Challenge issued July 17, 2012 : http://www.avoiceformen.com/misandry/if-you-cant-fight-wear-a-big-hat/
To the NICE feminists : http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/to-the-nice-feminists/
Pee Zed’s “counter argument” LOLZ : http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/11/07/exterminate/
http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/radfem-hub-the-underbelly-of-a-hate-movement/
http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/feminist-lies-feminism/when-is-a-death-threat-funny/
John Hembling is the Editor in Chief of the A Voice for Men website and co-host of A Voice for Men Radio. 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.
 |
Dianne Abbott is concerned about men. More specifically she is concerned about their masculinity; especially when she thinks on some level that it may affect women. Well, actually only when she thinks it will affect women. Correction: Dianne Abbott isn't concerned about men at all.
The honey badger parade continues as Diana Davison offers up some analysis and some poetry on female power and male disposability. For anyone out there interested in understanding why women become MHRAs, now would be a good time to shut up and read.
As is no secret to anyone not living under a rock these days, the language and sentiments of the MHRM are making their way into the mainstream. Here is another example courtesy of CeeLo Green, a mega star with the courage to let the truth fly, right in the faces of assholes.
Myers Karvunidis offers an apology to the men's movement, sort of. She is sorry, but it still isn't really her fault. In fact, she may be saying that her mistakes were caused by you.
It has been established by investigators, not to mention a mountain of evidence, that restraining orders have been very, very good to actress Pauley Perrette. Are we on the verge of seeing one of them pan out nicely for her again, at the expense of ex-husband Francis Shivers?
For Brad Casey. Watch this video, man, Watch it till your eyes bleed. Watch it till whatever part of your shopworn values that have not sold out start to find some inspiration from a single person telling their honest, simple story. Take an example from the courage, if you're not too much of a chickenshit.
For those following the University of Toronto debacle involving Warren Farrell and a gaggle of violent protesters against the human rights of men and boys, we have our first investigative winner.
Everyone once in a while we examine what passes for wisdom on the pages of the Good Men Project Magazine. The only thing for sure on this one is that it doesn't pass for wisdom here.
You want to help men? Grasp what it is like to be one with women like you for five fucking minutes. Then we can sit down and have a little chat.
Abortion is highly polemicist, with the mainstay of its opponents squarely on the neoconservative religions right. Socons, as we call them.
The Southern Poverty Law Center has placed AVfM and other related sites on a list identifying them as "misogynist" and "woman hating." Paul Elam responds with a letter to the SPLC president.
This is an AVfM action alert. We have recently been notified of what appears to be a developing plan to face men with the prospect of extermination.
You can support us by making  donations either one-time or on a monthly subscription basis.
If you don't have paypal, check out the other options.
If you want to get some merchandise and sponsor us at the same time, consider the AVfM store.
|
 |
 |
Emma Kadey
Bigot |
 |
Harriet_Harman Corrupt Public Official |
 |
Josefin von Zeipel Segerberg
Bigot |
 |
Vanja Krajina Bigot |
 |
Sophia Guo
Bigot |
 |
Jenna Myers Karvunidis Bigot |
You need some love and understanding, not that dead-end life you're planning...
A domestic violence ad that won't make you vomit
Near Earth Object: Thank you for the reply, Suz, and I believe you are probably correct. (move along quote-miners; nothing to see here)Near Earth Object: Dear Anonymous Down-Voter, Thank you for the reminder [fuck] that curiosity [you] is a bad thing— and that [fuck] asking [you] questions [again] is wrong.Near Earth Object: “How well trained we must be to have blocked that part of reality out!” That has never occurred to me either, Peter. It is things like this that are going to keep me coming to AVfM for a...
TheSandreGuy: It wasn’t just the labor government that pushed female-friendly legislation.
Peter Wright (Tawil): Great commentary CLM. @CLM: “(lets not say anything about the ladies that are living with their parents – it ruins the flow)” Funny, I never once considered that nor heard of anyone...
Bewildered: Comparing reactionary hate to the hate that created the problem isn’t fair. Absolutely ! Unfortunately they feed on each other.
PZ Myers, icon of rational thought, can’t even add two and two to get four if it means departing from what he thinks female feminists want to hear.
What a fraud.
His main claim to fame as a “scientist” is getting something published in the world’s most prestigious scientific journal, namely, Science.
The problem being that all it was was an angry screed about Creationism, a subject on which he is so obsessed he will dub anyone and everyone who ever questions any facet of current evolutionary thinking a “creationist.” Fuckwit even called me one even though I was an atheist and all I said was “running to court to ban the idiocy of so-called Creation Science from the schools does more harm than good” and “hey, when there are holes in evolutionary theory, just go ahead and acknowledge them, that’s how you make progress.” That was almost ten years ago that fuckwit did that to me, but I never forgot.
He’s incredibly intellectually shallow and a titanic bully. Ultimately, I think he’s probably just an aspie with seriously bad social skills who, now in his late middle age and a man of no particularly great accomplishments besides bloviating and some mediocre science work, now seeks to be The One Good Man surrounded by his little harem of young empty-headed third wave feminists. It’s really rather pathetic.
I normally refuse to indulge in ad hominem and armchair psychoanlyzing of people I criticize, trying to instead engage their ideas head on, but really, this guy is such an embarrassment to his entire profession it’s hard not to just call a spade a spade and move on.
(What, if the shallow intellectual coward even responds at all he’ll call that a racist remark or some shit.)
Well, not all of us Aspies are such poor socialites, at least. Strange that one of the Darwinians would take up the feminist cause so unswervingly.
I had to come back to this. Am I the only one who finds people who title themselves, ‘freethinkers,’ incredibly off-putting? If you’re coming to your own conclusions, it should be made obvious through your reasoned arguments. One shouldn’t need a laminate.
Hey John,
Since I love to give other people suggestions and criticisms, my criticism of this, if you had issued it to me, is that it would be difficult for a person to know just how high a bar that is, or how sincere or intellectually honest you are about that.
And I, personally, am not suggesting that you are anything other than sincere and intellectually honest. I am saying that if I were PZ, it sounds like a lot of work to reach an uncertain goal of uncertain worth, and he and others can’t tell if that goal is achievable in any manner or won’t just be Lucy’s football.
I think that’s why the traditional format of debate works better. Take you out of the judging panel and put in a group of Internet viewers, and any viewer.
If/when you reissue this, my suggestion (see I love telling people what they should be doing) is to debate over Google Hangouts or Blogging Heads or plain-old-YouTube some issue, and then let people see for themselves who’s argument was better and let them decide if they were persuaded.
Intelligence Squared seems to poll their audience before a debate and after the debate in order to determine how persuasive the debate was.
I do, very much, like your asking the question, (apologies if my paraphrase is wrong) “what evidence would you need to prove this was a civil rights movement.”
That might be a good subject either for a Blogging Heads or Google Hangouts or YouTube exchange.
How can PZ consider himself an intellectually honest skeptic, an intellectually honest feminist, if he refuses to engage and examine the people that disagree with contemporary feminism straight on?
How is PZ or any of the Free Thought Bloggers, Skepchics, or almost any feminist any different from an ostrich? How does refusal to take dissenters on in honest debate judged by others have anything to do with what they claim skepticism is about?
(Also, I really appreciate how you make your videos snappy and move along by editing out the pauses, etc.)