Categories
antifeminism creepy douchebaggery evil women hypocrisy men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA threats violence against men/women

MRAs: Let’s bring back torture devices for women!

Actual 16th century Scottish "Scold's Bridle."

When you think they can’t get any creepier, they do. Here’s a disturbing new Men’s Rights meme-in-formation I’ve recently run across.

In a late-December rant about anti-porn feminist Gale Dines, the self-proclaimed “Male Renaissance Agitator” who calls himself Fidelbogen wrote:

In olden days of rough village justice she’d have gotten the scold’s bridle, or the the ducking stool, or the stocks. And quite right.

A couple of days later, regular A Voice for Men commenter DruidV, perhaps inspired by Fidebogen’s post, made a strikingly similar suggestion on that site:

I urge all Men here to have a look at wiki’s description of what was commonly known as a scold’s bridle, or the Branks. For whatever foolish reason, this item was done away with some time ago. This invention to end Men’s suffering, needs to be brought back into public acceptance and application, post haste, imo.

So let’s take a look at the Wikipedia page he linked to and see just what exactly this “Scold’s Bridle” was:

A scold’s bridle, sometimes called “the branks”, as well as “brank’s bridle” was a punishment device used primarily on women, as a form of torture and public humiliation.[1] It was an iron muzzle in an iron framework that enclosed the head. The bridle-bit (or curb-plate) was about 2 inches long and 1 inch broad, projected into the mouth and pressed down on top of the tongue[2]. The “curb-plate” was frequently studded with spikes, so that if the tongue moved, it inflicted pain and made speaking impossible.[3] Wives that were seen as witches, shrews and scolds, were forced to wear a brank’s bridle, which had been locked on the head of the woman and sometimes had a ring and chain attached to it so her husband could parade her around town and the town’s people could scold her and treat her with contempt; at times smearing excrement on her and beating her, sometimes to death.

Emphasis mine.

I will be charitable and assume that both Fidelbogen and DruidV were joking. That is, they don’t literally want to strap women’s heads into ghastly torture devices, smear them with shit and beat them to death. They just think that the very notion is hilarious.

Whether the suggestions were made seriously or not, they’re still pretty hateful. Given that Fidelbogen was recently taken aboard as a regular writer for A Voice for Men, and that DruidV’s comment on that site got mostly upvotes (and no criticism) from the regulars there, would it be fair to call A Voice for Men the “underbelly of a hate movement?”

I’m not sure why that particular phrase popped into my head, but somehow it seems all too appropriate.

245 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
blitzgal
11 years ago

Rapex = evil

Scold’s bridle = really good idea

white knight
white knight
11 years ago

These guys out-do even Valerie Solanas’ craziest rhetoric.

hellkell
hellkell
11 years ago

I’m sure if we suggested doing this to them, they’d have no problem at all with it.

Polliwog
11 years ago

Nice of them to put it out in the open and explain that “men’s suffering” is caused not by anything anyone actually does to them, but by women simply being allowed to talk.

pillowinhell
11 years ago

And this is how a husband was allowed to “physically chastise” a wife without actually beating her himself. They used to keep these things in public places so men could pick them up as they felt necessary. And MRA’s wonder why feminists had problems with the ways domestic violence was handled…

Toysoldier
11 years ago

Given that Fidelbogen was recently taken aboard as a regular writer for A Voice for Men, and that DruidV’s comment on that site got mostly upvotes (and no criticism) from the regulars there, would it be fair to call A Voice for Men the “underbelly of a hate movement?”

No, it would not, but fairness is not exactly your forte. However, if I were you, I would not be so quick to label someone else’s site the “underbelly of a hate movement” given that when you wrote a post mocking a man who burned himself to death several of your regulars continued to make fun of the guy for killing himself, which you later defended.

And by the way, while 5 upvotes is certainly more than 2 downvotes, it is hardly the whopping level of support from Voice’s regulars that you implied.

hellkell
hellkell
11 years ago

Really, TS? No one here condoned that, and you know this.

Discordia(formely Debbie)

Riiiiiiight……oh how men are so oppressed, they have to listen to women talk! and have opionions! Poor babies! Also they have no right saying that the feminists are hateful or to even dare to critisise the radfem hub(which is often mean spirited) when they have shit like cheering on murderers and abusers, wanting to take away womens rights, and wanting to torture women….I mean compared to them Rad fems are the diet coke of evil
(sorry for the AustinPowers revference)

Discordia(formely Debbie)

Ok sorry for the double post, but I just saw toy soldiars…

Again…..your movement is cheering on mass murderes, and wanting to torture women
No one was making fun of a guy buring himself to death…however pointingout what a dangerous man this guy was is perfecdtly fun cuz he was

How can feminism possibly be a hate movement when MRAs are the ones who are violent

Vanessa Emma Goldman
Vanessa Emma Goldman
11 years ago

ugh. ugh ugh double triple quadruple UGH!! ugh to the power of a million. so creepy. so disgusting. so horribly misogynist, sexist, fascist. at the risk of sounding at least a bit like them, these “men’s rights” assholes need to be lobotomized. or given large doses of anti psychotic medication. or maybe just locked up in prison for the protection of women. or sent away to some deserted island in the middle of the friggin ocean with NO women for them to inflict torture on. dammit, this totally sickens me.

Nobinayamu
Nobinayamu
11 years ago

And he comes with a patented derail. The posts on Thomas Ball (there were more than one) did not mock him for immolating himself. And, if memory serves, only one poster made a comment that could be reasonably interpreted as mocking Ball. Most of the regulars objected to that post.

But, if you’ve got anything other than half-truths and distortions, come with ’em. Some quotes from regular posters making fun of Ball for killing himself would be a good start. Three quotes, in context, from three regular posters. Go.

And I think that posters here should refuse to engage your derail until you provide hard evidence of your claims.

Shora
11 years ago

Oh, Toysoldier, it’s been so long! How I’ve missed your reasoned good faith debates that are not derailing at all.

Also, If you don’t think a call to bring back a medieval torture device for women only (while expressing surprise and confusion that it fell out of style) isn’t hateful, well. Back to Decent Human Being 101 with you!

David K. Meller
David K. Meller
11 years ago

Isn’t there a kinder, more humane, and more civilized way to negate the malign influence of feminists, and enhance the influence of ladylike and domestic-oriented sweet old-fashioned girls? Brutality is often counterproductive, and feminists who are terrorized by these barbaric devices would probably NOT be capable of ascending to true womanhood, even if such mistreatment was rountinely carried out!

We catch more flies with honey than with vinegar! Wouldn’t being nice to good women, while ignoring and ridiculing feminists at every opportunity work infinitely better than torturing feminists? Even animals often respond badly to torture and sadism, and such abuse would bring out the worst in feminists that you were trying to prevent! It may even create widespread sympathy for victims, and more influence for feminuttery then would otherwise be the case.

In short, BAD idea, all the way around! Back to the drawing board!

ozymandias42
11 years ago

It is not cool to make fun of people for killing themselves!

I am vaguely heartwarmed (?!) that Mellerlove is against torturing women. Apparently there are depths to which even he won’t stoop.

Bee
Bee
11 years ago

I will be charitable and assume that both Fidelbogen and DruidV were joking. That is, they don’t literally want to strap women’s heads into ghastly torture devices, smear them with shit and beat them to death. They just think that the very notion is hilarious.

I’m sure they’re not joking. MRAs hate jokes! In fact, there’s nothing they hate worse than jokes! Remember Katherine Heigl and her balls video?

Shora
11 years ago

Hey Meller, the scold’s bridle and the like were created before there were feminists. Women pretty much were the property of the men they were married under (or fathered by) and this was the result.

So in your fantasy world where women are under the complete control of men, how will you prevent abuses like this? Because even without feminists, they happen.

Shora
11 years ago

Ozy. as I understand it, Meller has always been against torturing women, it’s just that maybe perhaps if they are just too independent and naggy and feminist and then just happen to get tortured then they need to take a little responsibility for provoking that, is all he’s saying not that he’s blaming the victim or anything.

KathleenB
KathleenB
11 years ago

Meller: I thought you’d decided feminists aren’t Real Women(tm). Wouldn’t that mean that we’re incapable of ‘ascending to true womanhood’? Because honestly, if your version is what we have to go on, I’ll stay confused. And married. (happily, have I mentioned that? for over ten years)

Ullere
Ullere
11 years ago

‘We catch more flies with honey than with vinegar! ‘

Wrong again Mr Meller.

http://www.chrisnull.com/2007/10/20/1628/

Not that torture is anyway comparable to catching flies one way or another.

David K. Meller
David K. Meller
11 years ago

Shora et al–January 6, 2012 @ 12:05pm

“…these devices were created before there were feminists…”

It is true that there were no overt, explicit, ideologically driven feminists then, but obviously there were what may be called “protofeminists”, women(?) who were envious of men, resented men, were in their own way competitive with and denigrating toward men, and basically held all of the attitudes and temperment of modern women!

These women(?), even if they were not feminists as we understand the word today, nevertheless put in a plausible and convincing substitute! The brutality may have been a response to a problem that such women(?) provoked that had no more seemly answer.

It is probably inaccurate for you to say that such women were not “feminists”. They were in every way but formal recognition, and unfortunately, provoked and incited the worst in the men around them!

Like you, I have no time machine, and the above is conjecture, but knowing what I know about contemporary women–and femininsts–my conjecture above seems reasonable.

David K. Meller
David K. Meller
11 years ago

Okay, Ullere–re:comment of 12:18pm. You can have the vinegar, strawberry jam, apple cores, and perhaps fruit juice left out! They will ALL catch all the flies you want, and draw more into your kitchen that won’t be caught, buzzing around you while you (and any guests) are trying to have your meal.

I’ll keep the honey, keep the screens in good repair, and remain fly-free!

Dani Alexis
Dani Alexis
11 years ago

I wonder if any of those husbands regretted parading their wives around in the scold’s bridle after the wife had been stoned to death by the locals? “I didn’t mean to get her killed, I just wanted her to shut up! Now who will wash my linens once a year whether they need it or not???”

Not hard to see why these went out of fashion, even when women were considered a kind of overly-talkative work animal.

vacuumslayer
vacuumslayer
11 years ago

On the other hand, they’re kind of wide and do a great job of balancing out the hip area.

Amused
11 years ago

The true extent to which these things were used against wives, as opposed to heretics and “witches”, is debatable, in any event. I was a medievalist in my former life, and my impression is that while women were certainly treated abominably in many respects and husbands were considered entitled to “chastise” their wives in principle, elaborate and horrendous punishments (such as parading a woman around in a torture device, smearing her with excrement or beating her to death) would not go over well with the local townfolk — not to mention, the woman’s own relatives. My guess? Such wife-specific torture devices were fantasy projects of lonely misogynists.

Lauralot
Lauralot
11 years ago

Toysoldier, shut up and stop pretending you’re here to debate in good faith.

It’s official: MRAs don’t see feminists, or women in general, as human beings.

1 2 3 10
%d bloggers like this: