>
 |
| Shirvell in action. |
Some good, long overdue, news. Andrew Shirvell, the Michigan assistant attorney general who’s been harassing a gay University of Michigan student, has been fired. Some details, from Freep.com:
Shirvell had been criticized for his blog in which he calls Chris Armstrong, the president of the Michigan Student Assembly, a radical homosexual, a Nazi and Satan’s representative on the assembly. Philip Thomas, Shirvell’s attorney, had said his client is expressing his free-speech rights.The firing was confirmed in a statement this afternoon from AG Mike Cox, who said Shirvell was fired for conduct unbecoming a state employee, especially that of an assistant attorney general.“To be clear, I refuse to fire anyone for exercising their First Amendment rights, regardless of how popular or unpopular their positions might be. However, Shirvell repeatedly violated office policies, engaged in borderline stalking behavior, and inappropriately used state resources, our investigation showed.”
According to Cox, Shirvell had, among other things:
Showed up at the home of a private citizen three times, including once at 1:30 a.m. … harass[ed] Armstrong’s friends as they were socializing in Ann Arbor … [repeatedly called] House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office, Armstrong’s employer, in an attempt … to cause Pelosi to fire Armstrong; Attempt[ed] to “out” Armstrong’s friends as homosexual — several of whom were not gay.
Oh, and he did some of this while at work, Cox says. And apparently lied to the Attorney General during his disciplinary hearing.
CLARIFICATION: Shirvell is not part of the MRM. I am posting about this because gay-bashing is an important men’s issue. See the comment by Sandy below.
>Question: What does this have to do with MRAs?Answer: Fuck all.
>Please reread my site description.
>"This blog offers a critique of the Men's Rights Movement and anti-Feminism generally; I also write more generally about men's issues."Let's do some more Q&A:Does this article have anything to do with the Men's Rights Movement? No.Does this article have anything to do with anti-Feminism? No.Does this article have anything to do with men's issues? Not really, unless you think gay men are subjected to substantially more cases like this than lesbians.
>I see you are exercising your first amendment right to smear the mm with the unrelated actions of insane American lawyers
>This blog is the National Enquirer of gender politics blogging. There is some irony here as the lawyer and David Frutelle use the same underhanded tactics to "out" and suppress.
>This disbarred Lawyer is actually connected to the feminist movementBarry Goldstein, JD., who is listed on the NOMAS website as their co chair on child custody. He is also an expert witness on domestic violence and has written a book on the subject, Scared to Leave, Afraid to Stay: Paths from Family Violence to Safety. The book chronicles the experiences of ten females, alleged to be victims of domestic violence, including, get this, how the courts abused these women for seeking help.But even aside from the idea that courts discriminate against battered women, there’s a credibility problem here. Goldstein had his law license suspended by a New York appellate court for deceit, fraud and misrepresentation. The laundry list of charges against him stemmed from two cases. One was misappropriation of funds involving his representation of a not-for-profit tenants housing resource center. The other was from his involvement in the Gina Shockome divorce case, which was a feminist cause célèbre in New York just a few years back.In an internet article he wrote about the case, he accused the presiding judge of denying his client due process and of causing her to suffer PTSD, among a slew of other accusations he leveled at the court. None of it turned out to be true, or at least provable, and that was added to the charges against him.Perhaps the most comical of Goldstein’s antics was to claim to the court during the Shockome case that he had a seen a video tape that showed a court appointed supervisor had slept for 15-20 minutes during a visit. When the court demanded that Goldstein produce the tape he claimed to have lost it. During one court appearance, he claimed the video tape was in his car, and later, at another appearance, he denied ever having had the tape in his car or anywhere else.Well, apparently, to Goldstein’s misfortune, his dog didn’t eat the tape, which was about the only excuse he didn’t offer. Officials eventually acquired it, and after viewing the video, the court stated, “Anyone looking at that video will see that there is nothing on that video that suggests that [the supervisor] was asleep for 20 minutes.”It seems that Goldstein was caught lying like a, well, like a crooked lawyer. And misappropriating money like one, too.Among some of the other complaints was that Goldstein repeatedly defied a court directive to refrain from calling the father in the case, who was eventually awarded custody, “the abuser” as there was no proof to support such a statement.Imagine that.Additionally, in the last 60 days, the Supreme Court of neighboring Pennsylvania disbarred attorney Barry Goldstein.Despite all of this being a matter of public record, NOMAS retains the now legally defunct Goldstein as an elected member of its national council.
>Eoghan, you're completely missing the point. Gay rights is a men's rights issue. Gay men face persecution largely because they do not comply with a mold of masculinity. Freedom to express or not express masculinity however you choose is an important aspect of men's rights, just as freedom to express or not express femininity is an important aspect of feminism. That the assistant attorney general was dismissed is a victory for men's rights.
>Sandy is of course completely right. You guys have completely missed the point. I am not suggesting that Shirvell is part of the MRM. I am adding a note to the post to clarify this.
>Sandy,Straight men, when they stand up to feminists, are frequently accused of being gay in an effort to shame them. Would you agree that those feminists who do that are anti-gay?
>Cold, women, when they stand up to MRAs, are frequently accused of being lesbians.People of either gender who do so are homophobic, and also probably weak thinkers.
>Cold, in fact feminists themselves are frequently accused of being lesbians. I seldom hear people accuse men's rights activists of being gay. More often they are accused of being bitter straight men.
>Likewise, straight men, when they stand up to MRAs, are frequently accused of being gay. Would you agree that those MRAs who do that are anti-gay?
>Ooops, my question was directed at Cold, not Sandy.
>Anyone who uses "you must be gay" as an insult is being anti-gay, but those MRAs who do it don't pretend to be supporters of gay rights. I can't say the same about feminists who do it.
>So, you're saying that mensright supporters are better because they openly admit to being antigay? Men's rights supporters who are antigay are no better than anyone else who is homophobic. In fact, I think it is worse to be openly homophobic. It suggests the person does not even think there is anything wrong with homophobia.Also, again, I really haven't heard these claims that men's rights activists are gay. I've heard lots of derisive remarks about them being bitter straight men who cannot win over the affections of women and therefore turn on them. On the other hand, "feminists are lesbians" is a common charge.
>Better only in the sense of not being hypocrites. I have more respect for people who are open about their beliefs than those who say "it's ok to be gay" in one breath and use "you're gay" as an insult in the next.Only some MRAs are antigay; in my experience most MRAs just don't really care either way. That's fine, since gays already have their own organizations to advocate for them and don't need the MRM duplicating their efforts. IF those organizations did not exist, then I would be more inclined to say that equal rights for gay men should be an MRA issue, but as it stands that issue is already being addressed and simply constitutes a diversion.Many feminists openly say they are lesbians or bisexual, so the assertion that "[some] feminists are lesbians" has merit. Frankly I don't care whether the advocates of female supremacy are heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual. They are all my enemies because of their ideology, not their sexual orientation.
>Cold, I've never heard a feminist, male or female, call a guy who disagreed with feminism "gay." Examples? But of course virtually every guy who stands up to MRAs is called a "mangina," or gay, etc etc. There are plenty of examples of that in the comments on this blog.
>@David – A quick Google search reveals several examples (cue Wacky Sax):"Oh my. Are these guys all repressed gay guys? For them to have such fucked up attitudes about women is surely a sign of some big underlying…issues. ;)"- http://liberal-debutante.com/sexism/anti-feminists-on-facebook.html"you probably are gay, and i am absolutely sure that you have never had a date ny our life, unless you gae them some roofers." – http://www.menarebetterthanwomen.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=13170"You will never feel love (unless you'll finally get your filthy women-hating ass out of the closet and screw a dude!)."- http://www.menarebetterthanwomen.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=13610"oh come on … your gay"- http://www.menarebetterthanwomen.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=10367"What % of misogynists are gay?If they hate women that much, wouldnt homosexuality be the logical route to take?"- http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090802192943AApYkQZ"Are Misogynists Also Homosexual?"- http://children.hfaqs.com/are-misogynists-also-homosexual/That wasn't so hard, was it? Good thing you have me around to help you out with these little things.
>IR beat me to it, but here's a couple more:"If they don’t like the way it’s done they can fuck-off and go kill themselves or just whine on a bunch of closet-gay “MRA” forums like they already do."http://ladyraine.wordpress.com/2010/05/07/real-self-defense-weapons-for-the-ladies/"Professor Slapass B. Tweenguyz, Dept. of Homosocial Bonding"http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2010/04/09/impromptu-meeting-of-the-male-studies-department/
>I wonder where David is. I know he's around, because I can hear the wind whistling between his ears.Cold, your comment on my blog about silence having a voice of its own was right on the spot. These examples of feminist behavior should be a flashing neon warning for everyone out there, though (feminists included): If you're with feminists, you are automatically reduced from a human to a meat shield should their theories and opinions ever be questioned. Gay, straight, white, black, male, female – they'll throw you under the bus if it suits their agenda.
>All right. You found some quotes. They're pretty obnoxious. Of course, many of them are directed not at MRAs, per se, but at someone who is a proud misogynist. And those comments, while hateful, aren't any worse than the other comments in the threads they're in:Like, say "Its worthless cunts like these that makes me wanna beat some bitch to a bloody pulp. Another skank thats all talk and no action." That's a response to this: http://www.menarebetterthanwomen.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=13170 Or: "change that blood soaked tampon and walk your big ass out. BTW as for you saying yor not a man hater,well who gives a flyin rats ass. Women like you are still a big pile of doggy diarrhea in my book."That's a response to this:http://www.menarebetterthanwomen.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=13610If you spew hate, you'll get hate in return. It works both ways. And a few of those comments do actually raise a real issue: if misogynists hate women so much, why do so many of them want to have relationships with women? I don't think it's gaybashing to ask that of people who really do seem to hate women. Saying "ha you're a fag" is gaybashing; asking why admitted woman-haters want to be with women, that's an actual question worth asking.
>"Of course, many of them are directed not at MRAs, per se, but at someone who is a proud misogynist."How is Dick Masterson a "proud misogynist," if that's what you're implying? When did "men are better than women" become warped into "I hate women?" Please, detail your thought process, this is kind of fascinating."And a few of those comments do actually raise a real issue: if misogynists hate women so much, why do so many of them want to have relationships with women? I don't think it's gaybashing to ask that of people who really do seem to hate women. Saying "ha you're a fag" is gaybashing; asking why admitted woman-haters want to be with women, that's an actual question worth asking."I thought people didn't "choose" to be straight or gay. Yet you are now commanding people who you think hate women to do a 180 on their sexuality and fuck other men. How is that in any way different from some religious nut commanding gays to 'go straight?' Once again, I'm really curious as to how you come to these seemingly contradictory conclusions.
>"If you spew hate, you'll get hate in return. It works both ways."So are you conceding that it's understandable for men subjected to extreme misandry to sometimes turn into misogynists as a result?"And a few of those comments do actually raise a real issue: if misogynists hate women so much, why do so many of them want to have relationships with women?"Very few MRAs are actually misogynists, so it's a moot point. Furthermore, there are at least four possible sexual orientations: heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, and asexual. A man who hates women and wants nothing to do with them isn't necessarily gay; he could be asexual.
>IR. "Dick Masterson" is misogynist; he writes hateful things about women all the time. Like this:http://www.menarebetterthanwomen.com/top-ten/http://www.menarebetterthanwomen.com/women-in-technology/And I'm not "commanding" anyone to do anything. People don't choose their sexuality. I'm simply asking why men who hate women want to be with them. (Obviously, many in the MRM are choosing not to, hence the whole MGTOW thing.) Cold: I'm saying if you spew hateful shit on a blog called "why men are better than women," you're going to get hateful emails from women. (And if you spew hateful shit on a blog called "why women are better than men," you're going to get hateful emails from men.) Does that make the hateful emails OK? No. They're still hateful. Misogyists are still hateful, even if they think they were somehow pushed into this position by evil misandrists. (Flip misogynist and misandrist in that sentence and it's still true.) And, yeah, obviously a man who wants nothing to do with women could be asexual. I just asked a question. I didn't give an answer. I don't have an answer. I do think that misogyny is pretty pervasive in the MRM. But I suspect you've probably figured that out already.
>You think a lot of things that don't hold up to scrutiny, so this is no surprise.