Friday, December 28, 2007

Rob and Steal

Ampersand the collaborationist, a.k.a. Berry Deutsch of Portland , Oregon, has posted a thread of some interest on his blog. You know, a blog called "Alas. . . !"

Among other things, Ampersand says this:
"One of the odd things about MRAs is that we forget how much variance there is within the MRM. From the perspective of most “Alas” readers, someone like Glenn Sacks seems pretty far “out there” — and justifiably so. Nonetheless, within the spectrum of MRAs, Glenn is actually very far left, since he objects to misogyny on occasion . . ."
Ampersand implies that "objecting to misogyny" is "very far left". And does he mean politically left—as in "leaning toward socialism"? Is that what he means by "left"? But apart from that, what the hell is Ampersand really driving at? Is he hinting that so-called "conservatives" as a rule have no objection to misogyny? Or that "misogyny" is a structurally conservative trait? It certainly sounds like Ampersand is suggesting something along this line.

However, that aside, what Ampersand doesn't appear to capisch is the harsh objective reality of present-day gender politics. He appears to take for granted that MRAs, or even men generally, have some kind of a sacred duty to "object to misogyny". But that is a misconception. That is an illusion. There is no such duty, and Amp errs in supposing that there is.

Go and review the Seven Point Counter-Feminist Platform. Pay particular mind to items 1 and 4.

http://tinyurl.com/2ftnrt

Let's see if I can make this clear: There is a WAR going on—all right, a grim political battle if you prefer—and it is simply not fitting for enemies to lecture enemies about their "duties." I mean, if nothing else, it's just plain ironic as hell! Sorry Amp, but it is really, truly, honestly NOT my job as the Counter-Feminist to "object to misogyny". Nor is it the job of any MRA, or any male person whatsoever, to do so!! That is, not unless they feel like it, and not unless they choose to do so freely out of the authentic, uncoerced goodness of their nature—for which, if it happens, gratitude would not go amiss!


But that aside, there are further reasons to find this particular blog post interesting—especially in the comment section. Go now:

http://tinyurl.com/yrh8jl

16 Comments:

Blogger Bob said...

Let's see:
I haven't spent time reading "Alas" before Ms. Robing Steele claimed the "honor" of its acolade. So its time to review "Alas." Ann Persand applauds the National Women's Law Center view of false rape accusations. Ann Persand nominates feminist infiltrator "Robing Steele" as "the most sane Men's Rights Activist," comparable to Glenn Sacks. Ann Persand actively supports the feminist rape-hate campaign to paint all men as evil, "Zuma is a rapist. He was acquitted - they always are."

On the whole, "Alas" appears to be a feminist blog. Such articles as "My daughter's vagina" are reminiscent of "Vigina Monologues" in perspective, supporting the most virulent misandrist feminism.

An acolade from "Alas" is more proof that "Robin Steele" is no friend of men.

9:06 AM  
Blogger Davout said...

Ampersand probably wants all MRAs to present anti-misogyny credentials as some sort of precondition for criticising feminism.
This is clever because if one accepts this demand prima facie without question, the feminist definition of misogyny is so broad that Ampersand can later accuse a feminist critic of misogyny AS HE UNDERSTANDS IT. The accused then has the problem of being on the defensive in addition to making his original criticism. The combination of the two detracts from the value of the criticism.

2:43 PM  
Blogger John Dias said...

You guys have analyzed this all wrong. If "Alas" believes that MRAs have a duty to speak out against misogyny, he is essentially conceding that feminists and pro-feminists have a duty to speak out against misandry. And if he does not believe this, then he thinks one camp therefore should be able to spew hate and bile with impunity -- namely, his camp.

10:10 AM  
Blogger Fidelbogen said...

@JohnDias: Yes, point taken. That is the core of my thinking also. However, there are various nuances to this, as Davout has suggested. But as a general principle, I am of the opinion that the feminist camp is in no position to make coercive behavioral demands upon our camp - of ANY kind. They should not expect any such implied endorsement of the feminist world-view from us, given that we have clearly identified ourselves as NON-FEMINIST. And they have got quite the nerve to harbor any such expectations!

@Bob: I can't help but notice that the person in question displays a rather suave and chummy demeanour toward the folks at "Alas!"

Which is a mite unseemly for a self-identified "MRA".

7:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Happy New Year Brothers. This kind of debate is healthy in my opinion. Bob's point is similiar to Pete Jensen's aka. Gonzo. Namely those of us who were for Equality have been waiting more than two decades for Women to own up to their lies about Feminism. To demand accountability for Women as well as Men. For Women to demand an end to the bashing and attacks on Men and Boys.

And for Women to demand to an end to their entitlements. What we have heard instead is crickets chirping. Silence, and not golden silence at that. When will Women become true Adults? Stop demanding Equality when it suits them, and special favors, benefits, and Protection when it suits them?

Who is killing Marriage in the US? Its not Men, its Women. Barry Deutsch needs to get a grip. He's named Biron Stalin as a Men's Rights Activist? Is part of the disinformation campaign Stalin is conducting. She has been outed as a Fraud.

Tributes to IMBRA and Lorena Bobbit. She is a liar, a proven one at that. And posts to other people falsely. Then like your typical Feminist wants to be held non accountable for her actions.

She has deleted content from her site that was intended to impugn Men. And to revile us, displaying for everyone her Feminist Leanings. She is a Femifascist. I hold no desire to Control Women they way Feminists want to control us.

Men prefer Freedom and Liberty. We prefer a square deal with both Parties Accountable. What has being nice to the FemNags gotten us? Nowhere.

I got banned from Three boards for being too Extreme. For being too confrontational so be it. Feminists are having a hissy fit over Men finally showing up and saying Screw You. They have had the media attention all to themselves. Now that the Lace Curtain has parted they are beside themselves.

The days of Men being silent are over. The days of Men being Militant is coming.

Khankrumthebulgar

6:48 AM  
Blogger Davout said...

HNY, Fidel and all. (No snow in Toronto so some folks are pissed
:-))

john,

Ampersand can get around the situation you mention FROM A FEMINIST VIEWPOINT by saying the following:
"We will criticize misandry if you will criticize misogyny."

The key here is that feminists' definition of misandry is highly selective while their definition of misogyny is extremely vague.

Feminists (incorrectly) could boomerang the same idea back on non-feminists in reverse i.e. 'their definition of misogyny is highly selective while their definition of misandry is extremely vague'.

They, however, do so at their own peril: the debate will inevitably turn to whose empirical data is correct and this is a war that the non-feminists will win.

8:03 PM  
Blogger Fidelbogen said...

Ampersand can get around the situation you mention FROM A FEMINIST VIEWPOINT by saying the following:
"We will criticize misandry if you will criticize misogyny."


An alternate scenario to what you have described could be, that when the talk gets to this particular stand, then. . . in theory it COULD go on standing forever, with neither side budging an inch! In other words, further "talk" beyond that point would become pointless, at which point it would become a choice of Armageddon.... OR (as I like to say) "negotiation".

9:02 PM  
Blogger Fidelbogen said...

@ Davout and All:

HAPPY NEW YEAR!!

9:05 PM  
Blogger Hawaiian Libertarian said...

While Glenn Sacks makes important contributions to the MRA, and often highlights important issues and raises overall awareness with his radio show and blog, the man is really clueless when it comes to connecting the dots on the feminist movement and the damage they have done with the politics.

He claims he's a liberal Democrat, and that the feminist movement in the early stages was justified.

He fails to understand that the very political groups and party that he supports and votes for is the VERY SAME movement he thinks he is fighting against.

12:12 PM  
Blogger Fidelbogen said...

Yes, I think it is safe to say that feminist influence has entwined itself into the Demo apparatus on a deep structural level.

It has also made inroads among the right-Republican crowd by garnering their support for legislation such as VAWA.

But then, feminism is opportunistic, and its loyalty is to itself. So it cultivates alliances opportunistically.

I like the idea that Glenn Sacks is a liberal democrat (and Jewish to boot!), because I want the world to see just how rich and varied the non-feminist sector really is. This prevents stereotypification.

Glenn Sacks has done great work in generating PUBLICITY - and publicity is what we need in order to put our issues on the front burner and help to polarize the world into Feminist vs. Non-feminist.

1:22 PM  
Blogger Davout said...

HL,

I foresee a time in the near future when the feminists will have no choice but to negotiate with Sacks as a means of causing division within the non-feminist ranks i.e. separation of MRAs who BELIEVE in equality ala equalitarian feminism and those who don't.

I agree with Fidel's idea of diversity within the non-feminist ethos.

While I agree that Sacks is wrong, in principle, in accepting the equalitarian feminist agenda, he really has no choice because the mainstream media are not going to give any appreciable publicity to someone who is not partly amenable to feminists because of a prevalent PC public fetish to 'find middle ground' even when there is no way or no point in doing so.

8:33 PM  
Blogger Fidelbogen said...

At the risk of being a cuckoo-clock:

LINK

Let's bear in mind that so-called "middle ground" is meaningful only in terms of where you set your markers and boundaries.

Also bear in mind that whatever compromising "settlements" might be concluded, if the underlying radical grievances are not meaningfully addressed, then the strife WILL continue in one form or another. It is simply a question of recognizing it for what it is and harnessing it politically.

9:25 PM  
Blogger Kuuenbu said...

The MRM certainly needs all the diversity (and pro-diversity individuals) it can get, as feminism has long used such to their advantage. Much like the church has done with minorities and the poor, feminism ensnares just about anybody "outside the norm", blaming the patriarchal devil for their plight and promising political salvation through its misty missions. (Try saying that five times fast!)

The few female supporters the MRM has are an exponential blessing, but it's going to take a lot more to shatter the movement's image as the biased viewpoint of macho, conservative straight men. We're going to need men and woman of as many races and social archetypes as possible, as well as the gays, lesbians, transgendereds, transsexuals and genderqueers that have long been feminism's advertising symbol of tolerance and enlightenment.

It's time to show the world that you don't need to come out of the Cleaver family to see the fallacies of the feminist belief system and find the rising struggles of the everyday straight male as something worth fighting against.

9:39 PM  
Blogger Fidelbogen said...

"It's time to show the world that you don't need to come out of the Cleaver family to see the fallacies of the feminist belief system and find the rising struggles of the everyday straight male as something worth fighting against."

Mmmm. . . a right handy configuration of mental backflips, there! ;)

The next step: harness that force as a discombobulator beam, to unleash upon the enemy. . .

10:05 PM  
Blogger Kuuenbu said...

"Mmmm. . . a right handy configuration of mental backflips, there! ;)

The next step: harness that force as a discombobulator beam, to unleash upon the enemy. . ."


I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "mental backflips"? Usually I'm able to decipher your zany metaphoric but in the case I'm a little befuddled as to what you're trying to say. ?|

9:53 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

kuuenbu said, "but it's going to take a lot more to shatter the movement's image as the biased viewpoint of macho, conservative straight men."

Why would we want to do that? So-called "diversity," promoted by feminists and liberals, is always disruptive to any group. We need to have a big tent to welcome many men into our ranks but we do not need to adopt feminist/liberal "diversity" viewpoints to do so. The Men's Movement is not about "me too" feminism. If the femnags and gays don't like it that is their problem, not ours.

Catch more of The World According to Bobat: http://bobstruth.blogspot.com

10:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home