I realize that I may be the only one who’s really all that interested in sectarian infighting amongst the MRAs, but an old friend of ours has weighed in on the recent battles over the A Voice for Men satellite group MRA London, and I’ve learned some interesting things as a result.
The old friend? Tom Martin, the British MRA who famously lost an anti-male discrimination lawsuit against the London School of Economics and who is well known around these parts for his beliefs that 97% of female humans are whores, 100% of female penguins are whores, hard chairs are misandry, and that [TRIGGER WARNING FOR CHILD RAPE APOLOGIA] “pedophiles who pay children for sex are not really rapists, because the child consents, then performs the act, indicating they understand the nature of the contract.”
Martin used to be a regular troll around these parts, making himself (and the Men’s Rights movement that supported him in his crusade against the LSE) look worse and worse with each comment he posted, until he became too repetitively obnoxious and I banned him.
Apparently he went on to have a bit of a run as a commenter at A Voice for Men, the self-described men’s human rights site that hosts an open call to firebomb courthouses and police stations in its activism section. But he was banned there too. Not for his misogyny. Not for justifying child rape. But for being … too feminist???
No, really. All this happened some time ago, apparently. But AVFM’s Dean Esmay recently unbanned him to let him post his thoughts about the MRA London fracas, and this exchange happened.
Yeah, I’m pretty sure Tom was able to figure out pretty quickly that we hated him, and it wasn’t so much because of the whole “male wanting to be treated as a human being” thing so much as his “inability to treat females as human beings” thing. But as we know, the inhabitants of AVFM don’t really live in what most of us on planet earth recognize as reality.
In any case, if you want to wrap up your Memorial Day with some utterly surreal reading (non-USians can ignore this bit), I suggest you take a look at the rest of the AVFM thread from that point on. You will see DriverSuz describe Martin as a “male enabler” of feminism. And you will see Martin himself describe himself as a “feminist MRA,” and offer this strange semi-endorsement of feminists as potential dates:
[W]hen you’ve dated and screened thousands of women for potential dates, you get to realize, its the ones identifying as feminists who are the ones least likely to be gold-digging whores looking for an early retirement off the man’s toil. …
I follow the money, which is why I am a feminist MRA.
The money the state disproportionately allots to over-screechy victim-feminist wheels is wrong, and needs to be fixed, but pales into insignificance compared to the over-screechiness an anti-feminist traditionalist woman has lined up for any man unlucky enough to cohabit with her. A feckless housewife wannabe is far more a financial burden than an ill-informed egalitarian identifying as feminist who can be corrected on which sex owes the other money.
Tom Martin, such a romantic!