~ archived since 2018 ~

Please: Don't down-vote to avoid discussion. Rather feel free to contradict, argue. TheAntiFeminist.com closing down? Mainstream MRA actively support incarceration of men for normal male sexuality and ban those who defend normal male sexuality

shadowbanned6

January 10, 2014

0 upvotes

http://human-stupidity.com/stupid-dogma/teenage-sexuality/theantifeminist-com-closing-down-mens-rights-support-for-incarceration-of-men-for-normal-male-sexuality

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Post Information

Title	Please: Don't down-vote to avoid discussion. Rather feel free to contradict, argue. TheAntiFeminist.com closing down? Mainstream MRA actively support incarceration of men for normal male sexuality and ban those who defend normal male sexuality
Author	shadowbanned6
Upvotes	0
Comments	35
Date	January 10, 2014 3:30 PM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1uvwwu/please_dont_downvote_to_avoid_discussion_rather/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/please-dont-down-vote-to-avoid-discussion-rather.1005027 https://theredarchive.com/post/1005027

Comments

[–]saint2e 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]shadowbanned6[S] 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]saint2e 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]saint2e -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]shadowbanned6[S] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]saint2e 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]shadowbanned6[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]saint2e 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]shadowbanned6[S] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]saint2e -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]ernestbelfortbax 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]saint2e -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

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

To be honest I've never read up on feminism driving age of consent to be raised. Normally that's conservative lobbying groups, or Christian groups. No, you're quite wrong.

Firstly, virtually all age of consent laws in the Western world were lobbied for and set by feminists (in the USA and the UK by suffragettes). Secondly, in Europe it is still almost exclusively feminists driving the frenzy of new law making and further draconian punishments. For example, the NSPCC, probably the most powerful 'child protection' orginization in Europe, is staffed entirely by radical feminists. It is not even true in the USA. For example, most of the measures regarding the sex offenders register were undertaken by the Clinton government. In fact, Hilary Clinton played a strong role in securing international treaties that defined children and 'child porn' as any sexual material featuring even 16 and 17 year olds. There is a massive Christian voter base in the USA, so politiicans like to appeal to it, but behind the scenes, it is feminist lobby groups pushing for the laws in the first place, often even a case of the USA simply fulfilling international (feminist) treaties. Furthermore, Christian/conservative lobby groups are increasingly dominated by women, especially those pushing for sexual legislation 'protecting children'. i..e Christian/Conservative feminists.

However, I'm glad to see you more or less admit that if it is indeed women jailing men under these laws (and it is indee the case) then the age of consent is a men's rights issue. This gives me some hope that some MHRAs, at least, are genuine.

[–]saint2e 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Manzboobz 12 years ago [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

I'm confused. Fiddy has no interest in MR issues other than age of consent laws and has previously stated he'd rather have anti-feminist allies than MRAs.

Good points, but he seems like a one-trick pony.

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

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

[–]shadowbanned6[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[+]Manzboobz 12 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

I upvoted because it's good points for discussion.

[–]shadowbanned6[S] -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

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

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

[–]K-Li -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

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

Take a look at AVfM's view of a new UK law extending the definition of domestic violence, especially the list of 5 points why this is a bad law :

http://www.avoiceformen.com/mens-rights/domestic-violence-industry/tough-new-domestic-violence-laws-proposed-for-britain/

All 5 points apply equally to feminist statutory rape laws. Your point above surely could apply equally to dismissing domestic violence laws as a non mrm issue - ie: 'They can be a men's rights issue, but the issue is that, regardless of the genders of the people involved(ie which is the instigator or domestic abuser), any financial or criminal consequences accrue to the male.'

Also, if you think the sexual attractive 17 year old girls is outside of normal male sexuality then you are lying paedocrite. It's such an absurd and obviously false claim, that the only possible motive for you to make it is to avoid having anyone here pointing the accusatory finger at you.

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

This smells like coat-tailing to me, and there is no need for the MRM to tolerate it.

Just to make it clear - these issues are so obviously related to men's rights and accepted obviously as mens' rights issues by every other mra before the moral panic of the last decade (from ernest belfort bax, David Thomas, to Angry Harry), that it is not credible that you can actually believe that there is no relationship to men's rights (other than equal application of the laws). Even the Economist magazine and other mainstream publications have spoken out, yet the men's rights movement can't? http://www.economist.com/node/14165460

It smells like shit wafting paedocrisy to me - 'please mr fbi agent, I'm not a paedo, don't look at me'.

And there is no reason for any real mra with a conscience to tolerate this.

What percentage of men locked up under feminist sex laws would it take for you to admit that these are men's rights issues? 1%? 5%? 20%?

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

Hey dude.. Your problem is that leading MRAs arent picking up and fighting your pet issue. You paint a picture that they are fighting against you, even though there is not even a single blogpost opposing or trashing you, while you have NUMEROUS blogposts trashing them.

You know damn well that an activist can focus on some specific set of issues of choice for them.. such as COTWA is focused on False Allegations only. AVFM is focused on its set of issues, and they already have enough on their plate.

If you were really capable, you would have branded your even more hot potato issue as a 'Mens Sexual Liberation Movement' and built it up as a leader. None of the leading MRAs had it easy.. They all struggled for years. Since you got nowhere in your 6 years of blogging, and you failed to build ANY sizeable community around you, your failures are blamed now on AVFM. SOUR GRAPES.

Why dont you bitch that other longtime MRAs, such as Chapin and the Spearhead's Price, are not adopting your pet cause? Instead, you have posts sucking up to him as 'The Great Chapin'. Why? Coz by your values, Enemy of an Enemy is your friend.

You are hung up to such an extent.. that you even say "Elam is living lavishly" on donations.. even though you dont donate ANY money, and people like me who donate money are quite happy with what we get. And insiders, and LONG time massive donors like Stu at AVFM, who are privy to more details are quite happy with how things are going.

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

Your problem is that leading MRAs arent picking up and fighting your pet issue.

No, as I've always made clear, I have no problem with other mras not discussing this issue, I do have problems when AVfM and r/mensrights, and other 'MHRM' hang outs, actually validate the feminist child abuse industry when a feminist leglislative creep and witch hunt is taking place that appears to have no end.

there is not even a single blogpost opposing or trashing you

Fidelbogen came on my site the other day and told me it was gibberish and that I had an IQ of 50. Paul Elam has stated that he believes that any MRA questioning feminist statutory rape laws should be fucked in prison.

You know damn well that an activist can focus on some specific set >of issues of choice for them.. such as COTWA is focused on False >Allegations only. AVFM is focused on its set of issues, and they >already have enough on their plate.

And you say this immediately after trashing me for having a 'pet subject' and suggesting that I'm not an MRA because I don't focus on the pet subjects of other MRAs.

If you were really capable, you would have branded your even more hot potato issue as a 'Mens Sexual Liberation Movement' and built it up as a leader.

Why? The whole point is to ensure that men's human rights activists like you aren't allowed to dismiss hundreds of thousands of men being incarcerated by feminist hags and millions more potentially criminalized as a 'pet hobby'. It's men's rights even if 99% of the MRM do not have the balls to speak out on it or not, and I'm an MRA.

Why dont you bitch that other longtime MRAs, such as Chapin and the Spearhead's Price, are not adopting your pet cause? I've already answered that - because they don't promote the sexual victimisation of 17 year old consenting boys (or girls). In fact, Bill Price has spoken reasonably on these issues on several occasions.

that you even say "Elam is living lavishly" on donations.. even though you dont donate ANY money

I have donated money in that past, but that's irrelevant. You can't criticise feminst donation industries that live off their own fat by creating new laws that jail men, when the so-called 'men's human rights movement' is doing practically the same now by chasing victimhood (wanted or not) for 17 year olds in order to get donations. The only result of that is more men in prison, more teenage boys (and girls) unnecessarily head fucked by the forced label of 'victim' and subsequent 'therapy'.

'That which we cannot speak of, we ought to remain silent upon' (Ludwig Wittgenstein) Again, I have no problem with AVfM not discussing the age of consent, men being locked up for looking at pictures of young looking elves under feminist laws etc, but I have a right to criticise when it starts taking money for actually applying and even EXTENDING feminist sex abuse nonsense.

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

And you say this immediately after trashing me for having a 'pet subject' and suggesting that I'm not an MRA because I don't focus on the pet subjects of other MRAs.

I didnt suggest that. If you see my reply to HumanStupidity below, I said that there are at least 2 possibilities.. one a rebranding as Mens Sexual Liberation Movement, and one under the current MRM. The rebranding may work better since it may avoid all internal conflicts, but thats just an aside.

when the so-called 'men's human rights movement' is doing practically the same now by chasing victimhood (wanted or not) for 17 year olds in order to get donations.

More BS. Since you have zeroed in on your pet cause, which is just one amongst a MYRIAD of MRM causes, you dont see that the donations are for the bigger project of raising cultural awareness ON MANY ISSUES. Instead you frame it as chasing victimhood (wanted or not) for 17 year olds in order to get donations

If you take 100 articles on AVFM, there may be 1 passing reference to 17yos having sex. Since its just not an issue that AVFM is fighting for, there is no strong stance on it one way or another. But nope.. you have beef with typhonblue (who is just one amongst MANY contributors there), and whatever her opinions maybe.. which I am sure a person with your reading skills will twist.. it just wont reflect the AVFM community's consensus opinion.

If Fidelbogen came to your site and trashed you, take it up with him. I am talking about AVFM that you have particularly chosen to blame for your failings.. and you do that continuously.

I have seen a few articles on AVFM arguing how the Statutory Rape laws are fucked up. for e.g Legally Obscene: Rape, Statutory Rape, and Child Support

But whatever.. go on pretending that AVFM is changing laws and extending feminist abuse. Go on pretending that what you are doing is 'critique' and not whining and bitching caused by your own failure over 6 years of blogging and inability to build a community around you. If its a 'critique' ONLY, why would you continuously post Chapin bad-mouthing AVFM on ISSUES COMPLETELY UNRELATED TO YOURS?

Admit it.. you got a hard-on for AVFM coz they wouldnt pick up your pet issue. Just like HumanStupidity who came over to AVFM pushing his issue. When he got push back and eventual banning, he whines about Free Speech issues at AVFM (but doesnt whine about Free Speech issues at your site.. even though you ban many people.. including Jay Hammers who's supposed to be on your side. LOL)

[–]shadowbanned6[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

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

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

[–]shadowbanned6[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

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

I assume you are the guy who goes by 'Human Stupidity'.

The fact that punishments are totally out of whack for sex-offenses is well known. That feminists and socons have done redefinition of SO MANY THINGS.. and 'child' is just one more term they redefined. I dont know any leading MRA who insists that punishments are fine, or actively campaigns for such punishments.. like you project they do.

You fuckers have been arguing that MRAs are just like feminists in this regard.. thats BS. One of the ways MANY MRAs are fighting feminism is "giving them the equality they want". i.e let women provide for themselves by working themselves to death in corporate jobs, let women protect themselves, let them pay for themselves on dates, and so on. That means no special treatment for them. And we insist there be NO PUSSY PASS even in criminal courts. That they get same sentences as men. I personally say, let women get into combat as well and fight in women-only units.. let them come home in body bags just like men do. WHY this approach? Coz its the only one we as individual men are in control of. Let women experience the downside.. thats the only way we will eventually get ANY bargaining chips.

You guys twist this MRA attitude as 'Equal punishment for sexual issues that are not really crimes'. BS once again. We know its not a crime. But the ONLY way to make them (and other observers) see it.. is to hold them to the same rules. At the end of that stage, maybe there will be more sanity in the world and renegotiating of what is a crime and what is not. what is a child and what is not.

But like I said elsewhere, nobody is pissing on you 'Mens Sexual Liberation Activists' from forking off from the MRA and rebranding yourselves and leading the fight in this arena. Or you could still do it under the aegis of the MRM.

It appears that your beef is that the leading MRAs are not picking up your cause. And you bitch specifically about one MRA group who did not pick up your cause.. AVFM.., and not others like Chapin or Price at Spearhead, even though you comment at TS.