David Futrelle redefines the words “sick motherfucker”

27 Mar

headline

Futrelle has a long, sad history of advocating for some truly sick shit, including the rape and torture of children “for art”, and skinning men to be used as glue, but he has outdone himself with his recent shitposting about how Paul Elam at A Voice for Men, and people in general who are concerned about the well-being of men and boys caused the tragic Germanwings plane crash.

Yes, that’s right – caring about the well-being of men and boys led to the depressed co-pilot slamming the Airbus A320 into the side of a mountain, killing everyone on board.

Futrelle writes, “[a]ll this would be a little more believable as a “warning” if Elam and other MRAs didn’t devote most of their energy to cultivating exactly this kind of male anger — and in some cases lionizing those who have acted out this rage.”

If MRAs didn’t devote most of their energy to cultivating exactly this kind of male anger. Show me where, show me one single line out of the millions of lines that have been written across the manosphere where anyone, ever, suggested flying a fucking plane into a mountain.

In a desperate attempt to remain relevant and collect funds, the one-time MRA and “lapsed feminist” Futrelle exploits the brutal murder of 151 innocent people, including two infants and numerous children, bringing his “sick motherfucker” quotient up to the full 9000 points allowed on the “sick motherfucker” scale.

Hell, I think Futrelle might have broken the “sick motherfucker” scale on this one.

Futrelle references the tragedy of Tom Ball who killed himself in protest at the wickedly cruel and unfair family court system that awards support and custody to mothers and relegates men to nothing more than cash dispensers, but rather than address the actual issue of unfair courts, Futrelle cherry picks a dying man’s agonized cry for help to promote the disgusting idea that women and men who think parenting should be shared equally are actually advocating for mass murder of entirely innocent men, women and children.

It’s so disgusting, I can barely find words.

It’s one thing to hate equality, as those who oppose rights for men do. Irony: feminists throw the dictionary around when challenged on their beliefs, citing equality as their only interest, but then literally oppose  equality when it comes to sharing their rights and privileges with men.

You know what, fine. We’ll carry on, bringing the message that feminism is not about equality and advocating for real, genuine equality regardless of how much feminists and their “allies” cry and scream about it.

It’s quite another thing to openly write that caring about equality for all human beings is tantamount to calling for mass murder of innocent people. Male anger did not cause the Germanwings crash. Male anger at being treated as disposable, obsolete, stupid, uncaring and unworthy of any assistance is justified. Any group being treated so unjustly is right to be angry. What Futrelle is doing is saying that any expression of male anger is advocating mass murder.  As far as Futrelle is concerned, male anger is not an acceptable emotion and men should just….what, David?

MAN UP?

Go fuck yourself Futrelle. But before you do, take a look at these images first. Notice anything?

men

men 6

men 5

men 4

men 3

APTOPIX France Plane Crash

They’re all men. Those men you despise so much? They’re up on that cold mountain picking up pieces of human beings. They are grieving, mourning, suffering and still getting the job done. How much do you want to bet that every single man up on the mountain, scraping baby parts into body bags is angry? Would you be angry, Futrelle?

Nevermind, we already know the answer to that. You gleefully watched a film in which adolescent boys were tortured, raped, forced to eat excrement and insisted dumb police officers were too dumb to know art when they saw it. Because torturing children as a form of art totally belongs in a porn shop. Yeah, people were doing art.

It seems you have forgotten, Futrelle, what it is like to be a child. Let me remind you:

David Futrelle - 028

Exploiting the deaths of innocent babies, school children, men, women – all of them innocent – as a way of insisting men are toxic, bad and worthless unless they subscribe to the one true ideology is beyond sick. It’s fine if Futrelle and his ilk hate men. Go right ahead.

Using a dead baby to make that seem rational and reasonable makes you not just hateful, it makes you a sick motherfucker. Here is one of the dead babies you are standing on to libel the men and women who care about boys and men as much as they care about girls and women:

baby

Take a good look, you sick motherfucker.

Rest in peace, little one. I’m so sorry for what happened to you.

We all are.

Lots of love,

JB

71 Responses to “David Futrelle redefines the words “sick motherfucker””

  1. insanitybytes22 March 27, 2015 at 16:33 #

    Futrelle is an idiot. Also he banned me. Talk about silencing women’s voices. 😉

    Anyway, 90% of the manosphere makes some good points or at least present some thought provoking ideas. I appreciate that very much. However, there is also an element that really does promote some unpleasant things, including violence against women, as if some men are entitled to seek revenge against all of womankind for their personal offenses and wounding.

    This is a real thing in certain parts of the manosphere. Vox Day presented his own omega rage theory regarding the plane crash and while certainly not the worst thing I have ever read in the manosphere, it is the kind of thing that fuels feminism and the Futrelles of the world. VD also received some push back for some of the things he said, so that’s good to see, too.

    My point being, feminism failed to police its own self and allowed some real yahoos to rise to the top. There are also some real yahoos within the manosphere that need to be called out on their crap. Futrelle may exaggerate and run with it, but he is also provided plenty of ammo.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. JudgyBitch March 27, 2015 at 16:42 #

    There are definitely some wingnuts who call themselves MRA, and Futrelle can call them out all he likes, but exploiting the deaths of these people is just sick.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. insanitybytes22 March 27, 2015 at 16:48 #

    Yes. But VD blaming these deaths on all of womenkind was pretty perverse, too. It also gives every broken and wounded individual out there the validation and permission they might need to commit homicidal acts.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. JudgyBitch March 27, 2015 at 16:52 #

    Haven’t read the VD piece, but if he did the same thing, that’s equally disgusting.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Sir Scatters #2116 (@SirScatters) March 27, 2015 at 16:59 #

    vis a vis VD NAMALT and Fatrelle is one sick motherfucker.

    Like

  6. JudgyBitch March 27, 2015 at 17:03 #

    I read the VD piece, and he does NOT blame women – he EXPLICITLY blames the pilot:

    Now, obviously no one else was responsible for Lubritch’s actions if it indeed was Omega rage at work. He alone bears the blame. But it is somewhat haunting to think about how many lives might be saved each year if the sluts of the world were just a little less picky and a little more equitable in their distribution of blowjobs.

    Crass as hell, but this is not “all womankind’s fault”

    Bullshit

    Like

  7. QNgm305 March 27, 2015 at 17:04 #

    Respected Ma’am (Ms Janet Bloomfield),

    I am an ordinary guy who has been researching on gender issues, over the past few years, through media, internet, newspapers, magazines, television shows, news, & so on. I used to consider myself as a proper feminist until the recent past (now I classify myself as egalitarian or equalist), because, I genuinely believed that feminism was about empowering women & girls, WITHOUT reverse-discriminating against innocent men & boys. But, after a few years of properly researching & closely monitoring & understanding several gender & social issues, I came to find that most aspects & functions of feminism ARE reverse-discriminatory towards genuine males of this world.

    Things like, ignoring deaths of men & boys; ignoring boys under-performing in schools; ignoring men under-performing in colleges; considering men & boys to be disposable & expendable; considering almost all men to be rapists, sexual harassers, molesters, etc; considering women & girls who embrace equalism to be anti-feminists; opposing genuine fathers’ rights; routinely criticizing men & boys on media, internet, television, newspapers, magazines, news, etc; justifying SEVERAL female-only scholarships, facilities, schools, colleges, healthcare funds, funding, government supports, financial grants & loans; justifying SEVERAL high-paying female-dominated fields like fashion, modelling, yoga, gymnastics, anime, travel & lifestyle, beauty, cosmetics, clothing, styling, glamour, anime, etc, where men & boys are DRASTICALLY under-represented & under-paid; publishing HATEFUL & DEROGATORY articles about how women are superior & men are inferior on mainstream media, internet, etc, actually opened my eyes as to what feminism was actually about.

    To be honest & very frank with you, I STILL believe that women & girls should have equal rights; should be able to earn lots of money in high-paying & respected fields like STEM, Business, Politics, Entrepreneurships, Sports, etc; should be independent; should NOT bow down to evil & illogical societies & customs; should be paid equally for whatever work that they do, and so on, but NOT at the cost of men & boys, who ALSO need help, funding & supports from governments, media, organizations, people, & so on. That’s why, I classify myself as an ”equalist”, because I believe in equality for all.

    Also, I believe that men should NOT unnecessarily have sexual activities with women (such as casual sex, one-night-stands, random sexual encounters, pre-marital sex, open relationships, drunken & drugged behaviors, & so on), in order to leave women & their bodies alone. BUT, at the same time, I ALSO believe that women should NOT falsely accuse innocent men of rape; should NOT steal men’s genetic materials (like sperms, blood, etc; usually happens to boys or elderly/disabled/comatose/immobile/etc, types of men); should NOT falsely accuse innocent husbands of dowry harassment, domestic violence, etc; should NOT selfishly divorce their husbands to get 50% of properties, money & assets, with 100% custody of the children; and so on, as far as possible.

    But ma’am, I don’t understand why you use the username & your website’s name as ”JudgyBitch”. The word ”Bitch” sounds very shameful, disrespectful & derogatory, don’t you think? You could have named it something like ”JudgyWoman” or ”JudgyLady” or ”JudgyEqualist” or ”JudgyAnalyst” or something different, isn’t it?

    Anyways, I am sincerely thankful to women like you who are raising concerns & issues on behalf of men & boys. Since I’m an equalist, I also sincerely hope that women & girls overcome the genuine discriminations that they are facing; & men & boys overcome the problems, issues & discrimination they are facing, as well.

    Thank you ma’am, for reading this comment, & I hope that you are also doing well in your personal, professional & family life. Please remember to CONSERVE your wealth & resources, PRESERVE your health & lifespan, & RESERVE your positions & facilities.

    Thanking You,

    Yours Sincerely,

    An Ordinary Guy

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Anon2 March 27, 2015 at 17:44 #

    Janet,

    Thank you for this.

    The other problem (among many) with Manboobz Fat-troll is that, like most manginas, he absolutely is certain that he does very well with women, despite objective evidence to the contrary.

    Manboobz (what type of ‘man’ would call himself THAT for years?) is certain that he does better with women than not just Game guys like Heartiste, Roosh, and Krauser, but even married men like Dalrock and WF Price. WF Price has a pretty wife much younger than him, despite already having kids from his firs marriage.

    Meanwhile, Manboobz cannot provide any proof that any woman is in any relationship with him.

    This is where my request to you comes in L

    You must, as a woman, call him out as THE foremost example of a man who is utterly repulsive to women, and how being a mangina doesn’t get a man laid. Shame him, mock him, and hold him up as an example of the OPPOSITE of what a man should be. To be attractive to women, be the OPPOSITE of David Fat-troll in every way. Yet, his delusion is so deep that he thinks he is far more attractive to women than most men.

    Keep shaming him for being exactly the opposite of what a woman would find attractive.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. insanitybytes22 March 27, 2015 at 18:50 #

    It is crass, but it is also rhetorical trickery to allow him to say exactly that, “how many lives might be saved each year if the sluts of the world were just a little less picky and a little more equitable in their distribution of blowjobs.” Since he is all about AWALT, sluts would be all women.

    If you want to get rid of the Futrelles of the world, you have to stop giving them so much ammo.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Liam March 27, 2015 at 19:06 #

    Just a quick question for his dip-s***edness: Would you say the same of feminism? Feminism sure as hell goes out of the way to nurture female anger and stoke it into a roaring flame.

    So when some individual, lone crazy woman gets overly pissed off at her situation (real or ginned up by feminism) and then drowns or otherwise kills her children in protest of some slight or other of her having to be a mother, would you suggest that that’s all on feminism, for stoking and fanning the flames of female anger?

    Or are you a f***ing self-loathing misandrist for whom nothing men do can ever be right and nothing women do can ever be wrong?

    Never mind, don’t answer, I already know the answer. I’ll see myself out.

    Like

  11. rajicangela March 27, 2015 at 21:25 #

    Yeah I really don’t like that kind of stuff. The thing about blowjobs that was stupid. Not enough blowjobs was probably the least of the co-pilots issues, if it was one. I really dislike people like Vox, Roosh V, Matt Forney etc. They’re skeevy, actually sexist, homophobic and more than a tad racist. Sorry JB, I know you like to repost there stuff sometimes, it’s nothing against you.

    There’s arguing for men’ and boy’s rights (I’m all for that) and then there’s arguing for male supremacy. The plane crash shouldn’t be anyone’s soap box though. Let the families mourn for Christ’s sake!

    Liked by 3 people

  12. Attila L. Vinczer March 27, 2015 at 22:20 #

    Who in their right mind with a semblance of human qualities or decency would write such an atrocious piece exploiting the deaths of so many innocent men and women?

    I understand this Mammoth Manboob does not like that there are people who care about abused men and boys. But to trample on the souls of these deceased to further an agenda of hatred towards those who care about men and boys, is disgusting.

    Where is your dignity? I have yet to see this tyrant do a single positive thing for the community. Jacques must be spinning in his grave given the painful mark this boob’s pen has made on paper and the souls of the recently deceased.

    What can you expect from a man who defends male child-porn, suggesting those boys eating faeces, as an art form. You are one very twisted, sick pile of DNA.

    Like

  13. that1susan March 27, 2015 at 22:23 #

    Futrelle obviously had a very immature reaction to Elam’s kind gesture of providing him with the title for his next piece. He was determined to show Elam just how “creative” he could get by choosing his own title and topic. I hope he’s eating his words for many years to come over this.

    Your rebuttal is excellent — but one thing might detract from that. The article of his that you linked to as evidence that he advocated for “the rape and torture of children ‘for art'” is not about that at all. It’s actually a surprisingly decent piece about finding a balance in dealing with abuse: holding abusers accountable for their own actions while having compassion for those abusers who’ve been abused themselves — and at the same time allowing them room to become better people rather than just condemning them; and also realizing that victims are not completely powerless, and helping them figure out what they can do differently to avoid getting into abusive relationships in the future, without blaming them for the abuser’s actions; and last but not least — Futrelle criticizes the author of the book he was reviewing for her decision to use male pronouns to refer to abusers and female pronouns to refer to victims.

    So — I just hate to see you linking to one of Futrelle’s better articles. He did something really shitty to those people who died, as well as to everyone who cares about men and boys, and I don’t think you need to be linking to anything positive of his at this time.

    Like

  14. Herman Robak March 27, 2015 at 23:17 #

    I don’t think it’s fair to say that Vox blames all womankind for this tragedy. He does not, like Futrelle, proclaim culpability on some bogeyman. But he does suggest a possible causation, with a rather unsavoury wording:

    “Now, obviously no one else was responsible for Lubritch’s actions if it indeed was Omega rage at work. He alone bears the blame. But it is somewhat haunting to think about how many lives might be saved each year if the sluts of the world were just a little less picky and a little more equitable in their distribution of blowjobs.”

    Yet, for all his button-pushing, I find him much more charming than Futrelle. He has more wit, and less feigned outrage.

    One more thing: Don’t you find the callous disdain for low socio-sexual status males (a.k.a. “omegas”) as expressed by Vox and his commenters just as distressing, if not more? I mean, which group gets a bulls-eye painted on their back by that blog post; the omega males, or womankind? That is not a rhetorical question. I don’t have (much) skin in this game, as I’m neither a pilot nor do I self-identify as an omega.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. insanitybytes22 March 28, 2015 at 00:51 #

    I do not think posts like that express disdain for so called omegas, I think they express support and justification for male rage. I believe VD enjoys using rhetorical tricks to evade responsibility for what he is saying, but he is still saying it.

    I think Futrelle is a fool, however just like the promotion of feminist anger has fueled and justified atrocities against men, when the manosphere embraces male rage, they do the same thing to women and an eye for an eye just makes the whole world blind.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. Anon2 March 28, 2015 at 00:59 #

    OMG, check this out :

    http://wehuntedthemammoth.com/2015/03/27/heartiste-pick-up-prole-chicks-using-ingenious-logo-ploy/

    Manboobz Fat-troll actually thinks he knows better than Heartiste about what works with women.

    Here, you have perhaps the least attractive man in the world (Manboobz Fat-troll), overtly mocking Game advice, from someone who has been among the foremost Game bloggers for years.

    Manboobz has no romantic contact with any woman, and cannot prove that any woman has been in a relationship with him in the last 5 years. He has zero proof, which surprises no one, yet is so lacking in self-awareness that he thinks he can mock Game advice from Heartiste, Roosh, Krauser, or whoever.

    Like

  17. Matthew Chiglinsky March 28, 2015 at 03:12 #

    Feminists and anti-feminists can both be pretty extreme people. I’d blame them both for a certain amount of depression, paranoia, and suicidal tendencies.

    Roosh, for example, once similarly placed blame for a tragedy when he blamed anti-pickup-artist criticism for the Elliot Rodger shooting spree. According to Roosh, most modern girls are sluts, and the only way for men to stay sane is to learn “game” and successfully engage in casual sex with them on a regular basis. So, maybe this co-pilot could have learned game too, and then the euphoric drug high from all that sex would have given him the will to live?

    Personally, I’m a male who’s still holding out hope that there are decent girls in the world who know how to be confident without being completely narcissistic. I don’t hate girls. I only hate unreasonable people. The theory of evolution asserts that some subset of girls must be reasonable due to random chance.

    Like

  18. Matthew Chiglinsky March 28, 2015 at 04:40 #

    Heartiste is racist, and Roosh is a rape apologist. I think there are better men in the world to use as examples on how to be successful with women.

    One is a guy called Stephan Erdman, who you can find on YouTube:

    https://www.youtube.com/user/stephanerdman/videos

    Liked by 1 person

  19. farkennel March 28, 2015 at 06:42 #

    I read that repugnant opportunistic piece of filth that Futrelle wrote.I left a message on his board saying he should have the common courtesy to debate Elam or Straughan or Bloomfield about his take on this tragedy.Not sure he`ll publish.David has sunk to a point where I could very much understand if violence was to come his way.

    Like

  20. farkennel March 28, 2015 at 06:50 #

    What the fuck does any of that have to do with the topic at hand?Find somewhere else to talk your shit.

    Like

  21. Stupid guy March 28, 2015 at 08:08 #

    Actually MRA’s and men in general are just scapegoats for anyone who wishes. Anything goes wrong? Men’s fault. A tragic plane crash that had remotely nothing to do with men’s rights activists? It is the MRA’s fault! It’s kind of amusing, because it reminds me of the witch hunts of the past. If this was happening to any other group, it would be reported as hate speech, but when it is happening to MRA’s, all the self proclaimed people standing for equality and tolerance don’t give a damn. In fact, they engage in these witch hunts with gusto.

    Like

  22. farkennel March 28, 2015 at 11:04 #

    If ever anyone needed to know what a slimy unethical piece of shit “our David” is…they need only read his words on this tragedy.You showed your colours “our Dave”…you are now about to held accountable for your words.

    Like

  23. Herman Robak March 28, 2015 at 12:58 #

    Oh, I think Vox Day and friends DO express disdain for the “omegas”. Vox frames his musings as speculation and prediction. A plausible prediction can be interpreted as a warning. A dire warning can be interpreted as a threat, or as an activation order to “sleepers”, “useful idiots” and their ilk.

    I can see one subtext that is really dark: Why be a loser idiot, if you can be a useful idiot, with fame/infamy to boot? But you have to do some legwork to pin that on Vox; summarising it as “rhetorical tricks” is too hand-wavey, and can easily be turned back at yourself.

    Like

  24. insanitybytes22 March 28, 2015 at 13:11 #

    I think that men who are teetering on the edge already are not going to bother to read those subtexts or peer through those rhetorical tricks. I think it’s harmful to both disdain alleged omegas while at the same time, providing validation and justification for male rage. That is the same thing that feminists do and it has done some real harm in the world.

    Of course, VD has now decided the guy was not an alleged “omega,”

    Like

  25. Paul Murray March 28, 2015 at 16:09 #

    “However, there is also an element that really does promote some unpleasant things, including violence against women”

    Got a link for that?

    Liked by 1 person

  26. Paul Murray March 28, 2015 at 16:12 #

    “I STILL believe that women & girls should have equal rights; should be able to earn lots of money in high-paying & respected fields like STEM, ”

    You say that like earning money in STEM is a right, rather than an achievement. What if the consistent experience of humanity for the past several hundred years is right? What if girls – on average – really do suck at math? Relatively speaking? What if they are avoiding STEM jobs and STEM education because they genuinely don’t like it and find it difficult?

    What then?

    Like

  27. Paul Murray March 28, 2015 at 16:16 #

    What I notice about this bit of idiocy is the magical thinking of it. *How*, exactly, does campaigning for men’s rights make this kind of thing more likely? I got the impression that this guy was lashing out over butthurt at his g/f. If he was one of us hateful, misogynist MGTOWs he wouldn’t have *had* a g/f. And if he had been listening to us, well, his relationship expectations would have been more realistic.

    Like

  28. Herman Robak March 28, 2015 at 16:17 #

    Yeah, now Vox considers Lubitz a “gamma”, and The Ilk (as the Voxista call themselves) despise gammas.

    However, the post “Gamma, not Omega” had one comment by cailcorishev that I find really salient:

    “He [Lubitz] also made another mistake we’ve discussed here recently: dumping his feeeelings about his job out on his woman. We were better off when men stopped at the corner bar on the way home and decompressed from work with a couple drinks with the guys, instead of looking to their women for therapy.

    Without those kind of male-only spaces where men can roughly bolster each other, the modern Gamma’s life has two parts: his job and his relationship. There’s no one to give him perspective, remind him that there’s more to life. If his job sucks, his relationship becomes everything, and the prospect of losing it overwhelming.”

    Womanhood are more than a little enthralled by their own sense of healing powers; that their influence on flawed men will be better and more sufficient than companionship between men. I don’t think most women believe this, but they are encouraged to believed it these days. And their egos are stroked by such beliefs.

    Our culture is laced with lousy relationship advice. Most of the time that just sucks, but once in a blue moon the suckage combines into a hundred year wave, a freak event. A somewhat predictable, yet surprising event.

    The moral? Pretty simple, yet pretty harsh: If we all suck less, fewer people will die in the long run! And with that segue, I’ll recommend the blog post “My dad’s old job” by Steve Sailer — http://www.unz.com/isteve/my-dads-old-job/ — which dovetails with the Suck Less, and Save Lives mantra.

    Liked by 1 person

  29. insanitybytes22 March 28, 2015 at 16:23 #

    Why? Do you deny the fact that men are capable of advocating violence as a solution? Do you honestly believe the entire manosphere is made up of a bunch of choir boys who would never dream of speaking such things?

    Like

  30. that1susan March 28, 2015 at 16:51 #

    He was responding to your previous post, in which you didn’t just say that men’s right’s advocates were “capable of advocating violence as a solution.” You said that some of them actually HAD done so. If you’ve observed one or more of them doing so, can you provide a link to where you read one or more of them making such a statement? If you heard it in a casual conversation with someone claiming to be an MRA, then obviously there would be no link, or proof. But maybe you could just recall the conversation to the best of your ability. Sometimes people would just like to see or hear the actual words, rather than accepting someone else’s interpretation of them as fact.

    People who want citations really aren’t just being petty, at least not usually. For example, I actually went to the link that JB used to support her accusation that Futrelle advocated for “the rape and torture of children ‘for art'” because I wanted to see what he’d actually written on the topic, and I let her know that the article that she’d linked to said nothing about that — not because I want to be petty, but because I don’t like seeing accusations being thrown around about ANYONE, where I like them or not, without any evidence to back them up. And especially when I agree with someone as much as I agree with JB, I hate seeing them throwing out any accusations that they can’t back up with fact, because that just hurts the whole cause.

    Like

  31. that1susan March 28, 2015 at 16:59 #

    P.S. What you said here: “Why? Do you deny the fact that men are capable of advocating violence as a solution?” comes across as kind of, I’m having trouble finding the right word, but maybe “sleight of hand”-ish is the most fitting term.

    You were the one who made the accusation — but rather than providing some evidence to back it up, you’d rather try to put anyone who questions you on the defensive by challenging them to prove you wrong. I hope you prove me wrong about this.

    Like

  32. insanitybytes22 March 28, 2015 at 17:14 #

    There’s no slight of hand there. The fact that all men in the manosphere do not act like choir boys is simply such an obvious statement of fact, I have no idea why anyone would challenge it. Surely no one believes all men are perfect, gentle, creatures, incapable of ever advocating violence?

    Like

  33. Jim March 28, 2015 at 18:01 #

    Futrelle desperately needs to get a life. He’s WAY past the point of being pathetic.

    Like

  34. Herman Robak March 28, 2015 at 18:18 #

    As that1susan stated, the statement that you are now defending is not the one that you initially uttered. Hence, noone challenged what you claim they challenged, because they had not been presented that statement.

    Reframing what you said, yet arguing against the replies AS IF they were in reply to your revised statement is widely considered to be bad form. Sticking to your guns after this has been politely pointed out to you is ill advised. Shifting of goalposts is considered, well, shifty.

    Now is not the time to dig in your heals further…

    Liked by 1 person

  35. insanitybytes22 March 28, 2015 at 18:30 #

    Stuff and nonsense. I have no desire to play silly games. Either look at these things truthfully or don’t.

    Like

  36. that1susan March 28, 2015 at 18:33 #

    Okay, let’s go back to square one. You asserted that some men’s rights advocates had advocated employing violence against women as a means of solving problems. Your exact words were, “However, there is also an element that really does promote some unpleasant things, including violence against women.”

    Paul Murray asked you for a citation to back up your statement, and you responded by asking him if he believed that no men were CAPABLE OF promoting violence as a way of solving problems.

    There is a difference between accusing someone of doing something, and simply saying that they are CAPABLE OF it. Paul asked for proof of an MRA actually having DONE THE DEED of advocating violence, and you retaliated by insisting that there were men who were CAPABLE OF doing so.

    It’s like if a woman is on trial for murder and the prosecution has no evidence and keeps asking the jury, “Well, do you really believe that no woman is capable of murder?”

    I, personally, don’t act like a choir boy — but my admission of this is in no way an admission to being a person who advocates violence as a means of solving problems. “Not acting like a choir boy” and “being an advocate for violence” are two different things.

    Like

  37. that1susan March 28, 2015 at 18:36 #

    We are; you’re not.

    Like

  38. insanitybytes22 March 28, 2015 at 19:48 #

    I frequently have complained about Vox on my blog, about the way he has referred to sex traficked girls as human trash, the way he has advocated that men should just punch women in the face, the way he calls women rancid vaginas and delusional whores.

    I can provide numerous links to many sites, including his, but at this point I suspect it wouldn’t matter in the least because each claim will be dismissed and excused in favor of ideological loyalty. You will simply call it crass or a rhetorical trick or my mistake.

    Frankly it pisses me off, because I find Futrelle to be a pathetic excuse for man, but I cannot very well criticize him when I too have been on the receiving end of some of the rage and hostility coming from the manosphere. AWALT, right? Well, I am one too, and if all women are like that, I guarantee some of that rage is going to spill over onto us all.

    Like

  39. Herman Robak March 28, 2015 at 19:59 #

    We’re not playing games. And I think you’re taking this personally, hence your diggin’ in…

    When you’re debating a person of Internet infamy like Vox Day, taking it personally is a bad move. I’ll let his post “Punch harder” from today demonstrate why it’s a particulary bad move…
    http://voxday.blogspot.no/2015/03/punch-harder.html

    Like

  40. insanitybytes22 March 28, 2015 at 20:32 #

    It’s a good post, but it also makes my point for me. Do I sound like a SJW? Do you see me roaming twitter saying mean things about men?

    When you spray bullets in any direction, there’s going to be collateral damage. When you hype people up and instruct them to “punch harder” with complete disregard for who your target is, you’re being irresponsible and inciting rage, rage which often leads to violence.

    C’mon, I’m a married Christian woman and a dinky little blogger who blogs love and anti feminism, do you really think that “punch harder” is an appropriate response to someone like me?

    I am digging in. I intend to continue to do so, because this is how MRA’s lose the moral upper hand and therefore the entire argument. I think many of them have valid points so that is not something I want to see happen.

    Like

  41. Herman Robak March 28, 2015 at 20:54 #

    (Responding to insanitybytes22 here…)
    “Do I sound like a SJW?”

    No. But if you cut corners in the same way that they do, you may face some of the same critisism.

    “When you hype people up and instruct them to “punch harder” with complete disregard for who your target is […]”

    I suppose “you” primarily refers to Vox here… Again, you’re shifting the goalpost. Not as much this time, but still too much. Vox Day does NOT show a complete disregard for who the target is. He provides rather comprehensive arguments as to where and why “punch harder” is appropriate and effective. You may disagree with THAT, but saying that he (or I, for that matter) have a complete disregard for whom the target is, now that needs a bit more justification.

    Oh, did you feel targeted by me juxtaposing Vox’ article with you? Well, that’s me shifting gears, from appealing to your reason into poking at your emotions. You don’t like that? Well, make a stronger effort to argue within the constraints of reason, and I will reciprocate.

    Like

  42. that1susan March 28, 2015 at 21:15 #

    I’m not very familiar with VD — is he a men’s rights activist? If so, then you’ve just found your citation!

    Like

  43. that1susan March 28, 2015 at 21:17 #

    But you have your citations! That’s all we were asking for. If VD is a men’s rights activist, and you’re able to link to the stuff he’s said about punching women in the face — there you go!

    Like

  44. QNgm305 March 29, 2015 at 05:11 #

    Sir, it is discriminatory to believe that women & girls may not be that good at maths & science, because, when given proper opportunities & resources (along with proper training & encouragement), they do tend to come out with flying colors in STEM fields, Sciences, Maths, & so on. Same applies for fields like Business, Politics, Leading, etc.

    Also, on the other hand, do you understand how men & boys feel when they are CONSTANTLY being brainwashed & discouraged by modern media & internet, regarding several things, such as these: women have better memories; girls outperform boys in schools; women have better thinking & social skills; women have better verbal communication skills; women are better at multitasking; women are better at language, literature, arts, dancing, yoga, etc;
    women have higher IQs than men, & so on? How do you feel when you read/watch mainstream media & internet websites, DAILY slandering men & boys, by declaring them to be biologically inferior, weak, incapable, disposable, dumb, fools, idiots, rapists, & so on?

    Extremely bad, isn’t it?

    Similarly, we must understand that women & girls must also feel very bad, when they are told that they can’t be good at maths, sciences, STEM, business, politics, corporate leaderships, etc, & so on. Therefore, we must NOT unnecessarily criticize/shame genuine, innocent women & girls. We must ONLY criticize/shame/argue with feminists, biased media, biased scientific researches, radical feminists, female supremacists, etc, who ALWAYS try to destroy the lives of innocent men & boys of this world, by demotivating, discouraging, demoralizing & shaming them, as far as possible.

    Sir, I can agree that human males, on an average, are bigger, taller, stronger & faster than human females. But, when it comes to IQ, Intelligence, Skills, Communications, etc, we are ALL nearly equal. It is wrong to say that women & girls can’t be good at maths, sciences, STEM, business, politics, etc, BUT, at the same time, it is EQUALLY wrong to say that men & boys can’t be good at memory, verbal communications, intuitions, multitasking, thinking, & so on.

    Liked by 1 person

  45. Paul Murray March 29, 2015 at 10:40 #

    The question isn’t whether “men” are *capable* of advocating violence – it is whether a) there “is an element [in the manosphere]” b) that actually *has*.

    Feminist have. PETA has. Most religions have.

    “Do you honestly believe the entire manosphere is made up of a bunch of choir boys”

    Is that really the best you got? It’s not much of an indictment for you to go “well, I just can’t imagine this not being the case”. Because when it comes to advocating gender-based violence: for every quote from some anonymous nutjob in some dank corner of the manosphere; we can find five from major and influential feminist thinkers in seminal works that have helped to define modern feminism.

    Like

  46. Paul Murray March 29, 2015 at 10:44 #

    The evidence is against you.

    People say the same thing about communism: “the only reason it’s never worked is that is has never really been tried”.

    Like

  47. JP March 29, 2015 at 12:45 #

    I read the first link, which you had as “rape and torture”, and it links to an article by Futrelle where he criticizes Sharon Lamb’s article. I couldn’t find anything objectionable about the article, but it had nothing to do with rape or torture of children, whether for art or otherwise.

    Either this is a different David Futrelle, or you linked the wrong article, back from a time in which this man was sane.

    Like

  48. JudgyBitch March 29, 2015 at 13:03 #

    Thanks for that. I was referring to his defense of the film “Salo”. I will fix that link.

    Like

  49. that1susan March 29, 2015 at 14:02 #

    I guess it took a man pointing it out. 🙂

    Like

  50. VD March 29, 2015 at 14:11 #

    Hey JudgyBitch,

    Insanitybytes22 is an elderly troll named Gabrielle Guthrie who has been banned from my sites for two years now. I still have the email from her she sent when I first told her to take a hike: “I certainly would never harm you, nor will I harass you at your sites. I am simply a mother, a grandmother, and a wife with an amazing husband of 28 years.” Needless to say, not a woman of her word.

    She still tries to post at Alpha Game, now she appears to have leveled up to Troll Level 3 and is running around trying to complain about me elsewhere. Not the first, won’t be the last.

    To be clear, I do not blame anyone for Andreas Lubitz’s actions but Andreas Lubitz. Perhaps if his ex-girlfriend had taken the Audi he bought her and taken him back, he might not have crashed the Germanwings plane. Then again, perhaps if she’d taken it, then dumped him, he’d have flown a plane into an elementary school and caused an even worse horror.

    We can’t know. And more importantly, she can’t have known the consequences of her perfectly reasonable decision to break it off with an unbalanced man.

    Also, I am not an activist of any kind. I am merely a writer, an editor, and a game designer who happens to blog.

    Like

  51. JudgyBitch March 29, 2015 at 14:28 #

    @VD
    I read your piece and no where did I see you blaming “womankind” for the plane crash. The only way to make that connection is if you think “sluts” is a synonym for “all women”.

    Thanks for stopping by and commenting.

    🙂

    Like

  52. Anubis March 29, 2015 at 19:50 #

    Unless all women are feminists VD doesn’t blame all womankind. Seeing as how some women still voluntarily marry and have kids proves this wrong.

    Like

  53. Anubis March 29, 2015 at 19:54 #

    Methinks you don’t know much about what choir boys get up to. You obviously think all choir boys fit that last sentence.

    Like

  54. Anubis March 29, 2015 at 19:59 #

    Vox explicitly makes fun of the notion of NA_ALT, because understands statistical outliers portrayed as normal is false. If I went by comercials and fictional TV every black woman would be a Professor Doctor Rocket Surgeon, but NABWALT

    Like

  55. Anubis March 29, 2015 at 20:06 #

    These proper opportunities and recourses never seem to get judged by a merit based test, only credentialization. The NSF spokeswoman for women in STEM has 3 degrees in STEM but chose to drink coffee sitting around at a marketing job instead of doing science. Women call off sick 43% more often than men and over 40% of women doctors chose to work part time. If women are equal they should be saying the same as men “Pay me for performance not attendance”

    Like

  56. Uchuu March 30, 2015 at 06:27 #

    Meh, after reading a summary and some background on the movie, the link rather reads like character assassination. Don’t get me wrong, I so far have nothing good to say about Futrelle, but the movie apparently had just as many female victims as male ones (so, the focus on the “boys” of the article seems dishonest), it wasn’t actually documented child abuse, but something fictional, and I’ve seen no real good argument connecting that one suicide to the filming of the movie. The contents are disgusting enough that I never want to see it, but supposedly it actually has some artistic qualities, so the free speech argument is not completely out of the blue.

    Like

  57. JudgyBitch March 30, 2015 at 12:09 #

    I have not seen the film and do not intend to, but the fact it was in a porn shop tells me a lot about the function of the film. The Sound Of Music is not on offer in most porn shops.

    Like

  58. that1susan March 30, 2015 at 21:24 #

    Most???

    Like

  59. Uchuu March 31, 2015 at 03:06 #

    I basically read a summary on opinion of critics about the movie (that critics review it should be an indication that it’s not just porn). As far as I see it, it certainly has pretty disgusting pornographic content, but that’s not all that the movie is. I assume it is supposed to be disgusting, after all the protagonists are fascists in 1943, and that supposedly is an important part of the story.

    I don’t disagree that “sick motherfucker” is a good characterization of Futrelle, but in this case I’m not sure the outrage is all that justified. Not saying that there aren’t good reasons to disagree with him there, but the way the article you linked portrays it seems like a misrepresentation.

    Like

  60. Broo March 31, 2015 at 09:43 #

    Another sick person: Luise Pusch, a german feminist says pilots who commits suicides with their planes are always men, so she claims we need quotas of women in cockpits. She also says 14 of 16 teenagers and their teachers killed in the crash were girls and women, and concludes: ” Victims are mainly women, agressors are men”.

    http://www.lepoint.fr/societe/crash-de-l-a320-si-le-pilote-avait-ete-une-femme-29-03-2015-1916816_23.php
    (sorry, not found english link)

    Like

  61. theantifeminist April 2, 2015 at 11:23 #

    @Uchuu – I am ‘theantifeminist’ and the author of the article attacking Futrelle over his support of Salo.

    To be honest, I’m not sure where you are coming from.

    Futrelle defended the film’s distribution in a gay sex shop, hence the relevance to the fact that ‘half of the victims’ portrayed in the film were boys (and from reviews I’ve read, the abuse and anal rape of the boys is particularly focused upon by Passolini, the director). Also, it may have escaped your attention, but Futrelle wants the very idea that boys face discrimination and injustices to be criminalized. Again, somewhat relevant to the fact that he once supported (and appears to still do) the gay sex shop distribution of a video containing nothing but scenes of naked underage boys being anally raped, made to eat shit, disembowelled, and slowly murdered.

    There is no possible way that such a film could be made today without the director facing a possible life sentence, especially considering the fact that Passolini faced multiple allegations of child sex abuse (and in fact, openly dated under 16 year old boys who acted in his movies). In fact, under the law, whether it has ‘articistic merit’ or not, the film is child porn in most countries and under the United Nations feminist definition (which Futrelle clearly approves of given his vocal judgement hat men who looked at pictures of clothed 17 year old girls in the reddit ‘jailbait’ forum were paedophiles looking at ‘child porn’.)

    Anyway, I’m just repeating what I put in my article, which you claim to have read and found to be a ‘character assasination’. We clearly inhabit seperate moral universes. I’ll continue ‘killing the cause’ of men’s rights by discussing the paedohysteria driven feminist sexual holocaust against men and boys, and you can continue defending a man who, when not trying to have you and me put in jail for believing in the rights of men and boys, supports the gay porn shop distribution of pederast snuff videos.

    I categorically disassociate myself from the men’s human rights movement.

    So

    Like

  62. theantifeminist April 2, 2015 at 11:28 #

    Also, Futrelle’s article on Sharon Lamb is highly relevant as it was written in the very same year as his article defending Salo in a gay porn shop. In the Lamb article, he claims that victims of abuse are never ‘entirely innocent’, and lambasts the media for portraying them as such. Few MRAs would go that far, and if any even suggested that abuse victims are EVER to blame, Futrelle would describe them as abuse apologists. In the same year, he also wrote articles claiming that we all harbour secret fantasies to torture and dominate others, and that the only thing that stops us from doing so, is by reading about or watching movies and documentaries about horrible murders.

    Like

  63. that1susan April 2, 2015 at 14:28 #

    It’s been a little while since I read his article on Sharon Lamb — but what I got from it at the time was not that he was blaming victims for the fact that abusers chose to abuse — but rather, that he was promoting the idea that (repeat) victims could take power over their lives by figuring out how they kept getting into abusive situations in order to prevent doing so in the future.

    Obviously, there are random acts of abuse that could happen to anyone — but for people who keep getting into abusive situations and staying in them, while it’s certainly not their fault that the abusers are the way they are, it makes sense for them to want to figure out how to quit ending up with abusers.

    Like

  64. JP April 3, 2015 at 01:12 #

    From what you describe, the film sounds disgusting, and the man sounds worse (Passolini too, for that matter).

    I’m cool with gay adults doing their gay thing, that doesn’t bother me. But what I really wonder is why so many of these high profile gays are so into statutory rape.

    Well, I shouldn’t say high profile *gays*, because what they actually are is high profile *Leftists*. They defend that guy who fled the country to get away from rape charges too, that Hollywood guy whose name I don’t care to remember. And while they attack Cosby for supposedly victimizing adult women, they don’t castigate Woody Allen for his inappropriate relationships with underage actresses.

    Why do they excuse horrible crimes committed by people who happen to share their politics? I don’t get it. If someone I admired did something like this, I would assume that I made a mistake in admiring them in the first place; because if they did this kind of thing, they couldn’t actually share my ideals.

    Or why a torture/child rape porn film is considered either art OR the kind of thing that sane adults would watch for masturbatory purposes.

    As for his claim that we all want to do bad things to other people, projection is the only word that comes to mind.

    I can’t reply to that1susan below me, but I will agree with her that some victims are abuse-enablers, and those people aren’t entirely innocent. But that only really applies to adults; a child has no idea that his behavior is enabling his abuser, and many don’t learn without outside help.

    Like

  65. that1susan April 3, 2015 at 10:59 #

    In my comment, I actually wasn’t focusing on whether anyone was innocent — just on the power that a repeatedly-abused person needed to draw on to choose a different kind of relationship. I think many repeatedly-abused people have been abused since childhood, and may need help finding a different kind of relationship.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: