to back peddle and try to explain away their lifetimes of inciting hatred of men and boys

  • donzaloog

    Thanks for stepping into the fire like this. I bet they’ll try to make you look as evil as possible especially with the way you told Friedman she’d need good luck in the future.

  • Redfield

    Respect to you Dr Elam, many thanks for putting yourself in harms way for me and my children ….

  • Woody Red

    I’m looking forward to seeing how this story turns out.

  • AntZ

    Jaclyn Friedman runs a web site and blog:

    Location: http://www.jaclynfriedman.com/
    Alexa traffic rating: 5,611,574
    Compare to AVFM: 34,094

    Her paranoid rantings reach as many people in a year, as AVfM reaches every weekend.

    Comopared to AVfM, this feminist is an invisible speck of hate … let’s see if 20/20 can conjure sufficiently clear vision to recognize this.

    • http://themrmglossary.blogspot.com/ dhanu

      Feminist don’t need to erect their own platforms with their own hardwork (not that they can if they tried). They always capitalize on the others’ works either through manipulation or government coercion. So, no matter if jacklynfriedman.com ranks lower than AVfM, her ass-lickers include the MSM top-rankers. (And by any chance, if they refuse to provide her a platform, like they do to the MRA’s, the government will force them to.)

  • Cam

    I would have to echo the thoughts of others here,namely:-

    Paul, I’m sure you did a great job under very difficult circumstances.
    News and current affairs is all about ratings and “infotainment” now unless you are watching PBS. So there is nothing like some confrontation and an hysterical and ignorant feminist thrown into the mix to keep up the interest. By the latter I am referring to:

    “Friedman claimed that I was responsible for mass shootings, for women fleeing their homes in fear for their lives under the direction of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and of course for rape apologia, violence against women and all other social maladies. I don’t recall whether she blamed me for 9/11, but things got kind of blurry after the first few accusations.”

    I would expect your piece will attract much new interest to your web site from concerned men (hopefully including many young guys) to see what this is all about. If that is just one result from this it will be all very positive.

    Well done Paul and clearly everyone thanks you for your fine efforts.

  • dungone

    For what it’s worth, I would be careful not to fall into a sort of MRM exceptionalism. The major news outlets have done these sort of hatchet jobs on every underdog social movement that had ever threatened the status quo. This isn’t that much different. The MRM isn’t the first social movement to have been fueled by the rise of decentralized communication. It’s also not the first to be unfairly censored by the likes of Facebook. That’s just how it goes.

  • Adanu

    Seems like they decided not to run it?

  • Eizieizz

    Too bad they didn’t,
    i think seeing Jaclyn Friedmans dishonesty in full glory
    would have been eye opening to many people.

  • OzzieMatt

    They were probably hoping for a Westboro Baptist-style interview and didn’t get it.
    I think it’s rather curious Ms Vargas ended up in rehab soon after this interview.
    I doubt she would have been used to truth and logic when discussing gender issues and her brain went into meltdown.