Boycott Paul Elam for the sake of men everywhere

N19864 · 2020-03-07T00:59:13+00:00

First of all he has done more for men than you.

Second, that is his style of writing usually takes feminist writing and swaps it around. Literally swaps it around. See how they like it. His writing is provocative, but it seems to escape the illiterate literates, that usually is nothing but a mirror image of the feminist version. Not a fan, but that's his way of writing and most cases he actually refers to the original feminist version.

And lastly Warren Farrell has praised Elam and many others on the Men's movement have done the same.

Elam himself said he would hit a woman, writing, "I am 6'8" tall and 285 pounds. If a woman five feet tall and 110 pounds soaking wet hits me, I am going to hit her back."

He should hit her back. Teach her not to hit, just not use full force and be gentle on her. Slap her, make sure she knows he won't take her shit. Better curb it early on, or you might snap like Ray did. A measured spanking on her ass and let her know she should think twice before hitting you. Men are not doormats for women and not all men are stoic machines. Teach women not to hit and not to start fights.

I've had enough of this hate-mongering asshole who is, I suspect, just in it for the $$$$ and the notoriety.

Being an MRA is a money generator? Are you kidding me?

No, not turning back on Elam. May not like some of his work. but that's not all of it. See him with Tom Golden and Janice Fiamengo.

N19864 · 2020-03-07T00:06:58+00:00

You know he says those to be provocative. To provoke a response.

No one told the suffragette to not throw bombs.

aussietoads · 2020-03-06T23:54:41+00:00

Love him or hate him, he's done more to get MR issues into the public consciousness than you or I. Until the likes of Elam came along, MRA's were totally ineffectual and completely ignored. Personally I don't like his style, but I do like his efforts. He played a major role in changing Cassie Jaye's views when she was making the Red Pill movie.

Cripplenippleripple · 2020-03-06T23:45:39+00:00

I didn’t learn about the one about rape, but most likely, it is similar to the one about hitting a woman where it was a satiric response to a feminist blog. His article about hitting women was written in response to an article by Jezebel, a leading feminist magazine, titled “Have you ever hit your boyfriend, cuz we have”. His article and the reaction proved how nobody cares about female on male domestic violence. Again, I can’t say for sure the one on rape is also satirical, but given the other articles he writes, it probably is a satirical reaction.

Adanu0 · 2020-03-06T23:50:13+00:00

You're right about Elam not being a serious friend to the MRM, but you're completely wrong for the reasons why.

I suggest doing some research and don't just fall for the satire as if it's truth.

RealBiggly · 2020-03-07T02:33:22+00:00

I'd rather disown you actually. Fuck off.

Lethn · 2020-03-07T01:26:46+00:00

??? I'm the one who reads links and shit people send me, and I'll back up anything I say with documentation ... Of course any documentation or citation that undermines some of the less creditable MRA notions just gets quietly ignored.

It really is fascinating the kind of shit you can dig up on obnoxious posters when you go through their history who try to pick a fight while being clearly ignorant on a topic they're discussing.

aussietoads · 2020-03-07T03:50:41+00:00

@OP: Elsewhere you posted this.

|Of course any documentation or citation that undermines some of the less creditable MRA notions just gets quietly ignored.

Speaking of citations. You recently posted this.

|Even though in 2019 80 percent of DV deaths were men killing women, and the coroner determined that all the women who killed an intimate partner were acting in self defense...

And I asked for citations. You replied with this.

|https://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/challenging-the-mra-claim-of-a-domestic-violence-conspiracy/8632190

Includes link to coroners report:

http://www.coroners.justice.nsw.gov.au/Documents/DVDRT_2015_Final_30102015.pdf

Actually this report was published in 2015, not 2019, but it reviewed a decade of IPV homicide and found that not one woman in ten years who killed her partner was "the abuser". In every case the women had been abused by the dead men. I'm not happy about dead men btw, just sick off all the bullshit about "women are just as violent as men".|

. It took me a long time to go through those 144 pages and I found there were many instances of motte and bailey tactics when representing the data.

While the data certainly indicates that men were the greater number of perpetrators of DV homicides (something I have no argument with), your statement that 80% of DV deaths were men killing women is incorrect. It is more correct to say that 80% of DV deaths were men killing women AND men. So while I have no argument against the notion that men were indeed the overwhelming perpetrators of DV homicides, females were not 80% of DV homicide victims, they were in fact 59% of DV homicides victims with males being 41% of DV homicide victims. These percentages are clearly in close agreement with the campaign "1 in 3" (http://www.oneinthree.com.au/) claims.

One instance of motte and bailey can clearly be seen in chapter 2 where the following is presented:

Of the 280 homicide victims who were killed in a domestic violence context: · 164 were female (which represents 51% of all female homicide victims); and

· 116 were male (which represents 17% of all male homicide victims).

Note that heading refers to homicide victims who were killed in a domestic violence context: but the percentages given refer to all homicide victims, not just DV homicide victims.

This misrepresents the percentages of male and female DV homicide victims so as to make it appear that women are an overwhelming majority of DV homicide victims while males are a small minority.

Then in the same paper we find this :

Almost all of the 31 men who were killed by their female intimate partner in a domestic violence context had been the domestic violence abuser in the relationship (N=28, 90%). There were no cases where a woman was a domestic violence abuser who killed a male domestic violence victim.

In two cases where a woman was killed by her male intimate partner, there had been domestic violence in the relationship perpetrated by both parties.

In two cases where a man was killed by his female intimate partner, there had been domestic violence in the relationship perpetrated by both parties. In one case a female perpetrator (acting together with her abusive husband) killed a man she was having an affair with. The male homicide victim was neither a domestic violence abuser nor domestic violence victim.

So the statement that : "There were no cases where a woman was a domestic violence abuser who killed a male domestic violence victim." is a falsehood.

Just because a man may have been an abuser, does not mean he was not also a victim, and just because a woman may be a victim does not mean she cannot be an abuser. There is also an exclusion of an intimate partner violence victim from the domestic violence stats when the male victim was having an affair with the female perpetrator outside of her marriage. Yet throughout the report the use of IPV and DV is used interchangeably whenever it suits.

You also posted this:

|and the coroner determined that all the women who killed an intimate partner were acting in self defense...

It is also interesting to note that under the heading Criminal Proceedings, the following was presented on page 11:

Of the 6 female homicide perpetrators, 2 (33%) were convicted of murder, 2 (33%) were convicted of manslaughter, 1 (17%) was found not guilty by reason of mental illness and 1 (17%) was acquitted on the basis self-defence.

If all the women were acting in self defence, then all should have been aquitted. Obviously the trial judges subjective analysis of self defence differs from the coroners subjective analysis.

Overall the homicide rates are a sad indictment of some people's behaviour, particularly some men, but it appears that attempts are made to mitigate and minimize the actions of the female perpetrators with claims of self defence while there appears to be no attempt at finding any mitigating circumstances for male perpetrators. I'm not really surprised at this as the report is heavily influenced by women's advocacy groups, while any woman charged with homicide would logically claim abuse at the hands of her partner given the existing law in NSW regarding " battered woman syndrome " as a defense, and its propensity to mitigate and minimize punishment for both non-abusive AND abusive women.

Atchoum150 · 2020-03-08T08:06:36+00:00

Elam did a lot of good for the MRM, nobody’s gonna disown him because of a satirical piece he wrote in response to something that glorified female abuse of men, which is in fact well too common (the equivalent: men glorifying physical abuse of women isn’t a thing.) Why are you putting so much effort into attacking the MRM? If you’re really in favor of equality, go argue with feminists who are the ones to rule society and who hold plenty of bigoted views on many subjects including DV.

EvilLothar · 2020-03-09T18:59:22+00:00

My only regret is that I have but one downvote to give this post.

BornFreeWE · 2020-03-08T10:00:43+00:00

This website was the reason I didn't enaged in men's rights earlier.

I didn't want to be part of that.

ThereAreThings · 2020-03-07T00:10:43+00:00

Unfortunately there is a dark side to the men's movement characterized by vitriol and anger.

I am not terribly familiar with Elam but I can say that his communication style does not align with me or my values at all.

In my view, our movement ought to be centred on the health and wellness of men and boys in our respective societies. We should constantly strive to build positive spaces and supports for our men and boys rather than tearing things and people down.

Title	Boycott Paul Elam for the sake of men everywhere
Author	stentorian46
Upvotes	0
Comments	58
Date	March 6, 2020 11:37 PM UTC (6 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/femg2e/boycott_paul_elam_for_the_sake_of_men_everywhere/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/boycott-paul-elam-for-the-sake-of-men-everywhere.857478 https://theredarchive.com/post/857478

Comments