Shortly after I stumbled into the often moronic blogging and forum world of supposed Men's Rights Activists (during my search for a Men's Rights Movement that showed some hope of Movement), I wrote the following post on Chris Key, host of the Men's Rights Online forum:
Chris Key, Hate Speech and the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy of MRAs
I reacted to his "Avatar" which was an illustration of Uncle Sam with the words "We need YOU to kick a feminist IN THE C*NT". That was actually offensive to me. After kicking around their blogs that stop at nothing to get some kind of a reaction, it seems pretty mild about now.
Anyway, after visiting his forum for a while now, I've developed a measure of respect for Chris Key for a few reasons.
The first reason Chris Key deserves respect is that he brought in a woman called ElfPrincess to represent an alternative viewpoint. In fact, he made her a moderator. ElfPrincess is impressive: Tough, smart & she holds her ground. She's got a higher tolerance level for morons than I do. Frankly, I don't know how or why she's put up with the kind of bullshit she has. Maybe she owes Chris money.
The second reason Chris Key deserves respect is that he backed her up. It would be easy to strand her or be middle of the road when all his cronies are ganging up on this articulate and unyielding debater, but he didn't.
The third, and my favorite, reason for respecting Chris Key is that he banished Masculist Man to Troll Town(!). As a fallen citizen with troll status, he can no longer sit at the adult table, and must now sit at the rickety card table with his rubber sword and eat humble MasciePie all alone. How great is that? Perhaps others will realize what I've been saying: the most dangerous enemies of any men's rights movement are the haters, the posers, the bitter misogynists who do not, truly, put their efforts in creating change or advancing understanding or dialogue.
So, Chris, I apologize. While I still think you should find a new avatar for 2008, I think you have conviction and are truly searching for the truth, and are truly advocating change. I was wrong to attack you.
I also apologize for any damage to your reputation caused by my positive comments.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
MRA is an unfair brand applied to anyone who opposes feminism.
Feminism is nothing but a Marxist social engineering tool being used to destabilize society into accepting an oppressive globalist agenda. Social revolution is difficult with stable family units.
While it is just one of a handful of carefully designed social movements, it is very destructive and its effects are being felt strongly, especially by men.
The majority of the unfairly dubbed MRA's are not promoting men's rights, but rather Human rights. I hear men judging women harshly who behave selfishly not considering the best interests of children. The issues addressed are humanitarian; you women are blind to the real intent of the policies you support. Most of us simply oppose the communist/socialist government you are paving the way for.
The word ‘Hate speech’ sends chills down my spine. It is Orwellian, and paves the way for an end to free speech. Hate can be defined as ‘dislike’, therefore these laws you feminists support will ban anyone from speaking on things they dislike. You could go to jail for speaking out against the government, technically its hate speech.
Doesn’t this concern you in the least bit? These aren’t male or female rights, these are human rights, and you feminists are blindly killing them…
It seems to me that people who are truly fighting for change (Activists")speak of abstract ideals, but also specific goals to acheive and actionable plans they are promoting.
Those who pretend to be Activists but are actually more interested in spreading hate and/or creating excuses for their own failures, it seems to me, speak only in generalities and abstractions. Their goal is simply to stir up emotion, and it's easy to stir up emotion with some vague, evil, and (mostly)imaginary oppressor on which to fixate hate. That way pesky facts and specifics don't diffuse the emotion with truth or logic.
uncharted thoughts said: Feminists are Marxist social engineers actively "paving the way" for a "communist/socialist government."
I have no idea what you're talking about, but it sounds really smart and intellectual... but then again I said the same thing about Eric Von Daniken.
uncharted thoughts said: The word [sic] ‘Hate speech’ sends chills down my spine....
Objecting to HateSpeech "paves the way for an end to free speech."...
Hate can be defined as ‘dislike’, therefore... You could go to jail for speaking out against the government...
But aren't your objections to my use of the term "Hate Speech" paving the way to the death of free speech? Aren't you saying that you "dislike" the term "Hate Speech" which will lead to people being jailed for saying that they disliked anything, including Brussel Sprouts and/or Green Tea frozen yogurt that contains no active cultures so shouldn't be called yogurt at all?
As an advocate of free speech, shouldn't you defend the freedom of those who advocate for abolishing free speech? Seems like anything less would be hypocrisy. Of course, you could also advocate for MORE freedom of speech for those who are in favor of free speech. Orwell said that the free speech of some is MORE FREE than the free speech of others.
And while he was mostly speaking about the free speech of talking pigs, shouldn't you advocate MY freedom of speech in freely spinning Orwell's words to support my case?
This 1st Amendment... whew!
Robin, tricking Feminists into supporting laws which will give the government totalitarian authority is a Marxist tactic, used to form the framework of a socialist/communist government, or police state depending...
There is a world of difference between conflicting opinions (free speech), and trying to push oppressive, unjust laws.
'Hate speech' is an attempt to alter the law, that is to say you are not voicing an opinion, but rather attempting to change the legal structure of the system.
You are no longer 'speaking', you are 'doing'. In this case, you are 'doing' treason.
I can't make it anymore clear than that.
Maybe this intellectual stuff isn't your thing? Why don't you go out and buy a new pair of shoes and forget all about this.
uncharted thoughts said: I can't make it anymore clear than that.
Sorry to hear that. Being ignored will be your fate, as you are freaking unintelligible. This makes no sense:
'Hate speech' is an attempt to alter the law, that is to say you are not voicing an opinion, but rather attempting to change the legal structure of the system.
Huh? "Hate Speech" is bigoted speech or written words attacking or disparaging a social or ethnic group or a member of such a group.
"Hate Speech" is not illegal and has been extended broad protection by the Supreme Court. What laws are you saying I'm trying to get passed? You rantings are so vague, I don't know if you're accusing me of supporting objectionable laws or if you're attacking the Great Feminist Chupacabra hiding in your basement?
My education level puts me in the upper ninetieth percentile. If I ain't getting what you're saying, lots of others ain't neither.
Robin, any attempts by you (or other feminazis) to suppress freedom of speech and instead term it ''hate speech'' is a clear example of your authoritarian ideology.
Most MRAs are libertarians, you wouldn't know the meaning of the word.
Instead of pushing for more state intervention, you should be bestowing power to the people.
Also, you did write an article glorifying IMBRA, and you did the same with Lorena Bobbitt. Good job you've been exposed, which is why no one considers you an ally (even though you did try to weasel your way through).
Nice try Robin, but you will never be an MRA, no matter how hard to profess to be one.
Anonymouse said: Instead of pushing for more state intervention, you should be bestowing power to the people.
Why don't you exercise your right to read, fool? I never pushed for state intervention. In fact, I leave comments of my opponents up. Bob Allen deletes all mine because he's against free speech.
I'm for free speech, including the freedom of Google & Blogger to enforce their own policies.
As for your MRA libertarian nonsense, MRAs delete more comments and ban more members than any group I've seen. Bob, mikee, Masculist Man are summarily banned or sent to Troll Town by many MRA site. Which is their right.
Also, you did write an article glorifying IMBRA, and you did the same with Lorena Bobbitt. Good job you've been exposed...
Old news. I've already established that I didn't write those. Where you been? Dateline NBC?
...no one considers you an ally (even though you did try to weasel your way through).
You'd be surprised how many have contacted me and privately. Fact is, there are few I've seen capable of being my ally. A few have potential. Very few.
MRA = Men's. Rights. Activists.
I am among the few true MRAs. One of the few with the courage and energy to actively and aggressively seek change.
Those you hang out with, who whine and kvetch about how oppressed they are by FEMZILLA, who think that typing bold words as Anonymouses is a substitute for action, who think their pathetic pity party is a "movement," are MRTs, not MRAs.
MRT = Men's Rights Talkers.
"I never pushed for state intervention. In fact, I leave comments of my opponents up."
............
Haha..you lying sack of chickenshit cunt. You've deleted more comments than you currently have.
"Those you hang out with, who whine and kvetch about how oppressed they are by FEMZILLA, who think that typing bold words as Anonymouses is a substitute for action, who think their pathetic pity party is a "movement," are MRTs, not MRAs."
........
Just keep talking about your vomit drinking self in the mirror like that. We're all just convulsing with laughter!
But, of course, your completely brainless existence cannot prove that Bob, Mikee, or Masculist Man have deleted message ONE.
Post a Comment