antifeminism evil women misogyny MRA reddit terrorism threats woman's suffrage your time will come

Men’s Rights Redditor: “I advocate the removal of judges, politicians, and other government agents who violate the Constitution by any means necessary.” [UPDATED]

Men’s Rights subreddit regular Demonspawn (remember him?) is back again with some deliberately vague but definitely threatening talk about judges and politicians:

Not a lot of “plausible deniability” here, though I am sure various MRAs will try to excuse this as not being what it obviously is: a threat of violence against judges, politicians and others who work for the government.

He’s done this before; I wrote about it here.

And while we’re on the topic of Demonspawn, here’s a little followup comment of his from the thread we discussed the other day. It’s a giant wall of text, I know, but it contains gems like: “When women mouth off to men and get their faces bashed in, they’ll know equality.” At least this comment of his got as many downvotes as upvotes.

I’m banned from the Men’s Rights subreddit, of course, but Demonspawn, despite repeatedly violating the subreddit’s rules about posting comments advocating violence, continues to post away. See his comment history for more lovely thoughts on, among other things, why women are parasites who don’t deserve the vote.

680 replies on “Men’s Rights Redditor: “I advocate the removal of judges, politicians, and other government agents who violate the Constitution by any means necessary.” [UPDATED]”

Ozy: It’s alright.

Once the Great Cat Rebellion happens, you won’t get a special place amongst the servants of the Great Kitties like the rest of us, but since you’re a nice person you won’t be destroyed outright.

Kitties aren’t that evil.

I’ve listened to the audio tape from Jonestown, and at least, just before drinking the kool-aid, a few followers raised some questions. With Manboobz, it doesn’t matter what Douchetrelle decides to front fart, everyone just automatically goes “Hmmmm!”

it’s true. one time david was like ‘let’s all kill ourselves’ and we all did it. which is how were still posting here, baldy.

Would a simple head transplant cure Tom’s baldness? Since it seems to upset him so much, he could try it and get back to us!

heidhi, I’m not sure they can’t transplant heads when they’re wedged so firmly up an ass.

^can. I can barely type with all ten working fingers, now that one’s out of commission, all bets are off.

I had three stepfathers. Two of them are dead now. I can’t say that I feel any less grief over that than I shall when the last one dies, or when my biological father dies.

Each of them was there for me at times I desperately needed them. Each of them has engaged in sacrifice to help me deal with the shit that needed to be dealth with.

So no, stepfathers are real fathers.

And “pushed out of the home” has nothing to do with the subsequent relationships of men and their stepchildren.

Would a simple head transplant cure Tom’s baldness? Since it seems to upset him so much, he could try it and get back to us!

I don’t suppose we ought to go there, but last time we did there weren’t any she-bears (2 Kings 2:24), so I guess it’s all right.

On the topic of Islam and religions… I have to say I’ve shifted my position from “all religions are evil” to “some religions are more evil than others” after befriending Islamic apostates. There is a difference in how religions treat their god’s (or gods’) punishment, and how it should be delivered. Even christian fundies seem to be of the opinion that nobody should be killed for not believing as there is always a chance they will “come back to god” and even deterministic denominations leave the punishing to god himself nowadays. Not so in islam. It’s pretty terrifying how apostates get treated even by those who identify as “moderate” Muslims. Silent approval or lack of condemnation of violence towards apostates “because they deserved it”, and the violence itself done in the name of god of course is something I’ve never been aware of before. There is a mentality to deliver god’s punishment right now right here by the faithful which has been scrubbed away from Christianity. It’s terrifying to see someone afraid for their life because of privately denouncing gods, let alone those who speak publicly and get veiled threats from politicians, for example. My experiences from the Netherlands, but I imagine it’s not a lot different in France and Germany where secular islam is a normal part of daily life among with christianity. Few speak about it publicly though, because of fears it’d feed the far right (as if we can get any worse than Geert Wilders without a majority turning to extremism). Atheists getting sacrificed at the altar of religious tolerance, nothing new in the world.

I guess I should add that I’m no better offline. I don’t discuss the apostate matter with my non-apostate muslim friends and neither do they. It does bother me as I don’t know what their particular views are and I only hear the horrible stories from other people whose daily life it is. My guess is though that most of my friends come from the educated middle class background and in a civilized country share certain civilised ideals, regardless of religion. But because I want to keep thinking that way I will not risk an otherwise good friendship by bringing up potentially flammable topics. My thinking may have been coloured by the stories I’ve heard, of course. But this seems to be a problem a lot of people have, caught between two versions of a world unknown to them.

I don’t think that the Islamic religion is worse than other religions honestly.
The catholic church, for instance, has:
– Covered up massive amounts of child abuse perpetrated by priests;
– Condemned several groups, for example gay people and trans* people, leading to many of their followers bullying, violently assaulting and denying legal rights to these groups;
– Supported oppressive dictatorships because their values align;
– Lobbied against sex education in schools, often offering lies as alternatives, which endangers the health and lives of many young people;
– Greatly condemned abortion, equating it to murder, leading some of their followers to bomb Planned Parenthood Clinics and other places where abortions take place, killing many people;
– Fought tooth and nail to prevent people from getting access to birth control and abortions, regardless of the health risks;
– Promoted an incredibly misogynistic view of relationships, leading several people to stay in abusive marriages for fear of damnation.

And this is not limited to the Catholic Church, there are plenty of other Christian denominations that do these kinds of things.

Basically what I’m saying is that Christian churches do all sorts of terrible crap, it just isn’t treated nearly as bad as when it is done by Islamic religions. Add to that that there are many different denominations of Islam as well, many of which considerably less awful than what is normally perceived as the standard of Islam and your hypothesis that Islam is somehow worse than other religions just doesn’t add up.

Now I’m not saying that all Christians are evil and all Muslims are good. They are both religions with good people and nasty people among their ranks, and their own shares of problems and bad positions and I have yet to see any indication that one is worse than the other.

Also, this?:

My guess is though that most of my friends come from the educated middle class background and in a civilized country share certain civilised ideals, regardless of religion.

Massive side-eye here &gt_&gt . How are you defining “civilized” exactly?

I believe it’s a ; at the end? I can’t remember offhand.

Even christian fundies seem to be of the opinion that nobody should be killed for not believing as there is always a chance they will “come back to god”

Have you heard the shit our evangelical military men have said, here in Merika? Because hint: It’s not that.

As to “All islamic apostates live in terror”, well, my previous landlord was an apostate muslim. His family was first generation immigrants from pakistan, or at least those his own age were. He didn’t even have heated arguments with the folks who came to bring him back to the fold. I’m positive a non-zero number of apostates in the west fear retribution, and justifiably at that, but the real world intrudes on the idea that apostates are all dooooooooooooooomed.

Silent approval or lack of condemnation of violence towards apostates “because they deserved it”,

Having just dealt with someone who assumed that because they didn’t hear about shit they don’t really pay attention to, it doesn’t exist, are you really so capable of mind reading silence from a society you admit to not really looking at too much yourself?


The way I see it is that we can line up all the evils of all religions and see what ends up as the “most evil”, but that is futile. In the end what we see with our own eyes and what affects us is what weighs most, even if I rationally know they all do shitty things. But I’ve not been affected by the evils of christianity ever. I have been affected by islamic evils by proxy (empathising friends), so it’s one concrete experience I have of religions. It’s different to hear a horror story of religion from a close friend than read it online, no matter how much I get angry from reading about christian gay hatred or something else I care about. I assume someone who got a bad personal experience with Catholics would feel Catholics are the worst. That’s what I was trying to say, a personal take with reasons, not an objective truth that everyone should prescribe to regardless of their experiences. Perhaps a bit of a confessional due to the contrasting feelings I have. It’s not an argument because I’m not arguing against or for anything. Well, maybe an argument for not forgetting the apostates.

I would consider “civilised” to mean a lot of things, but in this context I was thinking “does not condone violence due to differing opinions”.

I know that there are people that are affected negatively by Islamic religions. I’ve read several accounts of people who used to be Muslim and who then had a horrible time when they decided to become apostates, this is not in question. But you were generalizing that to the whole of Islam, which is a wide-reaching and diverse faith.

And when you then say stuff like “There is a mentality to deliver god’s punishment right now right here by the faithful which has been scrubbed away from Christianity” and “My guess is though that most of my friends come from the educated middle class background and in a civilized country share certain civilised ideals, regardless of religion” you sound more than a bit racist.

I think part of that is your vision of the world is colored by the society you live in, where bad things committed and/or encouraged by Christianity are mostly dismissed. I know what that’s like, I live in a similar society and only recently did I begin to inform myself on what’s really going on.

But another more serious part is that you are tarring all Muslims with the same brush. When you say “[…]my friends come from the educated middle class background and in a civilized country share certain civilised ideals, regardless of religion” you are dismissing people who live in so-called “uncivilized” countries who also share those ideals. When you say “civilized ideals”, you are saying that those ideals are unique to “civilized” countries, which is highly dismissive.


No, I’ve not heard non-parody fundies say that. I’ve honestly had very little contact with religion in my life, having been raised 100% secular in a mostly secular country. I didn’t know Christmas was a religious holiday until primary school. All I know of religion is from the neutral studyof it and from news articles and more personal accounts like blogs and discussions online and offline, though mostly online due to having very few religious people in my life.

Like I said my opinion on islam has been shaped in the past years from the previously “academic” impersonal nonopinion mostly thanks to people with a very negative view on it, and I acknowledge this may colour it. I’ve allowed myself to be affected because I know those people don’t have the ulterior motives for their dislike, just a very personal experience of something I have little knowledge of. And rationally knowing there are also apostates who don’t face violence doesn’t help a lot when comforting a scared person.

I do feel awful about my inability to ask straight about it and rely on an assumption – or a non-assumption in this case (because if my doubt was greater than my trust I couldn’t be friends with someone). And you know, a few years ago I wouldn’t have had this “problem”. My “assumptions” aren’t because of magical mindreading abilities but because of the other side I’ve been told. All I know on this comes from the victims first and other sources second. I’ve found it difficult to doubt their word when they say there is a general mentality shared by many. Not all, but many.


You’re right, I should have specified “not all” because I’m not talking of each and every muslim. I’m talking of a part of a group, as explained to me. It’s pretty late here and this is a very sensitive topic to me due to reasons mentioned. I’m not sure why I even mentioned it, it felt like I needed to at the time.

But please mind I’m not talking legalese here so excluding something from what I write does not equal that I dismiss them. I’m not dismissing anyone anywhere who shares my ideals even if I don’t specifically mention them every time. Now I was thinking of my friends, what we have in common. Not beyond that.

The society I grew up in is secular, btw. People might believe but they also believe in keeping it private. Christianity being the main religion it also takes the most crap and wrongdoings get publicised in the press very easily. Especially those done by the fundamentalists. We also have a strong islamic tradition of our own, the Tatars.


Let me clarify a bit more on what I meant with my comparison of islam and christianity that you quoted there. Christianity has been guilty of a lot of atrocities that are no longer done in its name but are done in the name of islam. Stonings for example. Most Christians do not think we should stone people because the Bible says so. Ive not heard of fundies saying that we should, and if a group somewhere does think so it’s a long way to state sanctioned stonings. That’s not the only face of islam, of course. Turkey is a good example, even if they did vote in the fundies in the last election. It was just one vote in a country with a long history of secular values. But still, a lone Christian fundies group calling for stonings is far away from countries sanctioning it (does any christian majority country stone people? Even gays? I’m prepared to be factually corrected if needed). And that’s because interpretation of Christianity has been modernised more than interpretation of islam has.

Will there be kitties in the compound or do we have to bring our own?

If there are no kitties I’m afraid I may have to reconsider my allegiance to this cult. Although I might accept puppies as a substitute.

Also, I’m seconding Myoo’s side-eye. Really, eline? “Civilized”?

I lived in Saudi Arabia and I don’t recall there being any groups who wanted to murder doctors, which good old American fundamentalist Christianity has spawned. All religions have nasty elements. Now I absolutely think that Islam as currently practiced in some regions (particularly the Gulf) is extremely sexist. But I’ve known plenty of apostates, and none of them have been running for their lives from people determined to murder them.

(And even more people who are culturally Islamic by upbringing but not really all that religious. Those people always seem to magically vanish in these conversations.)

Actually what eline’s comments make me wonder is WTF is going on in the Netherlands. Whenever I hear this sort of “all the apostates are being hunted and killed!” stuff it always seem to come from there.


Do you get what I’m trying to say with that choice of word? English is not my first language so there may be a better choice, one that is without unintentional meanings. I’d rather use one that doesn’t come with connections I may be blind to. I’m not trying to exclude anyone based on their origin but rather try to describe a certain peaceful mindset, open to discussion and disagreement without conflict. “Academic” sounds a bit silly and yet more exclusive to my ears.

And no, I didnt forget the nonreligious even if I didnt specifically mention them.

I’m told this is a problem a that has become a problem in the past 10 years or so, which is a period of growing anti-immigration sentiment in the Netherlands, btw. I doubt it is a coincidence. And there have been famous Dutch apostates like Ayaan Hirsi Ali (whose cooperation with Wilders and the Freedom Party is a crazy indicator of how the other parties shun discussion, according to her) which might make it easier for others to speak out.

I would guess the anti-immigration sentiment, and following racism in one’s adopted home country could lead to some folks seeing the family members not adhering to tradition as the enemy, or at least an easy target to take frustrations on. It happens in Christian families, too. I think the harsher the interpretation the easier it is to use religion as a device of family violence in general.

I don’t honestly know enough of the Gulf states to comment on them. But from what little I’ve read I’m not surprised a rich, educated people feels less need to hold on to religion strictly and to just maintain a facade of piety with lip service (they do still have the religious police right?). It would appear to be the case all over the world.


You may want to look up Ehsan Jami, the dutch politician who was silenced by the labour party leadership when he wanted to bring the treatment of islamic apostates on the party program. A lot of the people I’ve been influenced by in my stance on this either were involved with Jami’s now-disbanded Central Council for Ex-muslims or did not dare to join. Jami, too, has done work with Wilders which I disagree with, but he felt he can’t be picky due to lack of willing speakers. That’s the point I’m trying to make here. Criticism of valid issues on islam is dominated by the far right because the rest either fear losing muslim voters if they do comment (which is exactly what the labour party leader told Jami) or don’t want to associate with the far right that uses any argument as a tool for their anti-immigration policies. It’s really crazy that to get support an apostate activist needs to ally with the racist scum like Wilders, which ends up “proving” that it’s “just a facade” for bullying immigrants.

You’re not helping your case here. I looked up Ehsan Jami, and what I found did not inspire confidence at all. He co-wrote an article with Geert Wilders that had the following in it:

If we do not act now against the far-reaching Islamisation of the Netherlands, then the 1930s will be revived. The only difference is that back then the danger came from Adolf Hitler, while today it comes from Mohammed.

Maybe that’s what you mean when you say he has done work with Wilders you disagree with, but this is not just a small error, this is anti-Islamic sentiment at its worst. The “far-reaching Islamisation” bit is something I’ve heard from way too many racist politicians who just want to stop immigration, and the comparison to Hitler is not only inaccurate(Hitler was alive and an actual physical leader in 1930, Mohammed has been, you know, dead for quite some time) but it’s highly inflammatory and liable to cause violence against Muslims.

What I’m seeing here is a former Muslim who has decided he doesn’t want to follow the Islamic religion any more (fair enough, no problem there), who then starts trying to force other Muslims to stop following the religion as well, and who allies with a known racist as well. These don’t seem like the actions of someone who is concerned for the people following Islam, but rather someone who is convinced that he holds the superior views and is trying to force those views onto others.

He was, from what I understand, physically assaulted for those views. I’m not going to defend that, and I have no problem believing that it was the actions of fundamentalist Muslims. But that doesn’t mean Islam is dangerous in and of itself.


Correct, it’s the anti-islamic rhetoric that he has used that I disagree with. I am told he did not begin that way, though, but his hardening opinions were the reason the Council disbanded. Based on what I’ve heard, though, a lot of his anger stems from frustration with the political atmosphere here, so I’m willing to cut him some slack even if I disagree with him on many points. I’m a firm believer in the freedom of speech of even those with whom I couldn’t disagree more so muzzling someone doesn’t sit well with me. I believe it can be difficult to understand the political realities if you are from a different society, it’s the same for me with the US stuff. But you are unfairly dismissing Jami, he’s done a lot for people who wish to leave islam regardless of associating himself with Wilders. Keep in mind that the people that muzzled him have a history of shutting down critique on islam coming from muslims or ex-muslims. They also quieted Hirsi Ali. She’s another one with whom I disagree about many things and agree about some, but even more I disagree with anyone trying to shut her up.

I’m not anti-islamic any more than I am anti-religion (which I am to a degree, especially if a religion forces/coerces people to practice), despite thinking islam today, in my experience, is worse than christianity (or many other religions) because Islam’s interpretations tend to be more old-fashioned than christianity’s in many places, and have been getting more old-fashioned in for example Gaza as the result of the blockade, Turkey as shown by the hijab debates in universities and Egypt where lots of women say they feel pressured to dress traditionally unlike their mothers did. Also here in Holland after 9/11, probably as a response to the growing racist rhetoric in the public discourse. But I’m aware of how these things have changed over time, and keep changing all the time, and that islam is not the only religion prone to hardcore interpretation, and that in its history it has in fact been the most progressive religion of the time too, although no religion exists in a vacuum and that’s why I don’t agree that any religion can be discussed without the context in which it is interpreted. Islam is the religion that has more hardcore followers in my proximity here in Holland, for example, but my experiences with the Tatars of Finland are entirely different.

I understand this is very different in the US where the Christian fundamentalism is the problem, a much bigger problem because they have real political power and influence and a sophisticated propaganda machine that obfuscates the public perception. It’s also very far from the political reality I live in. This is the main reason why I like to have these discussions, to learn from other people’s very different experiences and maybe have them learn something from mine. I do feel you’ve misunderstood my position to be specifically anti-islamic or even racist when it’s not (I focus on the very specific problems within the islamic community of which I’ve learned by listening to my Dutch Turkish and Moroccan friends), that is a risk in these blog comments discussions where all nuances don’t get expressed. I do appreciate if you ask for clarification instead of assuming the worst if something seems odd, because despite trying to proofread I’m not writing these comments like essays and something that may seem self-evident to me from the whole text may not be so to others, of course.

eline: There are a lot of fundie christians in the states who are all for making a theocracy, complete with killing people who don’t toe the line. They are “willing” to tolerate unbelievers, so long as they conform.

Stoning isn’t required, but killing is. It’ goes back more than ten years. Eric Rudolph, for one, and a host more betimes, as far back as I was paying attention (ca 1982).

Yeah, what pecunium said. It’s downplayed wicked hard, but it exists.

I mentioned this before–there’s a series on the site Shakeville called ‘Today in Totally Not Terrorism.’ It goes up whenever the mainstream media reports another killing/bombing event that’s either aimed at religious minorities (Muslim, Sikh, UU) or planned parenthood clinic or suchlike and the press is reporting it as an isolated incident or ignoring the pattern or not even mentioning right-wing calls for exactly this kind of violence.

They only post when another event happens.

It’s been a fairly regular feature since I began reading. Practically monthly.

I mean, we’ve all heard about the Oak Creek shooting. And noted that it is getting nowhere near the Aurora coverage.

But where’s the mainstream media coverage of this mosque? Second suspicious fire in five weeks on the same mosque.

Where was the coverage about this?

But, nope, we should just focus on Muslims!!

Do you see why that’s kind of a problematic framing, Eline?

As a simple data point, there is (to the best of my knowledge) no active group of Muslims trying to make the US an Islamic theocracy.

There is one for christians. Google Christian Dominionists. It’s scary.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.