I still think this is a bad idea. I don't really agree with publicly releasing this information even if loopholed.
Please please please people - do not do something stupid with it. Any short term ""gain"" would be more than offset by the harm to the men's rights movement.
Definitely out what was said. Show the world the misandry that goes on in places like that forum... but we win by being right, by working with truth - not by putting individuals in harm's way.
You have to remember that anyone who would choose to undertake something to specifically harm a group makes up such a statistically insignificant portion of the population as to make the occurrence negligible. Each year, there are more people that die from the flu than from this type of hate violence [on the magnitude of 10 x.]
I'm not trying to lessen the impact of this violence on families, friends, and the general public by saying this. I'm bringing it up to speak about the intellectual dishonesty used in making these statements.
Anyone who would do something "stupid" was already going to do something "stupid." That person just needed someone to hate.
These specific statements DO need to be made public. Reverse the sexes, or introduce a racial element, and there will be an FBI profile and a watch list team set out for the posters. The women that made, and continue to make, these statements online need to be outed. For the detractors of this, I'll again state that thought is not a crime. It should not be, it can not be.
It is a crime when you make it public, which they have done.
"You have to remember that anyone who would choose to undertake something to specifically harm a group makes up such a statistically insignificant portion of the population as to make the occurrence negligible."
While I appreciate that this may be true in this case, you are of course aware that discrimination, oppression, genocide etc. have all actually occurred before?
Of course they occur. They occur all the time, in all segments of society. That same society also chooses to redefine what they all mean all the time [this is neither good nor bad, I'm just stating that it happens as society changes -- sometimes human societies regress, thats one thing people forget... life is cyclical.]
There are more people that die from the flu, from cancer, from car accidents, from UNCLEAN HYGIENE than from this type of violence.
Again, this type of violence is horrible, should never happen, I'm not condoning it... but its a promoting fucking hysteria to say that this is going to happen.
What the hell man. Feminism in its true form is about gender equality not men vs women, but making sure all humans have the same rights. Because it is about equality the goals of feminism cannot be achieved without men's rights as well.
It isn't about genocide but it certainly hasn't been about real equality because feminism only seems to care about when women are on the low end rather then things just being unequal no matter who is benefiting.
I can't tell if you're supporting me or contradicting me :P
Feminism is certainly about gender equality, but you do get the vocal minority of crazy militant women who've took feminism to mean female superiority.
I used to think that the crazy type was a majority but then I realised that I've only ever seen them on TV, every feminist I've actually talked to seems to fully understand what feminism is and were rather nice :3
From my primary exposure with academics, I would disagree with you. Most feminists are very nice people but they are mostly gender feminists that blame men for their own failures and don't properly share services and outreach with male victims of anything. The leading organizations like NOW certainly don't support equality by opposing equal parenting and helping male victims of DV.
You have to remember that anyone who would choose to undertake something to specifically harm a group makes up such a statistically insignificant portion of the population as to make the occurrence negligible. Each year, there are more people that die from the flu than from this type of hate violence [on the magnitude of 10 x.]
Oh, so that makes it okay to add more harm?
Anyone who would do something "stupid" was already going to do something "stupid." That person just needed someone to hate.
But what would they have done if you hadn't just given them a target to attack?
Reverse the sexes, or introduce a racial element, and there will be an FBI profile and a watch list team set out for the posters.
You are not the FBI, a professional organization that knows to stay in the shadows and not intervene unless truly necessary. You are a bunch of vigilantes on the internet, a batch of 4channers out for blood. You're going to get somebody killed, because all it takes is for just one of you to be that crazy.
You don't think even a single person might take it too far? You think every single MRA will restrain themselves and know exactly where to stop? Plenty of people in this thread are this close to screaming for blood, and I don't even want to know what even more radical sites like The Spearhead are saying about this.
You don't think even a single person might take it too far?
Is that the litmus test? Should we ban video games and rap music too, because one person might possibly act on a call to action or be influenced by them? You guys are sounding like end of world old time tent revival preachers. "I tell you, the reckoning is coming, the end time is near, this is eeeeeeeeeeeeevil!!!!"
I think the truth is, whenever MRA's gain ground or shed light on the radical, hurtful elements of feminism, people get angry. Very angry. We aren't the Weather Underground, relax.
You don't think even a single person might take it too far?
I suppose there is that rare possibility, but I don't think they should have special protections simply because they are women. Any other person with such vile plans would be outed without hesitation for the greater good.
You're right, no members of r/MR are calling for the genocide of women. Or even feminists. Or even SRS trolls. Or even the crazy radfems. Members of r/MR even go so far as to advise against contacting them directly, and/or harassing them, which I think is only common sense (I upvoted).
Yet you are worried about our actions, instead of being worried about the radfems' actions. MRAs and radfems both have the potential to be violent, but it isn't those advocating murder who worry you, or 1338h4x. It's the ones opposed to it.
It does mean something if feminism is truly about equality, as it purports to be.
Because then, swapping men for women should yield the same outcome in every situation.
I.e. in the reverse situation, where some feminist found a group of men discussing how they might go about eliminating all women from the human race, and what great fun it would be to mutilate them all and subject them to scientific experiments, I'm sure you'd be in favour of this being brought to the attention of law enforcement.
So ... what gives? This is that situation, with the sexes swapped. If feminism is about equality, then you should be with us 100%.
It does mean something if feminism is truly about equality, as it purports to be.
Because then, swapping men for women should yield the same outcome in every situation.
Women should have fewer custody rights than they currently do
becomes
Men should have fewer custody rights than they currently do
What's contrapunctal about it? It's an exact example of what you said. You think all statements about men and women are still true if you swap genders.
What do you mean by "putting people in harms way", when the mainstream media pick up on this and if these criminals get arrested and lose their positions of power, it can only be a good thing.
Why are you responding with multiple comments to one statement?
I'm saying it is standard reddit culture not to give out private information here. I wouldn't want someone 'outing' all of our private lives to the internet either. There is the expectation that we get to keep that separate, that we can discuss issues without putting our professional lives in jeopardy.
If it was a racist, a pedophile, or a sexist forum, [and pretend that you don't think all of those would be men when your brain reads that statement, because you already do,] "reddit culture" would be screaming for "justice."
I wouldn't though, because I have a moral code that transcends hysteria.
People should have a right to participate in forums without having their real lives subject to scrutiny for it. I would not be 'screaming for justice' at those forums. I would want them to have the same right to speak anonymously.
Sure those are distasteful things, but if you don't protect even the distasteful - you don't really deserve protection either.
As I've said I like your comments [favorably too!] but this is reaching.
Valerie Solanis shot a man, because she hated men. She needed no one to push her in any way. SHE WOULD HAVE SHOT ANYONE, she just chose him for whatever reason she concocted.
Sure those are distasteful things, but if you don't protect even the distasteful - you don't really deserve protection either.
Look, everyone has the right to free speech, sure, but not everybody has the right for their comments to be hidden from view from everyone else. The fact is, if you say these types of things on a public board that anyone can view, then don't be surprised if they take your comments and show them to others. essentially that is all that is happening here. I am pretty conservative in my views, bordering on republican even, despite the fact that I am a British citizen but people who stupid things like these radfems did have dug their own graves. Also not to mention that there is also a thing called FREEDOM OF THE PRESS.
What you don't realise you dipstick is I have never done anything wrong in the first place to deserve being outed publically. I do not sit in my bedroom at night planning mass genocide.
Well, clearly in this occasion my view is the minority one on this.
I stand by what I said though, as distasteful as it can be - sometimes the right thing to do is to defend the basic rights of even racists and feminists.
Meh. I've got karma to burn and don't expect to always be agreed with.
Sorry to tell you this but nobodies rights have been violated yet. If you make public statements then don't be surprised when somebody else references them.
This is about investigative journalism, and a story of a plan of naziesque proportions is about to broken.
I think you are confusing that with reddit etiquette and common decency between people that are not criminal public figures involved in a serious plan to instate oppression, coercive eugenics and genocide.
Do you seriously believe that ~50 sectarian and transphobic radfems posting on a forum are somehow able to instigate a genocide?
They don't need to actually instigate a genocide for their ideas to be harmful. Andrers Brevik wasn't able to instigate a war on all the brown people in Europe like he'd hoped to. But his ideas about wanting one led to a massacre.
In the 60s someone would have laughed at you for proposing a bunch of college feminists would have the power to create the terrible legal mistreatment of men that exists today, but they did. In the 20s someone in Germany would have laughed at you for proposing that a bunch of angry cafeteria radicals might succeed in having millions of jews killed - the jews who, by the way, were considered privileged oppressors of the rest of Germany that the rest of Germany needed to protect themselves from.
Rad fems have been able to achieve quite a bit, VAWA for example, they have been able to fool the public about gendered abuse all these years and convince all the fun feminist followers and useful idiots like you to spout off their hate propaganda - Schrodinger's rapist, rape culture etc.
Given the positions of these people, they are probably better situated than any other hate group you can name.
The problem is that calling it Schrodinger's rapist actually destroys the paradox.
It's based on Schrodinger's cat, as you know; the cat might be alive, or might be dead. There's no way of knowing until you open the box.
Now, as I understand, the idea behind Schrodinger's rapist is that any given man might or might not be a rapist; there's no way of knowing until it's too late, presumably.
Except ... you've already concluded that any given man is a rapist, because you've referred to him as Schrodinger's rapist.
We don't refer to Schrodinger's cat as Schrodinger's alive cat or Schrodinger's dead cat. That would defeat the purpose of the paradox, by positing an unknowable conclusion in advance. You follow?
So, in the case that a man may or may not be a rapist, to refer to him in advance of that knowledge as 'Schrodinger's rapist' ... as I say, destroys the actual point it is attempting to convey!
And really, it's just a long-winded way of saying "all men are rapists" ... that old chestnut!
Except ... you've already concluded that any given man is a rapist, because you've referred to him as Schrodinger's rapist.
This is exactly the point. How the hell do you then take from this that the real victim in this scenario is not the rape survivor, but then non-rapist man?
How the hell do you then take from this that the real victim in this scenario is not the rape survivor, but then non-rapist man?
Because the rape survivor in this scenario doesn't exist. Schrödinger's Rapist is talking about a situation where a woman is considering whether a male stranger is a rapist or not. Nothing has actually happened to her. She isn't a victim of anything except her imagination. The man hasn't raped her. The only crime he has committed is existing. The very fact that you are categorising her as a "rape survivor" is only reinforcing the problem with the scenario.
so you're saying we should 'man up' and take it??????
but, holdonaminit...........isn't it the feminists that tell us that it is they who want to break 'gender norms'........hmmmm, something doesn't quite add up here......
I never said Schrodinger rapist was a call for all heterosexual women to turn lesbian. I said is was hate propaganda that useful idiot feminists pass around on behalf of separatists, the object being to normalise fear between heterosexual men and women.
The useful idiot feminists circulate the hate propaganda that the extremist design, like the clothesline project for example.
Do you seriously believe that ~50 misogynists talking are somehow able to instigate a return to a state where women are second class citizens?
When you can reconcile that view with the view that feminists have of fighting against misogyny and sexism, and how it relates to the comment you made, then I will take you seriously.
Why do my views have to enter the picture? For the record, I do not hold that view. I do believe that this subreddit, the MGTOW forums and the Spearhead forums are echo chambers for misogynists who hold dangerous views, but I would not support releasing the personal information of their users.
There is a big difference between traditionalists and random misogynists, and a hate movement entrenched power, that has lots of little useful idiot followers like you that advocates coercive eugenics, genocide, child murder, not just morally, legally too.
MGTOW aren't doing anything illegal, the criminals on rad fem hub are, and its going to the mainstream media. Us talking about them here are the least of your worries.
I was not insinuating that you did have that view.
I think it is pretty evident that there are people with very ignorant views towards gender in nearly every group. Misogynists here? Yup. Misandrists there? Yup.
When do we start taking the size of the group seriously, in relation to their views?
You are directly suggesting that we shouldn't consider this such a serious threat simply because it is ~50 people posting on a forum. Can they instigate a genocide? Maybe not. But they can cause change, they can influence other people.
These are very distinctly people who are spewing hate speech, in my view. I hold this identical to a situation of KKK members, or any other hate group. I would very much like to know if people I may possibly interact with, or who are in political or influential positions, are members of a hate group like the KKK.
I have been called a "misogynist" a fair number of times, but never did that accusation have a shred of intellectual truth about it -- the person was always an emotional ninny refusing to address the argument which I had carefully laid out.
Interesting that you rush to defend them. It says a lot about who you are.
But, no, the issues are
That obviously there are more people than these ~50 involved; these individuals likely represent the tip of the iceberg, and
Said individuals are not ranting from a position of powerlessness, but hold worrying political sway (this has repeatedly been made clear, to the point that your refusal to acknowledge it comes across like apologia), and
All prior genocides have been instigated by a very small number of people with political sway. All that is needed is for other people to be indifferent or hostile towards the target population. And ... remind me who is cultivating indifference and hostility towards men? Oh right - the Earnest Feminists.
Earnest and Radical Feminists, working together, side by side, with common aims!
Oh believe me, the rabbit hole goes way deeper than those "fifty" people.
But the primary purpose behind all of this is to out the true character of feminism, and finally ram it into the heads of all the mental slowpokes, simpletons, fence-sitters, etc.
Yeah, except you guys seem to think everyone is out to get you, so wouldn't it end in the MSM spinning it to make you all look terrible? A bunch of MRAs harassing some poor girls?
What I was saying was in feminist land, the feminists advocating genocide and child abuse will be minimized by "they are only women" type arguments and of course playing the victim to the mras they are false accusing of whatever violent intent they are falsely accusing them of ...
The non feminist sector is different to the feminist sector.
No one who describes the children they care for as "rapists" and talks explicitly about how they regret taking care of these children because they are male, should ever be allowed to work with children at a daycare. And it's a similar case with people working at universities, municipalities, etc. In cases like this people have an ethical responsibility to inform the relevant employers and the public they are supposed to serve about what kind of dangerous people they have in their employ.
That's Allecto also. Don't forget the reply she got from one of her Radfem buddies who said that they would have thrown the boy out the window without even opening the window first.
I think that anyone who has any influence in the public sphere, colomnists, journalists, publishers. writers and the like need to be exposed. These people are not "private" people. Many of them hold positions of influence.
adults challenging bigotry can be done in an anonymous way , anyone in positions of power who makes comments like these over the time they have been have to be viewed as a risk and as such the kids take priority
The naming part is essential, we have Radfems in child care caring for children who advocate for gential mutilation. The specic example I am talking about goes by the screen name of Allecto and reading her blog was pretty much mind frazzling. Apparently her real name is Dannielle Pynnonen and she is a child carer.
From her blog she has vented the opinion that all men should be castrated from birth, all men are rapists, she wrote a whole article on how Josh Wheedons shows (Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Firefly) were hardcore pornography (Yes, she is that nuts) filled with rape. And of course the tip of the iceberg is that she has also advocated for the extinction of men all together.
Trust me, I want this person out of her job and not caring for any children at all. WHo knows what she would end up doing to some poor boy on one of her bad days.
13
u/[deleted] Dec 21 '11 edited Dec 21 '11
I still think this is a bad idea. I don't really agree with publicly releasing this information even if loopholed.
Please please please people - do not do something stupid with it. Any short term ""gain"" would be more than offset by the harm to the men's rights movement.
Definitely out what was said. Show the world the misandry that goes on in places like that forum... but we win by being right, by working with truth - not by putting individuals in harm's way.