If you don't get AVOICEFORMEN.COM, STFU! (Or, how AVFM.com is selling the MHRM)

carchamp1 · 2013-09-30T20:56:54+00:00

For those of you who don't get AVFM.com please take 20 minutes out of your day to learn what they're doing. See the links below. There IS a...

[–]oneiorosgrip 10 points11 points12 points 12 years ago (89 children) | Copy Link

There was a fathers' rights movement in the UK for decades, trying to fight for a better system for handling custody disputes, and it was completely, utterly ignored. These weren't all slacktivists did nothing but talk - there were those who wrote to politicians, who lobbied for legal reform, and nothing happened.

Then one day, a group of them started dressing in superhero costumes and climbing public buildings, and suddenly, in the public eye, there existed a father's rights movement.

Of course people criticized their method - there will always be someone to criticize your method, and it'll nearly always be an armchair warrior - but the reality is that polite requests and reasonable discussion alone did not work. Being flat-out-fucking impossible to ignore worked. It's slow going, but there have been some victories for the fathers' rights movement in the UK since those stunts drew public attention to them.

Until that event, people around me were clueless about fathers' rights groups. That news story brought that discussion into the general public's minds even in my community in Ohio, and some folks who had previously dismissed my complaints about my husband's custody situation began to understand that hey, maybe it's not okay for a mother to try to lock her children's father out of their lives just because she doesn't love him any more.

Obviously, they didn't decide my husband's ex-wife shouldn't try to keep her kids away from him just because someone dressed as a comic book character and scaled a building. It was because even though at first the stunt itself was all that was being discussed, in the end, it boosted the dialogue. People didn't just talk about what they did. They also talked about why.

That's what needs to happen here, as well.

[–]carchamp1[S] 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca -4 points-3 points-2 points 12 years ago (87 children) | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (86 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca -4 points-3 points-2 points 12 years ago (83 children) | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (82 children) | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip-1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]3 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]RatSnakeRabbitSnake 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]RatSnakeRabbitSnake3 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You haven't "called" any of my shit. This is the first time you've responded to me in this thread. If anyone is acting tribally, its the AVFM crowd, so I don't feel any guilt by association. The fact is that you were trying to take the high ground by saying that appearance shouldn't matter, only to resort to a loaded cheap shot.

"Butthurt" isn't a very nice term, has pretty rapey implications, and is one of those non arguments that people resort to when they can't think of anything useful. Someone is saying things you don't like, you don't want to address what they are saying (in this case that Dean has decided he wants to be a public figure and that comes with certain baggage), so they must be "butthurt."

All Im saying is that your high horse may be a few hands shorter than you think. I don't expect myself or anyone else to say everything right all the time, but I think your making a mountain over a molehill over the whole appearance issue. You had a point, so did the other side of the argument.

[–]oneiorosgrip0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You haven't "called" any of my shit. This is the first time you've responded to me in this thread. If anyone is acting tribally, its the AVFM crowd, so I don't feel any guilt by association.

Says the commenter who responded in defense of another commenter. It doesn't come across as very genuine when your actions contradict your claims.

Butthurt" isn't a very nice term, has pretty rapey implications

Actually, butthurt refers to the behavior of a kid after getting spanked. You thinking of rape right off the bat is rather odd.

Someone is saying things you don't like, you don't want to address what they are saying (in this case that Dean has decided he wants to be a public figure and that comes with certain baggage), so they must be "butthurt."

No, what he's saying has no value. It's simply whining without cause. The reality is that the original comment had nothing to do with advise, but was merely a petty dig made by an individual who is pissed off about parting ways with the site. Everything said after is just you guys digging it deeper. Even more pitiful than resorting to petty jabs like that is the twisty gymnastic effort to weasel out of admitting that's all it was.

[–]RatSnakeRabbitSnake2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]RatSnakeRabbitSnake2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

That's the point. It is as baseless as your "butthurt" accusations.

You know I'm going to call bullshit on that. You made a blatantly baseless statement. You got called on it. Backpedaling doesn't help you out.

Instead of telling me how butthurt I must be, why don't you just call me a sister punisher and a chill girl.

You have become incapable of having an honest discussion, haven't you? You're not even making an effort.

Or you can stop deflecting with your complaints that how a leader dresses is irrelevant and reread and understand the complaint was not only legitimate but addresses in pretty temperate tones.

Again, no, it was not. It was flounce - entitled teenage girl flounce over being pissed off about an existing conflict with Dean. Arguing that it was intended as advice after the manner in which it was presented is dishonest.

[–]RatSnakeRabbitSnake2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You know the more I read your comments the more Im convinced that your motivation is to just to win arguments, and that you don't really care how you do that so long as you can tell yourself your successful. I don't think you here because you have anything to say, and I don't think your communicating in good faith. There were plenty of other things said in this post that supported or criticized AVFM and its approach, but you seem to obsess over the smallest things, like the dress better thing. My guess is that you thought this would be an easy "win" for you, and your only going on and on about it, or whatever other little thing you can pick at, because you can't stand to "lose."

I don't know, I could be totally wrong, and I don't expect to get anything out of this conversation, which is why I hadn't planned on continuing it. I had thought that you were a perfect example of how the AVFM community operates, but the more I think that the more depressing it is. The only reason Im even typing this, despite being tired, is that I don't want to attribute the worst intentions to you, even if Im right in any of my criticism. If you are just playing silly ego games, which I suppose we all are to some extent, I don't think your being an ass online consciously. I know this comment won't get a positive reply, but its worth risking being an ass myself if it means maybe shedding some light on something your really just not willing to admit to yourself. I know that sounds pretty sanctimonious, hey this is reddit after all, but I really think your being shitty, but I don't think many people mean to be shitty. My bigger problem with AVFM is that the unintended consequence of thier insistence on dividing people into us and them/good and bad is that its just asking for the Lucifer effect to happen, and it doesn't have an off switch.

Rant over, good night for reals.

[–]oneiorosgrip2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TheGDBatman 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]FeministBees -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (57 children) | Copy Link

But he's kind of got a point. I mean, it's not nice to hear, but the way you look does communicate a lot about yourself. Consider for a moment how quickly many MRAs and folks at AVFM latched onto the physical appearance of "the red-haired feminist" from Toronto. Whether right or not, her appearance was used as a tool to rally certain perceptions of her and of feminists in general.

I watched the rally footage, and I have to agree with truthjusticeca, Dean should have dressed for the occasion. There is a lot that can be criticized about how the rally was handled, but a simple button-up and a sports jacket would have gone a long way (and this advice really could be extended to all the AVFM staff present).

When I was in college, I spoke at an LGBT rally at my state senate. I was invited by a senator, and before the speech, she and some other assembly members talked with me. There were a lot of things we discussed, but one subject was what I would wear. We did this because speaking, as part of a movement, requires presenting oneself in a specific manner. If you present yourself in various forms of "unprofessional" or unprepared then people aren't going to think you're serious and aren't going to take your movement seriously.

[–]truthjusticeca 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (55 children) | Copy Link

[+]FeministBees 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]FeministBees 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[+]FeministBees 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]FeministBees1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]FeministBees1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]FeministBees1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You obviously have more of a problem than you're admitting.

What "more of a problem than you're admitting"? I mean, I can understand people using the term "chubby" as endearing ("my cat is fuzzy and chubby"). But I just don't understand why you think that it's a "neutral" descriptor.

it's hilarious to see you now complaining about narrow social standards because you think you're seeing them applied to a woman, but you have no problem applying them to the MRM.

You mean the part where I explain about "presenting oneself as a movement"? I was making a normative claim, not a moral one. In fact, I totally think it would be wrong for people to judge the MRM simply based on the clothing choices of it's members at a rally. Does that mean people won't do it. Of course not.

When I spoke at an LGBT rally at my statehouse, I didn't dress for it because it was the moral thing. I did it because it's a necessary part of speaking. If I didn't, people would have judged me (right or wrong). And I agree these kinds of judgment are unfair and I don't like being "pragmatic" any more than any other idealist. But I recognized that the issues our movement was working towards (housing and employment nondiscrimination) were important issues. LGBT men and women die because of these problems. At the time, I wasn't willing to diminish our movement's political effectiveness by dressing poorly.

Which is what I was trying to say earlier. It may be unjust, but men die everyday in prisons, because of gun violence, and because of suicide. And it is a responsibility of those who speak out against these injustices to do what needs to be done. If dressing a particular way (that may not be normative) is in sync with your goals, then go a head and do it. Otherwise I don't know why someone in the MRM would object to the advice I've offered.

[–]oneiorosgrip0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]FeministBees1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]FeministBees1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]FeministBees2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Sorry, I wasn't willing to let people die simply because I might have not wanted to put on a tie.

That's the most ridiculous example of histrionics I've seen all day.

And your reply? Nothing but posturing and flounce, unless you can tell me who got executed as a direct, measurable result of an MRA refusing to conform to your narrow standards for appearance.

You've shown that you can't discuss feminism with honesty and integrity. Now you're showing that you can't discuss men's issues with honesty and integrity, either, but that's to be expected.
Projection doesn't transfer responsibility for that from you to anyone else. It only shows that you're blinded by your own self-importance.

Regarding the comment you originally showed up to defend - my assertion has been vindicated, as the commenter has gone on to show that his interest in this discussion is all about his resentment toward AVFM and specifically Dean over a preexisting argument. You're defending a statement made by someone who brought his argument with someone else to me as if it had any relevance to me, and brought it up in the most petty, childish manner possible - with a neg. That high horse of yours is getting shorter every time you make another comment supporting that.

[+]FeministBees 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (35 children) | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (34 children) | Copy Link

[+]FeministBees 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]FeministBees0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]desmay3 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]FeministBees0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]FeministBees1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]FeministBees0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]FeministBees0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]fractal_shark2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]RatSnakeRabbitSnake2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]FeministBees1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]FeministBees1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]FeministBees0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip-1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]FeministBees0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]FeministBees0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]FeministBees0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]oneiorosgrip0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]FeministBees0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Look, you aren't going to get anywhere feigning benevolence.

The "benevolence" isn't feigned. I've had a number of encounters lately with MRA-feminists and concerned non-anti-feminist MRAs. One particular discussion made brought me back to a place I was at almost a year ago, when I was trying to help MRAs.

These MRAs genuinely care about men's issues (like I do) and feel conflicted with the overall anti-feminism and misogyny in the movement. I know two of them who've just kind of abandoned the MRM, and I think it burned them out. They felt like all the important discussions were being drowned out by the anti-feminism (AVFM was a big example).

Basically, I gave the "one particular" MRA some advice, and that was that he should get out and involve himself directly with the issue he cares about. He found some groups with similar missions and as far as I know, he's doing men's issue advocacy as we speak. An important point I made was that if these issues are worth addressing, there's no point sitting around waiting for AVFM to get on it.

So, I kinda feel like there has been an increased presence of a number of MRA-feminists and non-anti-feminist MRAs lately, and that it's worth trying to put these kinds of advice out there.

[–]oneiorosgrip0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The pro-feminist rhetoric pretty much identifies you as a troll in the sub, rather than a genuine contributor. Claiming to genuinely care about men's issues is meaningless when in the same paragraph you defend the movement that is the cause of some men's issues and one of the main contributing factors holding back the resolution of others.

Feminism is not exempt from criticism. In fact, it's incredibly deserving of it. Modern feminism is a vacuum of hatred and solipsism.

As for your puerile whining about AVFM, that's just another indication that you're not benevolent - you're not criticizing the site out of genuine concern. If you were, you'd make statements containing at least a grain of truth. Instead, you've exhibited the MO of every anti-MRM troll we've had here; attack the more noticed advocates, in hopes that you can shut up the part of the movement that is actually out there taking action.

[–]FeministBees1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

The pro-feminist rhetoric pretty much identifies you as a troll, rather than a genuine contributor.

pro-feminist? I explicitly identify as a feminist (in both life and in user name).

Claiming to genuinely care about men's issues is meaningless when in the same paragraph you defend the movement that is the cause of some men's issues and one of the main contributing factors holding back the resolution of others.

I just sincerely disagree with you about the nature of feminism, and it's historical trajectory. I even addressed you initial points, because that's all I needed to do to disprove your generalization about feminism and feminists. But I don't see any middle ground with you on this. I have worked with enough feminists, read enough feminism, and know enough about contemporary feminism to conclude your view is just too narrow. And I know that I'm NAFALTing, but whatever. I've been trying not to claim All MRAs Are Like You lately.

As for your puerile whining about AVFM, that's just another indication that you're not benevolent - you're not criticizing the site out of genuine concern.

Well, I do criticize it out of genuine concern. When MRAs Attack Masculinity: Using heterosexism, cissexism, and sexism to police feminists. I do believe that AVFM hurts men and boys. And I think I show pretty definitively one way they do it.

I honestly think that this myopic focus on feminism is because you want to make the MRM inhospitable to feminist collaboration or cross identification. I mean, it's become really obvious lately that there are feminist MRAs among the movement, but for some reason their voices and experiences don't hold any value to you.

Instead, you've exhibited the MO of every anti-MRM troll we've had here; attack the more noticed advocates, in hopes that you can shut up the part of the movement that is actually out there taking action.

Well, there is truth in that I do call out some of the most "noticed advocates." Specifically those MRAs more concerned with being anti-feminist then helping men. It is really weird to think how much effort is put into fighting feminists, when there is no obvious feminists you fight. Like, the only ones are your protesters (which it seems gave up on you guys last week). And now you have Bash Back, which is a radical anarchist queer group, who arguably are voices of concern for men and boys protesting your rally.

[–]oneiorosgrip1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

pro-feminist? I explicitly identify as a feminist (in both life and in user name).

That's enough to convince me to dismiss any claim of concern you might make, because you're speaking from the ideology that has created and executed a dehumanization campaign against men.

I just sincerely disagree with you about the nature of feminism, and it's historical trajectory. I even addressed you initial points, because that's all I needed to do to disprove your generalization about feminism and feminists.

I pointed out in the comment after yours that your statement didn't disprove anything. Don't pretend that a whole discussion didn't happen there and only refer to your comment, which didn't even address the entire comment before it, but only talked about some dissent within early feminism. Not that I don't expect that kind of dishonesty when feminists troll the sub, but don't think you can get by with it.

But I don't see any middle ground with you on this.

It's good that you've figured that out now, because this would be a long discussion if you didn't. There are two kinds of feminists: Those who actively advocate and lobby for anti-male discriminatory law, policy, and social standards... and those who, by wearing the label "feminist" let themselves be used to legitimize the first group.

Well, I do criticize it out of genuine concern. When MRAs Attack Masculinity: Using heterosexism, cissexism, and sexism to police feminists..

Your article isn't genuine concern. It's "I'm going to try to shut you up by pretending that your criticism of my group hurts your group instead of drawing attention to the flaws in mine." Not only does not not show concern for the MRM, it also shows a sense of entitlement to dictate MRA opinions. It's also dishonest - for instance, you labeled "things feminists don't like" as "things that harm women." Those two sets of things are not the same things.

I do believe that AVFM hurts men and boys.

Again, that's a fake show of concern, using the pretense of concern for men and boys to try to control or silence the site that is drawing attention to the movement. I'm sure you're familiar with the term "concern troll."

I honestly think that this myopic focus on feminism is because you want to make the MRM inhospitable to feminist collaboration or cross identification.

Feminists don't collaborate with other movements - they take over and control. And again, as I've pointed out quite effectively with links you didn't address, feminism is a cause behind some of the issues men face in modern society, a contributing factor to more of those issues, and an active, deliberate deterrent to remedying some of those issues.

As for this specific movement, there's another reason why the two movements aren't compatible: Yours has based its ideology on a conspiracy theory designed to demonize men and damsel-ize women for the purpose of exploiting the social reaction for power and money.

I mean, it's become really obvious lately that there are feminist MRAs among the movement, but for some reason their voices and experiences don't hold any value to you.

When you stop talking out of both sides of your face, that might change. As long as you pretend men's rights activism is compatible with feminism, no, your voice doesn't hold any value to me.

Well, there is truth in that I do call out some of the most "noticed advocates." Specifically those MRAs more concerned with being anti-feminist then helping men.

This is a dishonest statement, which depends on begging the question. Your unfounded assumption is that tracing the problem back to its roots and calling bigots out on their behavior isn't helping those against whom they've solicited discrimination. It also depends on the idea that one can't both be antifeminist, and help men.

The reality is that feminism doesn't help men - it's a targeted attack against men - again, shown in the links you ignored while making your NAFALT argument.

It is really weird to think how much effort is put into fighting feminists, when there is no obvious feminists you fight.

This tells me that you didn't even look through those links, and you don't know as much as you think you know about your movement. I honestly can't take anything you see until you've read through the entire set of material presented in that comment set.

[–]FeministBees2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I get it. You just keep asserting I'm faking my concern. That's a winning strategy. Also, you by definition rule out the possibility of any "good" feminists with your false dichotomy ("There are two kinds of feminists..."). And you have a weak grasp of feminist theory, in both your generalization and failure to understand the diversity (you collapse them all into one theory, your Patriarchy Theory, and then get upset when feminists tell you you've got it wrong).

As long as you pretend men's rights activism is compatible with feminism, no, your voice doesn't hold any value to me.

Didn't I explicitly state that this doesn't have to be the case? (and it isn't a forgone conclusion) What's wrong with you? (are you still not getting the is-ought distinction?)

The reality is that feminism doesn't help men - it's a targeted attack against men - again, shown in the links you ignored while making your NAFALT argument.

Boy-o, the Women's Center at my alma would heartily disagree. Among other things, we had men's shirts on the Clothesline project and provided counseling and support for men victims of rape and abuse.

And I honestly can't take anything you say until you've responded to Paul Elam's hateful transphobic writing.

Honestly, it really does say something about how unwilling you are to actually talk to and understand other feminists. It is such a intellectually impoverished position that you think all feminists are dishonest schemers. I mean, I have never denied that there aren't problems in the history (or even some contemporary feminism). I simply asked that you open you mind to the possibility that there is good feminism out there.

And instead of a productive attitude from you. You've continued your "all feminists are two bad things" arguing. You argue in circles, and it's really unimpressive. You also seem unwilling to do the very work you demand that I do (which I am not even disagreeing with you about the facts, just that you're "overall" history is biased). You won't even stand critical of the very hateful things tossed about by your own beloved AVFM. Sorry, but I do criticize other feminists (happens all the time in /r/askfeminists), it's you who's unwilling to deal with your own "house."

[–]oneiorosgrip1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I get it. You just keep asserting I'm faking my concern.

You've repeatedly demonstrated that you are.

Also, you by definition rule out the possibility of any "good" feminists with your false dichotomy ("There are two kinds of feminists...").

Again, supported in the links you didn't bother to check out.

And you have a weak grasp of feminist theory, in both your generalization and failure to understand the diversity (you collapse them all into one theory, your Patriarchy Theory, and then get upset when feminists tell you you've got it wrong).

The entirety of feminist theory dissipates without patriarchy theory. Patriarchy theory is explained in fair detail in several places online. It's not rocket science. It's a conspiracy theory with no merit. Offer me proof otherwise, if you have any.

Didn't I explicitly state that this doesn't have to be the case? (and it isn't a forgone conclusion) What's wrong with you? (are you still not getting the is-ought distinction?)

Fake insults don't help your argument, either. In this case, the is/ought distinction doesn't matter, because in either case you're demanding that the MRM change to fit in with feminism, and feminism is still responsible for causing and perpetuating significant legal discrimination against men.

Boy-o, the Women's Center at my alma would heartily disagree. Among other things, we had men's shirts on the Clothesline project and provided counseling and support for men victims of rape and abuse.

First, boy-o? Clarify, please.

Second, your statement isn't a counter to the statement you quoted before it. One women's shelter deigning to put out rape t-shirts for a few men does not counter an entire movement's effort to define rape to exclude male victims of female perpetrators, or to deny men equal assistance toward getting out of abusive relationships. It doesn't counter the academic side of feminism making a deliberate effort to impute malice upon men by defining human dysfunction as a set of masculine characteristics, or to mislead the public with biased studies and false conclusions. Your comparison is a joke. "I cooperated with the most oppressive political hate group of my time, and all I got was this stupid t-shirt."

And I honestly can't take anything you say until you've responded to Paul Elam's hateful transphobic writing.

Link, or it didn't happen - especially after the link you got from manboobz turned out to be such a bust.

Honestly, it really does say something about how unwilling you are to actually talk to and understand other feminists.

For the record: I am absolutely, unequivocally not a feminist!

It is such a intellectually impoverished position that you think all feminists are dishonest schemers.

That's a strawman. I've noticed from their overt, measurable actions that feminist leaders are dishonest schemers. I've noticed from the overt actions of the grassroots that they are naive, ignorant, and easily manipulated by their leaders. And like you, when they learn of the hateful, bigoted behavior of their mainstream, instead of condemning the hate and bigotry they obfuscate and present lame excuses.

I mean, I have never denied that there aren't problems in the history (or even some contemporary feminism). I simply asked that you open you mind to the possibility that there is good feminism out there.

Good feminists are like good Nazis. They may believe they mean well, but they're still contributing to societal acceptance of an ideology of hate and bigotry.

And instead of a productive attitude from you.

I think you don't understand what the word "productive" means. The word you're looking for is "controllable," maybe, or "malleable," or "obedient."

You've continued your "all feminists are two bad things" arguing.

Actually, no, I've submitted that in answer to your use of NAFALT as a reply to evidence that established, funded mainstream feminism is a hate movement that advocates for discriminatory conditions, and your argument helps back it up - you've done exactly as I pointed out: instead of condemning the hate and bigotry you obfuscate and present lame excuses.

You also seem unwilling to do the very work you demand that I do

Yeah, those links in my comments just dropped out of the ceiling into my lap one day. Extensive research wasn't involved in finding them or in writing the articles that some of those links go to. It's all a ploy to sully the totally innocent fluffy bunny feminist club. For my next trick, I'll clone the president so he can have a decoy for public events.

One of us has looked at feminism without the bias of already agreeing with it. The other is scrambling for excuses to ignore its hateful history and ideology.

You won't even stand critical of the very hateful things tossed about by your own beloved AVFM.

You haven't shown me anything that was hateful.
You're making unsubstantiated claims and comparing that to the substance I provided, which you have yet to address. Your horse isn't as high as you think it is.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 12 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link

[–]MakhSC 10 points11 points12 points 12 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]anonlymouse 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1[S] -4 points-3 points-2 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Davidisontherun 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1[S] -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ghebert001 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]RatSnakeRabbitSnake 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mhra1 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

What makes you think AVFM does not get millions? I can tell you they do. They are at tens of millions of page views now.

Also, go to Alexa and compare the traffic of AVFM against Genderratic. Not even in the same universe. Nothing against Genderratic, it is a great site, but not even remotely close to AVFM in traffic.

Plus, your logic is really, really flawed. Genderratic does offend people. TyphobBlue offends feminists nearly constantly. Anything that dissents from feminists dogma offends feminists and a fair number of non aligned people in the mainstream.

AVFM alienates some people. So does r/mensrights, so does Genderratic, and so does anywhere else in the universe where people take a position.

This subreddit has great potential which is completely undermined by the lack of knowledge and rule by conjecture that dominates here.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]mhra1 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Davidisontherun 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]typhonblue 12 points13 points14 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I have to run so to be brief, I took a negotiations course that suggested that two locomotives running head on were just going to crash and burn, and that instead of approaching every issue head on, black and white, we win you lose, you're wrong I'm right, you're not the victim I am the victim a better approach is to find ways to make it so both sides can win.

Though prison rape is an enormous issue that deserves attention, is it really smart for MRAs to insist the problem of male rape is worse than female rape because there are so many prison rapes?

I think that's missing a ton about why society is horrified by one and sadly jokes about prison rapes.

I think the time and energy would be better spent on

reducing all rape
raising awareness and demanding attention that women can rape men
raising awareness and demanding attention that there are a ton of double standards especially regarding sentencing
raising awareness and demanding attention and punishment for malicious false accusations
raising awareness and demanding attention to innocent people in prison
raising awareness and demanding attention to not keeping alleged rape victims name anonymous
raising awareness and demanding attention to problems of made up feminist gray rape
raising awareness and demanding attention to problems of the dear colleague letter at universities and the shift to preponderance of evidence.
the various inhumanities of prison, prison rape included

But when I see at reddit or elsewhere posts about male rape is the same or worse because of male on male prison rape, I just see 99% of society tuning out and throwing up their hands and rolling their eyes about the idiot MRAs.

There are several other issues where this sort of "it's even worse for men!" is counter-productive and thwart what I think is a more winning message.

Gotta run.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]RatSnakeRabbitSnake 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

In a lot of ways it almost seems AVFM is copying what various feminists do really when it comes to dealing with gender issues.

This is what really worries me. Not only can this approach lead to the surrender an easily held morally high ground, it turns everything into a zero sum game. The AVFM strategy is usually defended as being the path to victory in some epic battle, and while I think that's a premature assumption that fosters unnecessary conflict, my big concern is that there seems to be little reflection on what "victory" would look like.

With AFVM being as obsessed with feminism as it is, they should be more aware of how the worst in feminism is linked with other negative trends, and how the negative end results of those trends are tied to the negative means used. If feminism is a problem, I don't see how using its methods won't raise problems either. Sometimes problematic methods can be overcome with caution and awareness, but the ideological bent of those employing said methods doesnt inspire confidence.

Perhaps the bigger problem is an insecure desire to embrace a naive outlook of the situation, one of a grand manichean conflict to be won by hero activist. That's a bit lacking in nuance for my taste, but then again Im always a bit wary of those using Machiavellian logic one moment and demanding some form of purity in the next.

The typical response to criticism like this is both reductive and patronizing, something about how a men's rights movement has been around for decades and has blossomed thanks to AVFM. Over simplifying things doesn't engender trust, or at the least it won't be able to overcome people's attachments to contrary oversimplifications. Its as if the cultural landscape hasn't changed in decades.

Time hasn't stopped. If the cause of men's rights is gaining momentum it isn't because AVFM is fucking shit up, its because men are experiencing problems and want things to change. I only wish more thought would be given to where the momentum is headed. Sadly, some are more concerned with taking all the credit.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1[S] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]rightsbot 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]womblefish 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

AVFM seems to get a bit of a negative reaction around here, mainly because the demographic here is a lot younger. There are people here who honestly seem to believe the MRM started with /r/mensrights just a few years ago.

You've been taught to be good boys, to be quiet, to sit down and shut up. You've been taught to patiently wait and eventually you'll get your turn. You've been taught to be polite, to not raise your voice, never get angry, that if you express yourself calmly and rationally people will listed to you.

None of that shit works in the real world! They teach you that to keep you from causing trouble, because it's angry young men that overthrow governments and change the world. They're scared of you, and they should be.

The modern MRM has a continuity that stretches back decades to men's groups in the 70's and fathers rights groups in the 80's.

Working with Feminists has been tried. Our problems always had to wait, and wait, and wait. There were always women's issues that were 'more important'.

Being polite, calm and rational has been tried. Writing carefully thought out letters to government ministers and newspapers has been tried. Politely asking for our issues to be debated in public has been tried.. Men were just ignored or ridiculed.

We've tried the 'approved methods', and they achieved nothing.

It's time to get angry, very fucking angry!

"Angry" MRA's have brought more public attention to men's issues in the last 5 years than the previous 30 years of polite discussion or co-operation ever did.

People pay attention to a crying woman, but they pay even more attention to an angry man. It's basic psychology/biology.

I don't approve of everything AVFM does or says, but we as men, NEED to start screaming obscenities and throwing shit, and AVFM seem to be a good start.

[–]mhra1 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Good points. AVFM's demographics are also young. A great deal of young people 18-24, while it also appeals to those 34-45, with a nearly even split in gender across the board (slightly favoring males).

I find much of the critique here really laughable. While AVFM is certainly edgy, it has also enjoyed publishing the works of Miles Groth, Murray Straus, Warren Farrell, Neil Lyndon, Glen Poole and others, none of whom have serious enough issues with the website to refrain from presenting their work there.

So, AVFM, the most trafficked men's rights advocacy website ever, draws the support of the most noted luminaries in the realm of men's advocacy alive (even as some of them disagree with certain aspects of the site).

Why? Because they know it is necessary, and they know, despite the ramblings of trolls like truthjustice, that it is accomplishing a great deal. It may not be everyone's cup of tea, but I am betting that the mainstay of hostility at reddit is from inexperienced advocates (and immature ones) that are not very tuned in to big picture.

I don't think AVFM is by any means the only way to approach these problems, and I can honestly say I do not agree with everything on the site. But the rigid mindset of some of the commenters here reflects the inflexibility of ignorance and an unfortunate blindness to the importance of the work done by that website.

Luckily, that importance is not lost on the more dynamic thinkers in this field.

Men and the women who care about them need a variety of ways to draw attention to the issues. Those that actually think there is "one right way' should season their approach and their thinking.

Lest the biggest contribution they make to this cause is attacking people whose work they don't understand.

Not much of a legacy, in my opinion

[–]carchamp1[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Hamakua 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]womblefish 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1[S] 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PortalesoONR 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mhra1 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]PortalesoONR 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]mhra1 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]PortalesoONR 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]mhra1 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]PortalesoONR 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]mhra1 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]PortalesoONR 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]BachelorLessons 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]ghebert001 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]BachelorLessons 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]mhra1 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]BachelorLessons 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]mhra1 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]BachelorLessons 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]mhra1 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]BachelorLessons 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

nar·cis·sism [nahr-suh-siz-em] Show IPA noun 1. inordinate fascination with oneself; excessive self-love; vanity. Synonyms: self-centeredness, smugness, egocentrism.

2. Psychoanalysis . erotic gratification derived from admiration of one's own physical or mental attributes, being a normal condition at the infantile level of personality development.

Nothing in my posts point toward comparing Elam to myself, or indicate that I hold myself at a higher status above Elam. So I'm pretty sure you didn't use the word "narcissism" correctly.

But you are right about one thing: I don't give a shit if AVFM makes an impact or not. I'm too busy making impacts of my own, as the fact that your anger (indicated by your attack on my character that is implied by your insinuation of narcissism) over my non-compliance to why I don't "JUST SHUT THE FUCK UP AND DONATE" would imply.

I wish AVFM all the best without my financial assistance. That being said, fuck Paul Elam and his stance on men who don't bend over backwards to lick his ass. On second thought, fuck you, too, for not being able to separate a person from deeds and then attacking others for simply not liking said person.

But please DO keep donating to AVFM so I don't have to.

[–]mhra1 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ghebert001 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]BachelorLessons 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PortalesoONR 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]BachelorLessons 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]unclefisty 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1[S] 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]unclefisty 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]unclefisty 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1[S] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]unclefisty 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]RatSnakeRabbitSnake 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]RatSnakeRabbitSnake3 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

That depends on your goals I suppose, but I see your point. However, being noticed does not by itself mean that you will achieve your goals. Not unless your goal is to be noticed. There's a reason that as of yet no Cardinal wanting to be the Pope has released a sex tape.

I think part of what's happening on the activist side of things is that the success of a mission can be confused with the "success" of those tasked with the mission. This is often happens in government bureaucracies, especially in national security, where each little fiefdom often wants more money and power, as if that directly correlates to an increase in national security or national well being.

Activist tend to take a very top down view of things, one that tends to see the health of a movement in the power of its leaders, and one that sees all success as being caused by the few on the soap boxes and not the many doing little things. Its like going crowd surfing and then thinking that you're flying.

The whole idea of activism implies that its the big hot button issues, usually government related, that are the problem. They never think that these easily defined issues are the symptoms of murkier cultural causes. If the problem is looked at from the bottom up, then its the little things, done day to day, by normal people, that hold the answers to our problems. Many activist don't like this, as it challenges thier ego boundaries. Its also why I'll never call my self an MRA, even though I care about men's rights.

This attitude went over like flies on shit with AVFM when I tried to interact with them. No big shocker there, as predictability is one of the many side affects of an idealogical approach. Once their dogma checklist reached the point where my lack of activist experience was used as proof that had nothing to say about men's rights, I knew they had no right to call themselves a voice for men. Im a man, and I have a voice, they just don't want to hear it, and I think they would be happy if no one else did either.

They say they are tired of talking about issues that they have already talked about, but I just don't see the benefit of closed systems, and I don't understand why they haven't came up with better answers to criticisms that they have supposedly handled many times before.

[–]carchamp11 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]RatSnakeRabbitSnake3 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Read what you just wrote me, and then look at some of your other post. If your a coke drinker, you shouldn't be rude to Pepsi drinkers and tell Royal Crown drinkers to shut the fuck up.

Keep in mind that AVFM is pretty bold, and if they don't want to be inclusive they need a more appropriate name, and they need to stop acting like there way is the only way, especially if their supporters pull they personal preference card out only convieniant.

If you want movement diversity, don't expect isolation. That will mean feedback, criticism, doubts, and discussion. That's called a functioning OODA loop, and those lead to success. Things only become divisive when you don't embrace such interplays, create echo chambers, or become rigidly dogmatic. Don't even flirt the with is or against us crap if your not looking to make enemies.

Edit: getting sleepy, so if that made no sense there's that. Thanks again.

[–]truthjusticeca 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Hamakua 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Anytime I see anyone Shoe-horn in "H" into MRM I immediately downvote as it's the same bullshit "fluid" speech manipulation that feminism does because they can't stand on the logic or arguments alone.

I'll read the stuff, I'll support and upvote any article I agree with, but if I see MHRM I downvote, ignore, and move on.

And I don't, agree at all, with the Benard Chapin point of view either.

"MHRM" is a symbolic trimming of the ball sack in hopes that "not feminists" won't castrate MRA's with claims of supremacist views or some other strawman.

The hypocrisy is doubly thick when they then turn around and try and justify caustic language (the language I am fine with, talking outside both sides of your mouth, I don't.)

It's been the MRM long before AVfM was around So I find the H cute at best. And no, I'm not going to bother discussing it over there since I've read accounts of people getting banned for less... sound familiar?

I appreciate the consolidation of voices and mental assets over there, but this is one of those things I disagree with on Principle.

[–]truthjusticeca -6 points-5 points-4 points 12 years ago (36 children) | Copy Link

[–]Sasha_ 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca -6 points-5 points-4 points 12 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 12 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]sillymod[M] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]mhra1 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]sillymod 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]mhra1 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago* (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]mhra1 -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

I didn't follow up because he erased my previous comment.

Oh waa!! Complete, nonsensical bullshit spouted by a fucking child. Oh mommy, mommy, the bad man erased my comment so I could not dial a telephone!

What does your previous comment, even if he really did erase it, have to do with the fact that his phone number and agreement to debate you were there in full view?

And if you supposedly went in there and found your previous comment erased, then you had to see his response to your post.

You are making lame excuses for yourself. In fact, you are single handed giving the word "lame" new meaning.

And don't bore me with the terms of your debate. I don't give a fuck what you want to drone on about. Find your spine and go call the guy that you have so far avoided, while falsely pointing the finger at him for being afraid to debate your stupid ass.

Fuck sake, you can't even make sense of yourself in this thread, much less a debate with someone like Dean.

If clowns like you are the best dissent against AVFM, then AVFM is in damned good shape.

[–]desmay 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

1) I did not delete any comment by you.

2) I absolutely, positively, DO NOT advise men to abandon children to abusive women. Under specific circumstances (a woman holding a child and using the child as a shield while attacking you) I may advise leaving the immediate vicinity when you are the target but the child is not, but nevertheless staying nearby in case she does turn on the child (unlikely but possible) and otherwise waiting for her to calm down then beginning a process of documenting and legal planning, because in most cases the woman will not have the child as her target while she's attacking you, although if she does turn on the child, then you can still intervene so long as you're out of sight but nearby. You also need to consult a lawyer and not go straight to the police, if you can, and document document document. This is a horrible situation for which there is no easy escape because any other answer, including calling the police or actually leaving for real would most likely result in the child being truly abandoned to an abuser (because the police will likely take you away and lock you up, so your power to do anything is completely destroyed), whereas the course of action I recommend in that scenario is the one LEAST likely to see the child abandoned to an abuser. In other scenarios, there are other choices of course.

3) The notion that I have no empathy for a man in that situation when you can clearly see me CRYING VISIBLY ON VIDEO while discussing the issue and the horrors this involves also shows that you're saying something untrue. Lacking empathy? What?

3) I have now publicly issued you three challenges to discuss this with me, publicly or privately. I've also emailed you. My phone#, once again, is 313-334-4887, and my Skype is deanesmay. In invite you to call to discuss this with me privately and/or set up a manner to discuss it publicly, but you sir are stating things that are NOT TRUE. There is nothing to "debate" so far in what you've said, because what you've said is a gross misstatement of my position, such a gross misstatement it is abusive all by itself.

I have up until now been willing to believe the real problem here is misunderstanding. Maybe it still is. There is one way for you to solve that and that is to talk to me.

I hereby invite you AGAIN (fourth time now by my counting) IN PUBLIC to discuss this with me (along with the private email challenges I've also issued you), and I also further invite you to call the Erin Pizzey show to discuss it or any other questions you have.

I predict based on past experience that you will not pick up the phone and like a human being just call and talk to me. I would like to be wrong. I hope I'm wrong. You have the number. You have the email address. You have the Skype. You have clearly written invitations from me. You have multiple venues in which you can easily and freely make this contact.

I otherwise ask that you stop making these false allegations. If there is a misunderstanding, have some courage, pick up the phone and talk to me, and try to help clear the air. Otherwise, you begin to look like someone with a genuinely psychotic obsession with me and an obsession with misquoting and misattributing me in a very bizarre way.

[–]truthjusticeca 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

1) I did not delete any comment by you.

Well, the comment didn't go through, it may not have been deleted.

2) I absolutely, positively, DO NOT advise men to abandon children to abusive women.

Perhaps there's a misunderstanding here then, do you agree that the only chance this man and child has under the circumstances is to collect evidence? There's no point in coming back when she's calm and taking a video of her calm. You need to make a video when she's hitting you. Did you remember what happened to Amber Portwood? You have no other solutions for men, but collecting evidence is the only thing that I have ever seen that works.

I still for the life of me do not understand how someone cannot see that if a woman is clutching a child and using it as a shield while bashing you, why you would think ~~either calling the police, wrestling the child out of her arms, or~~ just sitting there taking the beating are better outcomes than removing yourself as the source of her rage and coming back and making documentation after you come back.

A man in this situation needs to collect evidence. Do you agree or disagree?

The notion that I have no empathy for a man in that situation

Do you understand this man's fear for his child? Do you think that fear might outweigh taking a few hits and getting it on video for a chance to save his child? Do you think some men have the ability to gauge their own tolerance and not hit back or make things worse? Did you recognize Woolybumblebee's lack of empathy and focus on man's responsibility and blame for the violence that is inflicted on him?

I have now publicly issued you three challenges to discuss this with me

Well, you declined 5 months ago and you shouldn't have. I'm accepting your challenge publicly. I'll need a few days for each submission and I probably only need to do two. I'm trying to figure out if you agree with me, because it seems that there's a reluctance to discuss all other options like collecting evidence.

I have up until now been willing to believe the real problem here is misunderstanding. Maybe it still is. There is one way for you to solve that and that is to talk to me.

It's entirely possible. Have you figured out yet that I have never suggested calling the police, struggling over the child or instigating violence? What is your opinion on collecting evidence of her acting violently?

[–]desmay1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Of course the only chance the man had was to collect evidence.

Then why aren't you advising men to do so and how to collect it? He should be going to a lawyer to take it in front of a judge. The issue isn't whether he should leave in an opinion after the fact about a fictional abusive woman, the issue is if he has enough evidence and if his kids are safe.

She's putting the child in danger, it's almost as if she's threatening to hit the child if he doesn't leave. He has evidence, he's got to use it, not listen to some idiots shit on him for not running away.

be the adult in the situation and remove himself from the situation

Generally, good advice to de-escalate, back off, go to another room. So, she keeps following you, what then? It happens the next day, what then? Times running out, his kids are trapped with the family terrorist. What does this man do?

shameful psycho as she's turned out to be, was showing empathy.

Well, it turns out that I'm a better judge of character than you, because I recognized what a shitty person and liar she was a long time ago. Empathy can be faked and crying isn't necessarily a sign of empathy.

I never declined any debate with you, ever.

Yes, you did, Paul even threatened to boot me for threatening to debate.

http://www.avoiceformen.com/updates/live-now-on-reddit/#comments

You could just release the video and show the evidence.

Anyway, I don't want to bust your balls about what I think of you. I just want to settle what the debate is about. We agree on de-escalation, not calling the police, not fighting back.

We don't seem to agree on:

He is the cause of her violence
The urgency to collect evidence and use it
The safety of the children if he leaves

[–]truthjusticeca1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]desmay1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]AgentOrangeMRA 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]desmay 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]JesusSaidSo 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]womblefish 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nigglereddit 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]mhra1 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1[S] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]CosmicKeys 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago* (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca 9 points10 points11 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]unclefisty 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1[S] -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]carchamp1[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]truthjusticeca 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	If you don't get AVOICEFORMEN.COM, STFU! (Or, how AVFM.com is selling the MHRM)
Author	carchamp1
Upvotes	9
Comments	215
Date	September 30, 2013 8:56 PM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1ngq78/if_you_dont_get_avoiceformencom_stfu_or_how/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/if-you-dont-get-avoiceformencom-stfu-or-how.1162499 https://theredarchive.com/post/1162499

Comments