a voice for men a woman is always to blame antifeminism antifeminst women creepy empathy deficit entitled babies erin pizzey evil ugly women mansplaining men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA paul elam PUA radfems oh my rape rape culture red pill victim blaming

Men's Rightsers offer innovative new theory about rape and feminism. And by "innovative" I mean horrifying.

Paul Elam: “Dworkin’s problem wasn’t that she was raped. Her problem, and I mean all along, was that she wasn’t.”

There’s a post on the AgainstMensRights subreddit today highlighting a comment from a  Men’s Rights Redditor that offers some, well, interesting theories about why feminists are “obsessed” with rape and abortion, even though he thinks they are very ugly.

Actually, in his mind, it’s because they are very ugly, and secretly wish someone would be attracted enough to them to rape them.

Sasha_ 3 points 1 day ago   I can't help noticing that many of these women protesting so vehemently about rape seem to be...well I don't really know how to put it; but if they're rape victims then there must be some very odd rapists in the US; because some of those women are clearly about 15+ stone in weight and there're not what one would describe as 'traditionally attractive' - unless one's particularly attracted to scary she-beasts.  It does make me wonder whether some of these women are motivated by sexuar frustration? A great many female feminists seem to be quite unhealthily obsessed with rape in a disturbingly-obsessed way.  It goes right across the board really - feminists are always banging on about rape and abortion. It's as though half the time they're obsessed with being 'ravished' - and God knows half the books women read seem to be rape-fantasises like that 'Twilight' nonsense - and the rest of the time they obsessed with killing the results.  The more I think about it, the more I think that feminist are really quite creepy.

I’m sure there are MRAs out there who would like to dismiss his posting as the ravings of a random Redditor. Sadly, it’s not. Despite the terribleness of his “explanation,” or perhaps because of it,  it seems to be a common one amongst Manosphereians and Men’s Rightsers.

Indeed, in one notorious post a couple of years ago, A Voice for Men founder and all-around garbage human Paul Elam — probably the most important person in the Men’s Rights movement today — offered a much cruder version of this argument. [TRIGGER WARNING for some primo rape apologism. I have bolded the worst bits, and archived the post here in case Elam decides to take it down, as he has been doing with some of his more repellant posts].




Isn’t it more than just a little fascinating that underneath all this hoopla about rape is a whole lot of women who, when thinking about some guy pinning them down in a kitchen and forcing a hand up their blouse, generally tend to do so with their own hand or a vibrator between their legs? …

And isn’t it also interesting that the most rape obsessive morons on the planet also happen to be some of the ugliest morons on the planet?

Consider this. If rape awareness was a religion, Andrea Dworkin was The Fucking Pope. The 300+ lb. basilisk of man-hate had a face big enough and pockmarked enough to be used to fake a lunar landing. Her body was roughly the size and shape of a small sperm whale.

And she thought of little else in her life other than rape. The subject drove almost everything she said and did.

She even claimed to have been drugged and raped in 1999 in Paris, an accusation that was never proven and which came under a great deal of scrutiny, apparently for damned good reason.

C’mon people, Dworkin’s problem wasn’t that she was raped. Her problem, and I mean all along, was that she wasn’t.

Oh, it gets worse:

Like a corrupt televangelist who only shuts up about sexual purity and morality long enough to secure the services of a five dollar hooker, Dworkin was the poster child for “The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”

Or, in other words, she was obsessed with rape, quite possibly even creating the illusion it happened to her, precisely because her worth on the sexual market was measured in pesos.

Dworkin wanted to be raped, which in her mind meant being sexually desired, but didn’t have the goods to make that happen so she made a career of hating both the source of her rejection, men, and the source of her competition, attractive women.

In the end, the most narcissistic of all Men’s Rightsers concludes that rape is all about female narcissism:

The concept of rape has a lot of utility for women. One, it feeds their narcissistic need to feel irresistible. Two, if feeds their narcissistic need to feel irresistible. That level of irresistibility is the pinnacle of a woman’s sexual viability and worth. And for a whole lot of women, sexual worth is the only self-worth they know.

A Voice for Men’s domestic violence mascot Erin Pizzey seconded Elam’s argument during an appearance of hers last year on Reddit.

If you’re referring to Paul’s statement that many or most women fantasize about being taken, I’m sorry but that’s the truth. That doesn’t mean they want to be raped, but it’s a fantasy I think almost all women have. And I think he went on to say that feminists like Andrea Dworkin who were and are so obsessed with rape are really projecting their own unconscious sexual frustration because men don’t give them enough attention. Andrea was a very sad lonely woman like this

This is an “insight” that many other manosphereians keep reinventing and announcing to the world. In a 2013 post, for example, the “Red Pill” blogger and sometime Return of Kings contributor who calls himself TheMaskAndRose offered a very similar take on the subject.

Feminists are ugly women. They are fat, old, masculine, aggressive, hateful, sociopathic, unattractive, or any combination of those things. Attractive women tend not to be Feminists, so I encourage you to think about why that’s the case. So keeping in mind that they’re not the type of women who normal men desire or pay any attention to, here’s my theory:

Rape culture is the ugly woman’s rape fantasy.

I think the true heart of a rape fantasy is narcissism.

I think it’s about the idea of saying NO to a man, over and over, but he throws caution to the wind and gives into the animal instinct to just overtake you–because you’re so attractive, so beautiful, so alluring, so irresistible that he just can’t help himself.

It’s about being wanted, more than anything else. Wanted so badly that a man would risk throwing his whole life away just for the chance to put his penis in you.

So, since Feminists and unattractive women generally don’t have men paying any attention to them at all–at least not the sexual kind of attention they crave but won’t admit to … they instead cast themselves in the role of heroine in a cultural narrative whereby men think they’re just so fucking deliciously hot that they can’t wait for the chance to rape them.

They project that insanity onto the world around them, and voila–“rape culture.” A world full of scary men so overtaken with lust and desire for these fat, ugly, manly cow-beasts that you never know when one of them is going to risk his career, family, money, and life outside of prison just to have sex with you.

There is, of course, a much simpler explanation for why feminists tend to be “obsessed” with rape: because it happens all the fucking time.

597 replies on “Men's Rightsers offer innovative new theory about rape and feminism. And by "innovative" I mean horrifying.”

It’s possible to say “this book is incredibly poorly written and the characterization is crap” without all the stuff about Ana being an un-person because she lets all that stuff happen to her, you know.

I’m saying that neither the creep nor its victim are people.

Again, if it were real life I’d judiciously beat up the creep and then have it sent to a mental hospital, and give the victim a blanket or something reassuring and send her to serious counselling.

I just found myself unable to see these characters as real people. Which says a lot, for me.

If Ana is poorly written and badly fleshed out as a person, I’d argue that it’s the fault of the writer, not the character. And since the rest of the books is just as badly written as she is, I feel sorry for her. Even if she’s not real, her plight is. Someone get that poor girl a decent author, and will that author please finally extricate her from that shitty relationship somehow? Thanks awfully.

PS: There’s a hilarious Tumblr called 50 Shades of Suck, which is basically a running riff on the drecky writing. I haven’t checked back lately, but for a while there, it was a laff a day at least.

… Petrel, you’ve already been warned for violence and ableism. It’s getting kind of creepy.

I’m not quite sure why you think that suggesting that hypothetical victims are pathetic and that you’d totally beat up their abuser is going to be more helpful to them than just not suggesting that the behavior caused by victimization makes them pathetic.

(Also, yeah, all the “I’d totally beat that dude up!” chest-beating is getting kind of old in general.)

OK, I got given mushroom tagliatelli for Xmas. And today I ate them with roast beef and a Diane suace. It was AWESOME!!
Yeah otally OT but…food!

nom nom nom YUM!

GroundPetrel, yeah, as M. said, I did tell you about the violence and ableism stuff last night. I’m reminding you now that it’s not acceptable on this blog.

GroundPetrel, I said I liked your previous comments and I do, but seriously back the fuck down . This blog does not tolerate fluffy justifications when something unsavoury has been pointed out. I don’t want you to be put in moderation so seriously, CEASE AND DESIST IMMEDIATELY.

I just found myself unable to see these characters as real people.

See, I kinda agree with you there, because they are at best cardboard cutouts with only the most rudimentary flesh on their stock central casting stereotype bones (heck, I’ll even agree with you that Moffat’s writing is at best mediocre and I hate the direction he’s taking Doctor Who in, but I don’t get and I am super creeped out by the chest thumping “I’m going to beat everyone up” crap.

Well, in my second year of college some chest-thumping posturing guy thought I was moving in on his girlfriend, so he kindly and helpfully backed me up against the wall, thoughtfully put his hand on my throat, and gently warned me that if he had to drop by again, he would bring three friends and they wouldn’t use words.

I have firsthand experience at being threatened with physical violence, and let me tell you, it’s not really likely to change anyone’s behavior at all, whatever it may be.

Beloved just remarked to me that “Mary Sue” anymore means “I don’t like this character” and she wishes it would be used less.

I think that Ground Petrol needs to realize that, while Ana is definitely a poorly written, badly developed character and that she does definitely come across as a pretty nasty person in her own right, her plight as a victim of physical, emotional, and sexual abuse comes across as very realistic and that the insistence on dehumanizing an abuse victim (however poorly written a character she is or however unsavory a person she might be) leaves a bad taste in everyone’s mouth. This goes doubly if you’re implying that she’s pathetic and unrealistic for putting up with Christian.

So there’s this thing people do where, when they don’t approve of a woman’s behavior, they say she’s not a woman or not “really a woman” or something similar (and to be fair, I have seen this done to men, too). And since it’s a given that fictional characters are not actual people, singling out a specific one for “not a real woman” status tripped some alarm bells for me. I mean, it’s true that she’s not a real woman, but neither are Lizzie Bennett or Sybil Ramkin. I just can’t see the point in even pointing it out, excpet in that gender-policing way I mentioned.

Also, you don’t really need to go on and on about how you’d totally beat up Christian Grey if you met him IRL. Even if you had the opportunity, it wouldn’t be helpful, and also, it has fuckall to do with the rest of the conversation.

Yeah…when you pull the “no true Scots(wo)man” logical fallacy on women, fictional or otherwise, it’s pretty harmful when we already run the risk of not being seen as actual people by…other people.

Yes, it also happens to men, and that is toxic and bad too.

Also, saying that Christian Grey isn’t a real man because he’s abusive is problematic too. Actually, saying that someone can’t be fully human or fully adult because they’re violent is problematic because it implies that only people who aren’t really *human* or *adult* commit violence and that the rest of us are far too normal to ever do anything terrible ever.

Alright, this is probably going to sound really stupid…

My problem isn’t that those terrible books detail and glorify an abusive relationship. The problem is that from my perspective, they fail utterly.

Basically, it breaks my willing suspension of disbelief.

It’s cool if other people don’t see it that way, I just cannot see either protagonist as a real human being, whereas (to re-use an example posted above) I can very easily imagine Lady Sybil as a real, eccentric, wonderful person.

I suppose it’s just an aspect of the general lack of quality of the author and her writing, but in my personal and highly subjective opinion, neither the creep nor its victim are believable.

As for the incident with my friend and her asshole boyfriend: What me and my roommate did was get this guy alone in a room, tell him to “back the fuck off”, and said that if he touched her again we’d call Public Safety and then Student Health Services on his behalf.

That was when my roommate took over and said that while my concern for the female friend in question was touching, my response needed some work.

I know that I’m a bit immature, and a bit of an idiot (I’m 18 and male, therefore stupid, as all college students are), I’m more than happy to admit that my opinion in this matter is highly subjective and probably stupid.

tl;dr: I’m not saying that the creep doesn’t seem human to me because he’s a shithead, it’s because the sheer lack of quality of the writing made it impossible for me to associate these people’s dumb decisions with realistic emotional abuse; it seemed, to me, like a bad attempt by one person to write an abusive relationship that was then turned into a temple glorifying abuse by a creep with little to no writing talent.

like a bad attempt by one person to write an abusive relationship that was then turned into a temple glorifying abuse by a creep with little to no writing talent.

See, I don’t think anyone has a problem with that. The writing was bad, the characters were formulaic and not believable, those were some of the book’s many literary sins. They were trash.

But they were also dangerous, because they glorified and romanticized emotional and physical abuse, and too many people are caught up in the toxic nonsense that the books (and soon the movie) spewed, and when you belittle the characters in the ways you were doing, or suggest that violence is an appropriate response, you participate in that toxicity instead of trying to clear it up.

I’ve appreciated a lot of what you’ve written, but like your roommate, what a lot of us want to tell you is that your posting needs a bit of work. “Dur, I’m just a stoopid guy” is an excuse. We think you are better than that, and that’s why you are getting the feedback you’ve gotten.


Thank my lucky stars I’ve never read the books myself. But from other people’s reads and reviews, I’ve gotten the impression that, disturbingly, Anna does, in fact, display many reactions and emotions that real abuse victims display. She makes decisions that real abuse victims do make. That’s what’s so terrifyingly awful about the book; the characters tick so many boxes for abuse (symptoms and flags) that it couldn’t be coincidence, but somehow E. L. James thought she ended up with a romance.

I think what makes the characters so unbelievable is that the abuse and relationship seems to be all they are. While the abuse is realistic in its portrayal and the red flags hit very close to home, neither Christian or Anna seem to be fleshed out beyond those things.

Thank my lucky stars I’ve never read the books myself. But from other people’s reads and reviews, I’ve gotten the impression that, disturbingly, Anna does, in fact, display many reactions and emotions that real abuse victims display. She makes decisions that real abuse victims do make. That’s what’s so terrifyingly awful about the book; the characters tick so many boxes for abuse (symptoms and flags) that it couldn’t be coincidence, but somehow E. L. James thought she ended up with a romance.

OK, first I’m going to re-state that I didn’t even finish the first book, for similar reasons to my inability to finish any of the innumerable Newberry Award winners that involve dead dogs and/or best friends (I can’t stand people reacting unrealistically to serial misery).

Second: In the part that I read, neither the creep nor its victim nor her so-called friend showed any signs of independent thought, inside or outside the creep’s abuse of its victim.

It got to the point where I couldn’t understand why either character was doing the things they were doing. The creep appeared to operate on a hard-coded program of maximum creepiness, the victim (who honestly I found the most realistic by a small margin, but that’s like saying “better than Dick Cheney”) didn’t have enough human traits outside of her massively abusive relationship to be believable, and her so-called friend appeared to be an active collaborator with the creep.

If I had been in said so-called friend’s position, I would have called the cops early on.

In a nutshell, I could not comprehend why these characters were in this abuse cycle, because neither of them had enough outside human traits to appear as anything other than a robot.

Hope that clears some things up.

Oh yeah, that’s true sunnysombrera. Anna likes to read, because that shows how smart she is see how smart she is she reads classic literature, but the main one that comes up is that one about abuse that for SOME DANG REASON James chose to be the biggest literary reference. Even Anna’s most defining hobby is wrapped up in the abuse.

I liked one comment (from tumblr? twitter? No idea) about how the commenter would love to live out one fantasy scenario from 50 Shades of Dreck – the one where someone goes straight into a job after graduation.

Ugh, Hardy. Yeah, his later books were written when he was clinically depressed, right?

Yeah. I can see where you guys are going there.

Never thought of that angle, actually.


Must not have read far enough then. 😛 Again, I haven’t either, but apparently 50sog tries to engrave the connection into your mind, with both Anna and Christian referencing Tess of the D’Urbervilles (it might even be Anna’s favorite book) constantly and with Anna wondering if she was Tess.

If you want, you really should read through some read-throughs. Maybe the characterization through some second-hand source might be a bit better?

I dunno… your other comment did give me a better concept of where you were coming from, which made me realize that my comment was off-base. Sorry about that.

I don’t get it myself; I have a very strong suspension of disbelief with regards to flat characters, but it did bug me that you were so insistant on denying basic labels like “man” and “woman” to them. It’s such a basic idea to me those labels can refer to fictitious characters as well as flesh-and-blood creatures, and I don’t understand what other significance they have that you’d want to deny to the 50sog characters.

Eh, it’s fine, kirbywarp. I know I’m a young, immature dude, and part of why I’m in college is to make me less of a young, immature dude.

And personally, I can’t stand flat characters, but something about these two went above and beyond flat characters that have annoyed me before. I mean, I usually refer to the “Twilight” main bricks as “the bloodsucker, the pedophile poodle, and the hood ornament”, but these two rubbed me the wrong way more than usual.

Sorry for creeping people out, that wasn’t intended and was rooted in a very subjective judgement.

I mean, normally I do treat characters like people. It was just this one case that, I dunno, maybe just creeped me out to an absurd extent.

Anyway. Sorry about that.


That article… seems strangely intent on trying to portray that “attraction between estranged relatives” thing as an ingrained behavioral thing rather than a really simple “this isn’t a person I view as a relative due to the estrangement and all.” I’m uncomfortably unsure if it’s the sort of thing that Warren Farrel would put forward…


Alright then. At least it turned into a discussion with a nice resolution, unlike earlier with another person. 🙂

It’s so nice for at least one discussion to end sort of well. Just, try to be a little more careful in the future, alright?

Still, thanks, GroundPetrel.

Also, based on your comments, the Jenny Reads FSlG is probably right up your alley. She complains a lot about that kind of stuff, initially.

I’m uncomfortably unsure if it’s the sort of thing that Warren Farrel would put forward…

Mark my words, someone in the manosphere is going to use that as justification for their nonsense

I can vouch for Jenny’s awesomeness. I think she was the first one I read, actually.


I’d even wager it’ll be all over the manosphere within a week.

damn you all, I need to puke now.

Jenny’s awesome, but i need to puke. Then cry. Then cuddle Sho-San (my stuffed panda, who I’ve had since I was about 1 and I’m not afraid to admit that I still sleep with her every night for comfort purposes). Then call my mom tomorrow morning and thank her for raising me better than the creepy shithead.

Ugh. How the fuck did any of this shit get published???

It got published because it got so popular on first. It helped that it was originally as BDSM Edward/Bella fanfic because those are (or at least were) very popular in the Twilight community. Now, is populated by a lot of people who are teenagers, inexperienced sexually, and therefore not familiar with BDSM but very into tropes like “dub con” (i.e. dubious consent, which is somehow different from rape in their minds). So, Fifty Shades of Grey and its sequels (then Master of the Universe) were very widely read and reviewed on, so E.L. James was able to use that to self-publish successfully enough to get a deal with a major publishing company.

So it’s like creepy piled on lack of ethics piled on stupid piled upon the morass that is Twilight.

Yup, it’s a good thing that I stopped reading those crapsacks.

Anyway, if we’re still making troll bingo cards, can we add a space for Fifty Shades of Grey?

Here’s the link to Cliff’s Fifty Shades index:
He’s quite busy now with his new job though, there was a several months long gap between chapter 24 and 25, and he has yet to finish the book. But I really like his reading of it since, as I said, he’s so loyal to Ana, and takes the whole thing fairly seriously while also making jokes when the occasion rises. Also, since he’s both a sub and masochist for many years, and has sadly experienced physical abuse and rape (the rape in a BDSM-setting) (he’s written about all this on the blog), he knows very much what he’s talking about.

Welp, I finished Jenny’s sporking.

Anybody know if there’s a specific thread I should use to fix Sho-San? I clutched her so hard that part of her tore, and I’m kind of distraught. I have a needle and some thread (because I fortunately know how to quilt), but I need something durable that won’t be visible.

Oh, and the crapsacks didn’t get any better. The only good part was where the diametric opposite of the female protagonist was represented as the Twelfth Doctor’s magnificent eyebrows.

Thanks to whoever first recommended that particular sporking.

Thank you, Falconer.

My sewing knowledge is mostly in quilting, so fixing my much beloved panda is not something that I’m good at.

And yeah, I did look at the Welcome Package. It was…very penguiny. Which is good, since penguins are kind of awesome.

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.