Sunday, 30 June 2013

The abortion debate - Why it matters for mens rights

I recently had a debate with someone who claims to fight for men's rights on Facebook about this photo that he put up in his feed:


Of course he gave the usual bullshit arguments that it's a baby as soon as conception happens, and that abortion is murder, yadda yadda...

But what he, a supposed MRA, failed to realize that, not only was he advocating for the removal of a woman's right to choose, but that he was also advocating for men never to be able to have legal paper abortions at the same time. He is advocating that men should always be on the hook for children they never wanted and do not wish to be fathers to. He is imposing his beliefs on others, and that is where trouble begins when one allows their religious and personal beliefs to poison the well.

He could not get his head around the simple fact that if you take away a woman's right to choose, you can not then advocate for men to have a right to choose either. You would have to accept the fact that men would be forever forced into fatherhood whether they wanted it or not, which is one of the main issues that MRA's are seeking to legally change. But seeking that right for men would have to stop if we take away a woman's right to have an abortion.

When you are advocating for the rights of one group, you cannot advocate taking away rights from another. It does not work that way and, as you can see from this example, has the real danger of backfiring on what you are advocating for.

If men want things like reproductive rights then men need to stop trying to take away women's reproductive rights. Siding with the Republicans and the religious nuts in the USA is one sure fire way to ensure that men never get any reproductive rights because they (Republicans and religious nuts) are hell bent on taking away women's reproductive rights. These people want to stop legal abortion and take away birth control access. If you think that these things are somehow a good thing, then you need to put down your MRA label and just admit that you are not fighting for equal rights or the rights of men. If you were you would be able to understand that taking away women's reproductive rights will only serve to further cement forced fatherhood on men and permanently remove any possibility for a man's right to choose. You are condemning men to a lifetime commitment they may not want, just as you are trying to do to women by advocating for the removal of their choice.

So here's a tip to all those so-called MRA's out there that think abortion is wrong and should be abolished - Please stop fooling yourself into thinking you are somehow advocating for men's rights. You are not helping men in any way by trying to impose your ridiculous, ill-informed, and ignorant beliefs on women. If you can't understand the simple logic behind this then there really is no hope for you. 

Just admit you are not really fighting for anyone's rights, let alone men's rights. Insisting you are just makes you look more foolish than you already are.

Tuesday, 25 June 2013

MGTOW vs The Toxic MGTOW

There seems to be another rift in the MGTOW/MRM sphere(s) between Paul Elam and Stardusk who both seem to think that they can define what it means to be a MGTOW and how MGTOWs should act/behave, which is what has prompted me to write this article on MGTOW and how I see it in terms of this latest divide.

Over the course of the last year I have been reading, researching, and examining the MGTOW way of life. I am of course not finished delving into the world of MGTOW, and I doubt I ever will since it is mostly a personal choice that men make based on their own experiences, perceptions, and preferences. At least that is what a MGTOW is supposed to be - someone who decides what is right for him, and him alone.

What I find odd within the MGTOW world is that many MGTOWs feel the need to dictate or define what a MGTOW ultimately is, and when a MGTOW has chosen a different personal path than another there seems to be a long drawn out dispute as to who really is a MGTOW and what defines a MGTOW. It's quite bizarre that something defined as going one's own way would have to adhere to a set of rules or standards.

If someone comes to the conclusion, based on careful consideration and introspection, that one wants to label one's self as a MGTOW and go their own way, then there should ultimately be no discussion or debate to have with that individual. That individual should also not be on a crusade to convince others that his way of life is the best or right way because, again, it is all based on a personal choice and no two people are alike.

But when MGTOWs begin to force their personal ideas and beliefs about what a MGTOW is, or should be, that is where problems begin because there is not supposed to be any set standard for a MGTOW other than for him to go his own way as he sees fit.

Putting men who choose to got their own way in a box and trying to define them by a set standards is not going to work. Dictating why and how they should be MGTOWs defeats the whole purpose of that personal choice.

When people try to convince others of what is right for them, or to dictate how they should be, then they are no longer allowing someone to make a personal choice based on what would ultimately be right for them according to their personal experiences. And when someone decides to become a MGTOW based solely on the assessment of others personal experiences or biased information, then it becomes a recipe for disaster.

No one should have to convince someone to become a MGTOW. That should be a personal decision based on one's personal experiences and motivations, nothing more. It should not have to do with being told what a MGTOW is and that by only doing XYZ can you truly be one.

The bottom line is this. If you decide to choose the MGTOW way of life based on personal reflection, careful consideration, and the knowledge that your choice will ultimately lead you to a more fulfilled and happy life, then I say go for it. Your happiness and contentment are what matter, but if you choose to be a MGTOW based on outside opinions, biased information, a hasty knee-jerk reaction after a bad experience with a woman, or by being coerced by other MGOTWs who feel the need to have others in their 'club', then I would caution you that you may be headed down a path that is not really right for you. A path that will most likely lead you to feel alone, angry, and abandoned.

This leads to what I term the toxic MGTOWs. These are the one's who are not actually content to be MGTOWs and who made their decision to be a MGTOW based on negative reasons outside of careful personal reflection and consideration. The toxic MGTOWs seem to have chosen their way of life based on information they were fed by biased individuals who want to dictate what a MGTOW actually is. They may also be those individuals who have had bad luck with women and feel there is no other alternative out of frustration or the idea that they will never find the right woman. These individuals would tend to be the ones who feel more alone, angry and abandoned, and they need others around them that feel like them to be able to feel justified in having made a bad decision. It's that old adage - misery loves company.

The toxic MGTOWs were the ones I had discussed in a video I made a while back called 'MGTOWs gone wrong'. And there are, unfortunately, quite a few toxic MGTOWs out there that give the sensible, well adjusted, and happy MGTOWs a bad name.

Of course these are purely my own observations which are based on my knowledge of basic psychology, experience with interpersonal behavior and group dynamics. But from what I have seen within the MGTOW 'community', it is not something that requires a rocket scientist to see or understand.

Being a MGTOW is supposed to lead one to a better, happier, and more fulfilled life. If you call yourself a MGTOW then it should not matter what other MGTOWs do or don't do. There are no set rules to apply to any personal way of life. The only 'criteria', if there is one to be had, for being a MGTOW would be your own personal happiness and fulfillment regardless of what others think, say, or do, but if you feel the need to convince men that there is only one correct way to be a MGTOW, or that it is the only sane option for a man to take, then you need to reflect and ask yourself why those things are so important to you if you are truly going your own way.

*Edited to add the first paragraph which did not get saved in the original draft.


Monday, 24 June 2013

Paul Elam steps in his shit once again

In a previous post I had put up a screenshot of one of Paul Elam's temper tantrums on AVFM which was directed at Stardusk.

Some of the commenters on that post were quite upset at the way Paul had addressed Stardusk by 'shaming him':




Oh dear... Could Kevin have struck a nerve with Paul? No more donations? But that can't be why Paul changed the whole original post from this:


To this:



Or is it?

Seems that Paul has decided to completely erase the original post in which he pitches a tantrum, and replace it with the new one on the exact same day of the commencement of his Summer 2013 Donation Drive. How convenient... And timely.

But that is not all.

Paul insists, in the new post, that the original post he had put up "was intended to look a lot more satirical than it does in retrospect".

Really Paul? It wouldn't perhaps have been Typhon who gave you that idea for a pathetic excuse to use to excuse your tantrum would it?


But of course Paul cannot help but step in his own shit and trip over his own lies can he?



So what is it Paul? That you lost your cool and had a fit, or that you were trying to be satirical? Choose one version and stick with it please. It's easier to keep track of your bullshit when you don't keep putting so much of it out there.

Oh, and just an FYI from your former senior editor... If you are going to issue an apology, or attempt to correct an error you made, you issue what is called a retraction. You do not erase an original post and replace it with a new one in an attempt to cover your tracks. That is considered unethical and dishonest. But then again, I don't expect much in the way of ethics or honesty from you or AVFM, especially when you are in the first days of fleecing your readers for your salary, and that of John Hembling (JtO) now as well.


Sunday, 23 June 2013

A little exercise in slavery

There is a saying in the MRM, and among MGTOWs, that being a 'utility' is equal to slavery, which is an absolutely ridiculous claim to make. The fact is that everyone is a 'utility', both men and women. Take away one's 'utility' and you take away one's identity and worth as a human being.

Everything you are, say, or do is a 'utility'. These are our roles as human beings in life. Without roles/utilities we are useless beings with nothing of value to contribute to society. And this is why I suspect many men are beginning to feel really lost. They are attempting to remove their utility/roles because they have been told that their being a 'utility' is bad for them and it makes them slaves to others. But in reality, doing things for others is the whole point of being a human being.

With that said, I want to invite you to make a list of the things that you see yourself as. It's a little exercise we did back in the first semester of my social work classes and I thought it would be fun to explore it here. It gives one a sense of who they are and their roles in life. It provides people with a sense of self and worth.

As an example, my list would be something like this:

I am a:

Mother
Wife
Sister
Daughter
Friend
Problem solver
Boo-boo fixer
Taxi driver
Meal provider
Housekeeper
Peacemaker
Tailor
Teacher
Accountant
Activist
Researcher
Listener
Rule maker
Comfort provider
Repairer of broken toys
Disciplinarian
Partner
Compromiser
Caretaker
Lover
Dog walker/groomer
Student


And so-on. But I do not want you to make such an extensive list if you do not have the time. Just list the top 10 things you see yourself as. List things that are the most important to you.

Go!

Edited for spelling errors.

Schadenfreude in the morning

Imagine my surprise this morning when I sat down and checked my e-mail to find a link to this blurb on AVFM:


I almost spit my tea all over my laptop while trying to contain my laughter at the sweet irony. I seem to remember someone warning Paul and others that people like Stardusk were full of shit and that the message they were promoting to men was based on nothing more than made up 'facts', personal opinions, depression, and anger towards women. Who was that insightful individual... If only I could remember...

ETA: And the irony just keeps getting better :)


Thanks for the laughs Paul. It's a shame you don't have the capacity to grasp why this is so tremendously funny.

Tuesday, 18 June 2013

Everyone Should Own Their Shit... Except Girl Writes What

Girl Writes What, Karen Straughan, has recently written a blog post in response to my videos that have called her self-proclaimed academic prowess and expertise in multiple subjects requiring some academic heft into question.

She presents herself as an authority within the MRM on various subjects such as anthropology, sociology, biology, and psychology. She does so while being quite proud of the fact that she never got past the first semester in college, twice, and admits that most of what she presents as fact is actually nothing but pure speculation:


Yes Karen, it takes a lot of practice to be a two time failure and be proud of it, as well as a great deal of cognitive dissonance


Oh, so what you present is not actually truthful or factual then Karen? So why do you present your conjecture in a way that comes across as fact with a disclaimer that uses words to hide what you really mean? Why not say things like "I am not qualified to give an informed opinion, but I did read XYZ here (citation), and encourage you to read it for yourself because I am not an expert in the field", instead of using terms that imply that you are stating things as having been examined by someone with academic heft, when clearly you are not an academic or qualified to examine anything remotely scientific?


Yes Karen. You are the Alexander Fleming of our time aren't you? Oh wait... But he was a biologist, pharmacologist, and botanist who wrote peer reviewed articles on bacteriology, immunology, and chemotherapy... Oh wait, on second thought, perhaps you are more like the guy who sells the Sham-Wow.



Look Karen, the bottom line is that you peddle your bullshit under the guise of someone who knows what the hell she is talking about. You pretend to have academic heft and professional training by omission. You were just hoping no one would put a lens to your 'work', but as with all pseudo-intellectuals it was just a matter of time before you ran out of rope.

The fact of the matter is that you are just butthurt that I am calling you out, and that Paul had promoted me into the position of Canadian News Director and Senior editor when he did. By the way, how are you doing as the new Canadian News Director and Senior Editor? Oh wait... My bad.

Sadly, all you can respond with are personal attacks on my children and assumptions about my mental health based on your expertise as an armchair psychologist. Who is throwing the tantrum now Karen?

As much as I dislike you, Paul or others, I would never, ever stoop so low as to attack someone's children. How can you even justify that as any kind of rational or professional way to handle something you disagree with? You can direct as many insults you like at me, I am a big girl and can take it, but to attack my children? Oh Karen... How low you have sunk. I truly pity you.

And not only that, but you insulted my ex, who is heavily involved in our children's lives and who insists on paying child support for them because he loves his children to death, and my new husband who you accuse of collecting disability benefits when he in fact owns his own business and works from home with me. Nice try at painting me as some welfare queen who takes men for a ride.

Projecting your inadequacies and failures in life onto others, and making shit up (although you are quite skilled at that) does not make you look very credible Karen. For someone who wants desperately to be taken seriously, and to become famous in an upcoming documentary on the MRM and AVFM, I don't think your childish meltdown is going to help you very much.

All I have done is poke holes in your already shoddy work. Don't shoot the messenger. Put on your big girl panties and own your shit Karen. You know, the things you love to tell others to do. Try to have some self-respect and integrity, and perhaps you'll come out only mildly stinking of shit.

Oh, by the way, is there some way you can prove you do indeed write your own work, since you "script" your supposed substantive videos? I mean it is quite obvious you are an excellent liar, so to question your ability to even have written your own material seems quite reasonable doesn't it?

Anti-feminism and Advocating for Rights Cannot Co-exist

For the longest time I called myself an anti-feminist, as well as an advocate for the rights of men, after buying into the bullshit peddled by the Men's Rights Movement.

Yes I was fooled, and I feel absolutely stupid for allowing myself to be sucked in by a bunch of angry, childish, and broken men. Does that mean that ALL men's rights supporters are angry, childish, or broken? No, of course not. But the vast majority, at least the loudest on-line portion of the MRM, are. And their anger is quite infectious, which is why I know that the MRM is attractive to those that are vulnerable to their angry bullshit. I fell for it, and I thought I was above falling for such obvious bullshit, but in the end no one is immune from powerful rhetoric and propaganda, especially when it comes disguised in the form of people saying they honestly want to help. But once the veil is pulled back it's easy to see that it's all just smoke and mirrors.

When one is trying to advocate for one group's rights, they cannot do so with the intent of removing rights from another group. This is what the radicals of the MRM want to do. These radicals want women to lose the 'power' they have over men by removing their rights and returning things back to a traditionalist state where the men work and the women stay home to cook and clean, and be good little obedient women. In other words, they want men to have rights over women, and THAT is a very big problem. It turns the Men's Rights Movement into a Men's Domination Movement.

The other thing that proves this to be true is the radical Libertarian mindset of some of these people. Libertarianism, at it's core is a system where everyone has to live by their own merit without any social safety nets, and if they fall on hard times, well that is too bad for you. Basically you are fucked if you lose your job, fall ill, etc.. It's the kind of society where no one want's to give a shit about their fellow man and prefers the selfish life of only giving a shit about one's self. A world that I would never want to be a part of because I have empathy and a desire to help those who fall on hard times, hence why I was part of the Men's Rights Movement. I wanted to help men reach equality in area's like the family court system and in social programs that help men. And I still do, but not under a banner that wishes to remove the rights of others in order to attain these goals.

As someone who loves to learn and accepts that learning entails screwing up at times, I am fully capable of saying I fucked up. I learned a valuable lesson from all of this and now have decided that I will still advocate strongly for men's rights, but not under the banner of the MRM or as an MRA. Those things are tainted too much right now by the radicals, and I do not wish to be associated with such angry and intellectually dishonest individuals. Again, this does not mean everyone who claims to be part of the MRM, or who call themselves MRA's are these types of people, but I refuse to be guilty by association any longer.

If anyone wants to know how I would label myself at this point, I would have to say I am a humanist/egalitarian. But labels now are not what is important to me. What is important is how you approach the issue of men's rights and equality for men. Most feminists I know are not actually feminists at all anyhow. They are more like humanists and egalitarians who truly do want to see men have equality in areas like family law and social programs. They are not my enemy just because they use a label that has been corrupted by radicals. And the same goes for those in the MRM who truly want equality and change without hating women or taking away their rights. These are the kinds of people I am willing to work with because these are the people that want to see real change and who are willing to do what it takes to get it done.

As for the hateful radicals, these are not people who want change. These are the people who want others to remain as angry and hateful as they are so they can justify themselves further. Misery does indeed love company in these circles. But I am not going to be a part of that any longer.

Life is too short to waste allowing myself to become angry and hateful. I prefer to make positive changes and to genuinely help others because it is the right thing to do.

I have been wasting my time listening to the radicals and being miserable. It's time to leave those lost causes behind and concentrate on what is really important. It's time to make a real difference.

Sunday, 16 June 2013

Recent Events and a New Direction

I want to take this opportunity to explain what has been going on concerning recent events at AVFM and in the MRM, as well as what direction my YouTube channel is now headed in.

First I would like to say that I am still an advocate for men's rights and believe firmly that men should be able to have equal rights in areas such as family law, the family courts, reproductive rights, and of course in education. I will continue to strongly advocate for men, and I am still working with Murray Pearson to get the Earl Silverman Center up and running - (There will be an update video on that coming soon).

 Now, onto the really important part of this post.

I believe that men have the right to be told the truth and to be able to make choices based on facts and intellectually honest information. This is why I feel it is necessary to expose those that are in the business of lying to men for the sake of nothing more than profit and personal agendas.

What has been transpiring over the last few weeks has not been about vengeance, hurt feelings, or a desire to one-up anyone. What this is about is that, while I was at AVFM it became clear to me, after having been on the back channels and after having seen how things work there from the inside, that there are things going on at AVFM which concern me greatly, and which I think people should be made aware of, especially those who give their money to these people based on what they pretend to be on the outside for their readers and viewers.

The claim that AVFM is non-partisan is one issue I have because I know for a fact that they lean heavily towards radical libertarianism. What does that mean? It means that they refuse to work within the current system for the benefit of men.

It is obvious that if one wants to change how something works they must first work within the current system in order to change it. However, Paul Elam and John Hembling, as well as others, refuse to do this because it does not fit in with their radical libertarian beliefs. I know this to be true because I suggested several things we could have done to help men, such as applying for funding for men's services through VAWA and other Gov't agencies, and was told that they would never touch government money because they do not want to use 'stolen money' because it is against their libertarian principles, and because that is 'what feminists do'.

I would personally have had no issue with their political leanings if it did not affect how they approached the issues of men's rights and how to advocate for men, however it clearly does influence their decisions by their insistence that nothing they do must ever be done against their libertarian principles or the way 'feminists do things'. This reasoning is ludicrous. If we take that position then we may as well pack up now and leave and all move to the mountains. It is a childish viewpoint that ignores reality and the fact that we can do a lot for men if we are willing to let go of this bullshit radical Libertarian idea, and the idea that anything feminists do is bad.

I admit feminists have done a lot of harm to men and boys, but they have also done a lot of good for women and it is THAT part which we need to look at and study in order to be able to adequately assist men in any real way. It is called working the system. If you want change, that is where you go to do it, and not by sitting on the sidelines waiting for the government to collapse. If that is going to be your position, then you are not doing anyone any good and should get out of the way of those who actually want to accomplish something now for the benefit of men instead of some radical ideology that hinders any and all progress.

The other issue is that these people are blatantly lying to you, and they are doing it almost as well as the radical feminists have.

Paul has admitted he controls the message in order to nudge men in the direction he feels is right. He is not allowing you to make decisions because he has carefully crafted the message (exactly what he said) so that you get nudged in his pre-determined direction. Is that what you want? To be unable to make an informed decision for yourself?

His controlled message is simple. He keeps men in a state of anger, and hopelessness. He perpetuates the victim narrative and tries to keep you stuck in victim mode. And he is not the only one. The inflammatory rhetoric used by those at AVFM, like John, are carefully written to get you emotionally worked up. I know this to be the case because I was on several SKYPE calls with John when he wrote many of his articles. I know how he does it and why. It's to keep you in a state of anger and despair.

As for Karen, I have several issues with her. The first being that she sells herself as an 'expert' to the MRM, yet she is not an expert in anything, by her very own admission. She has admitted she has no academic training or specialization in any area, yet she sells her assumptions, unsupported ideas and personal opinions as fact. She claims to not be a libertarian even though the proof is readily available in several places like Reddit that she is. And of course her video of her speaking at the libertarian convention in NY earlier this year is quite telling of her libertarian leanings. We won't mention the fact that she claims to not know where she's leaning, then accuses me of attacking 'her' beliefs. (she said this publicly for anyone who cares to examine her positions). She also supports things like biological determinism and Briffault's 'conjecture' which have been debunked by the scientific and academic community.

All these things should be red flags to anyone with an ounce of common sense. If she is able to justify these things in her own mind as being somehow plausible, then that speaks volumes about her ability to present unbiased or accurate information as a self proclaimed 'expert'. If this is not cause for concern, then I don't know what is. One should ask why, if she is such an 'expert', why is she not published in the scientific community? Why are her papers not under any peer review? These are questions you should be asking yourself of anyone who claims to be an expert in any academic or scientific field as she does.

Anyone working in the helping professions worth their salt will tell you that the goal of their work is to help their clients free themselves of the need for their help. A helping professional's job is to give their clients accurate and honest information so that they can heal and move on. So that they no longer require your assistance. This is what honest helping professionals do. But what Paul, John, Karen, and others at AVFM do, is keep you in a state of constant anger, helplessness, and need. They do not want you to get better. And why would they? Misery loves company. The more you rely on them the more they profit.

It has always been said, in the MRM, follow the money if you want to know who profits when it comes to feminists. Well I urge you to follow the same advice and the money here too. Open your eyes and see that the ones profiting are the ones who claim to have your best interests at heart. Sound familiar?

So my YouTube channel is now dedicated to exposing the lies and bullshit that is going on in the MRM, and at AVFM. I am going to do it the same way I would if it were radical feminism, religion, or any other bullshit scam.

I am doing this for you, not me. I do not profit from this at all. I make very little from doing this - YouTube will not feed or house my children in any way. The only reason for me doing this is that men should be able to make decisions and choices based on honest information. I feel that men deserve not to be lied to and taken for a ride. I believe that men have had the shit end of the stick for too long and this bullshit needs to stop.

If we are to accomplish anything as a movement these lies need to be exposed. If we don't do this then we are no better than the radical feminists. We will not advance, and we will not accomplish a damned thing. We may as well give up now.

There are men out there at this very moment that are truly hurting and suffering. Let's start showing them we really care by doing things that make a real difference in their lives. Enough of the useless sitting on the sidelines bitching about how evil women are, how the government needs to collapse, or how the only way to solve things is to opt out. This is why Earl Silverman died. John wants to blame feminism, but the fact is that the men that were close to Earl at the end knew that his despair was borne of the failure of the MRM to actually DO anything. When they were cornered on their own podcast by this revelation, they quickly changed their tune from 'the feminists did it' to 'he did it to himself', as if not being technically savvy, which is what AVFM has claimed, is a reason none of them could pick up the phone and call Earl the old fashioned way, or run fundraising campaigns for him.

Let's not delude ourselves, they don't WANT to take any responsibility for Earl's death - who would want to? So instead of accepting that Earl was desperate because no one who purports to speak for men decided to help him, they blame him - which quite nicely fits the Libertarian paradigm of personal responsibility, doesn't it? Suicide is a choice? Everyone who's been at that point, ask yourselves, did you choose to be there?

Enough with the inflammatory rhetoric and propaganda. It's time we moved past this shit and began exposing the lies. Doing this will motivate others to act in real productive ways instead of buying into the bullshit narrative that doing nothing is the only option for men. It will break through the bullshit narrative that a man's only option is to give up, and other bullshit that men are being fed on a daily basis which only serves to knock them down mentally into a state of despair.

I for one am not going to let this continue. I am going to fight this bullshit as I have in regards to feminism by peeling back the layers to expose the rotten core, and I welcome you to join me.

If not, then perhaps you are content with being lied to, being a perpetual victim feeling sorry for yourself and doing nothing to help yourself or others move on. If that is the case, I urge you to move aside for those of us who want to help men now.