Categories
$MONEY$ a voice for men antifeminism evil sexy ladies ha ha I tricked you infighting manginas men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA paul elam post contains sarcasm

A Voice for Men publishes an article so extreme and hateful that it makes even Paul Elam gag

Emma Watson: The woman who nearly destroyed A Voice for Men
Emma Watson: The woman who nearly destroyed A Voice for Men

Yesterday, A Voice for Men published an article so extreme, so hateful, so beyond the pale, that even Paul Elam, the site’s founder, was taken aback by it. Elam, who said he hadn’t read the article before other editors on the site posted it, claimed in a comment that when he finally did read it, it made him literally sick to his stomach.

Today, he took the extraordinary step – for AVFM – of taking down the article and offering an apology for publishing a piece so “counter to every aspect of our mission and values.” (It’s still up, for the time being, in Google cache; the original can also be found here.)

So what did this terrible, terrible article say? Brace yourself.

It said that Emma Watson’s recent United Nations speech on feminism … made some good points.

While the author of the piece, a tech dude turned “dating expert” named Jeb Kinnison, took the standard MRA swipes at the alleged evils of third-wave feminism, he argued that Watson’s version of feminism represented a kind of “equity feminism which is equally concerned with men’s rights.”

Then he described Watson as “very, very smart, and wise beyond her years … .”

I know, I know. Horrifying.

But that wasn’t even the worst part of Kinnison’s piece. In his conclusion, he actually suggested that

The smart and civilized aren’t spending their time nursing grievances based on sex, gender, race, or religion. If only the most intelligent voices were as amplified as the voices of ignorance and hate promoted by the grievance-mongering misandrists of third-wave feminism as well as insecure male misogynists.

Yes, that’s right: An article in AVFM actually acknowledged that some of those in the Men’s Rights ranks might actually be – gasp! – misogynists.

Naturally, such heresy could not stand. In the comments, a fight broke out between those who hated the article, and those who also hated it but felt that criticizing AVFM about anything was terrible and counterproductive and, hey, remember to donate to AVFM during the Fall Fundraiser!

In the former camp, the most outspoken critic was Nick Reading of Men’s Rights Edmonton, posting under the alias Eric Tiberius Duckman, who bluntly warned that

This article is disgraceful. If uncle Jeb here imparts any more of his mangina wisdom on AVFM, I’ll be seriously considering pulling my support and encouraging others to do likewise.

Elam was having none of this – very poor taste, especially during AVFM’s Fall Fundraiser! He responded to Reading’s threats to take his ball and go home with an indignant comment defending the editors who ran Kinnison’s piece and tearing into prodigal Nick:

[O]ur editors did their job and I am 100% supportive of that.

To be even more frank, even less appealing to me than this article is tantrums and ultimatums from readers attempting to exert editorial control by threatening to leave if they see content they don’t like.

Then apparently Elam decided that he didn’t support the editors 100% after all. In another comment, he declared that

This is the most overly generous, myopic interpretation of Watson’s speech I have seen, including feminist websites. It is literally embarrassing in its reductionist dismissal of issues unique to men and boys. …

I could write an entire article on what is wrong with this piece, but I am just too busy right now.

Throwing up.

Once he finished up with this, he took the piece down.

And AVFM’s Fall Fundraiser was saved!

233 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
thebewilderness
thebewilderness
7 years ago

Never stop fundraising and always be closing.

Bina
7 years ago

P.S. Hey, Jeb, if you are reading this: please explain to us what a *true* misogynist is and how it differs from its “untrue” version. Thanks in advance.

And lo, it was very quiet; a forlorn breeze tumbled some tumbleweeds, and the song of the crickets was heard throughout the land.

GrumpyOldMan
7 years ago

For organizations like the MRA or the Tea Party, your red meat can never be too red. Apparently Esmay didn’t realize that.

Finisterre
Finisterre
7 years ago

Gosh. For a bunch of tools who love to tell women that they ‘don’t have a right not to be offended’, they sure were getting their y-fronts in a twist over that mild little rebuke!

strivingally
7 years ago

He was acknowledging that there are some insecure misogynists out there, that they get a disproportionate amount of attention, and that’s what caused AVfM to flip their shit?

Proposed new slogan – A Voice For Men: because anything that makes me feel slightly uncomfortable is MISANDRY

strivingally
7 years ago

Also love (by which I mean loathe) the idea that the assholes who call feminists professional victims, and accuse them of keeping themselves bubbled in dissent-free echo chambers, apologise for putting an article on the website that’s “framed wrong” – that is, might possibly be construed as an implicit criticism of some members of AVfM.

Jack Strawb
Jack Strawb
7 years ago

What a sad little hit piece. You write so badly, and so obscurely, it’s almost impossible to know what it is you’re complaining about. Do grow up, and join the adults in conversation. Surely you know you can do better than this.

cloudiah
7 years ago

To which I’ll respond with Aunt Edna’s words from a more current thread:

OT: I’ve gone to the beginning of WHTM / manboobz to read the earliest posts where David heroically battled MRA trolls alone (boy, did they come out of the woodwork…)

And I found this gem of an exchange between David and Paul Elam that should be an instant classic, IMO:

http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/dfxw2/mens_rights_activist_suggests_taking_away_womens/

It is full of all kinds of awesome, including plenty of the usual stupid and pompous posturing by Elam, complete with his advice for David to, essentially, cease and desist, a conceited and supremely condescending lecture on blogging (seriously), and a “challenge” for David to present “real” ideas and arguments (you know, like MRA do 😉 ).

Elam was so full of hot air that he sounded ready to burst — which apparently happened when David did offer those longed-for arguments, because there was no more response from him. All that urgent interest in “ideas” and “debate” suddenly evaporated when he was faced with facts and figures.

MRA, such a waste of oxygen.

Paul, is that you?

1 8 9 10
%d bloggers like this: