How the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ tried to target my friend by leaking personal details


10:50 am - December 12th 2012

by Guest    


      Share on Tumblr

by Maya Esslemont

Last week, a group of students at the University of Toronto protested against a Men’s Rights Activist, Warren Farrel, from being given a platform by their university.

The event was set to be fairly minor and only a few tweets and a couple of posters acted as publicity for the protest. Police turned up in order to forcibly remove the students from the entrance of the hall. The whole thing was caught on camera by Men’s Rights Activists, with the most “violent” moment consisting of one young woman out of a group of fairly calm students calling somebody “fucking scum”.

So, imagine my surprise when an online witch hunt aimed at one girl, who did nothing provocative during the event, began to unfurl.

The personal details of Emma Claire, a Canadian blogger and something of a friend of mine, were posted and scrutinised in the public eye by the website A Voice for Men. The writing attempted to answer the question on nobody’s lips: “Who is Emma Claire and why is she so hateful?” The article tries to “seal her legacy” so that “anyone who ever does an internet search on her name again will be aware of [her feminism]” the author states. The comment section indicates a consensus between the author and readers, with one of the top-rated comments saying:

“I wonder if she will ever be rejected for a job, and wonder if it was because this came up on a google search for her name? I wonder if in future years, she will regret the event she recorded her ‘legacy’ at.

I wonder, and I hope all of the above happen.” – Steve_85

Claire, 19, attended the rally and was later spotted in a photo by somebody from the website. After hunting down her old internet history, they discovered she had posted facetious tweets about the protest in its lead up. Apparantly, this is all the justification needed in order to publish her personal details online, all in the hope of scuppering future chances at a job.

Incriminating evidence included a couple of blatantly satirical tweets like: “Political position: kill all men, hail Satan” and a separate plea to friends and family to help her save up for a “Misandry” tattoo.

According to the website, Emma Claire has now been added to “Register-her.com” an online register for “False accusers of rape, murderers, pedophiles, and rapists”. Unfortunately for this satanic teenager, she was refused the opportunity to commit any of these crimes on tape, as she only appeared in the MRA’s video for a grand total of two seconds, doing nothing more than holding a banner next to friends.

The supposed expose of Emma Claire has revealed the dark side of internet vigilantism to counter one of the redeeming qualities of the online world: the prevailing existence of freedom of speech.

A Voice for Men has every right to call protesters whatever they feel like. They can dredge up old tweets by a 19-year-old girl only tenuously involved with the event in question. If they think it helps the brotherhood, they can even blatantly aim to harm the career prospects of a student picked at random, just because he or she has different beliefs.

Nobody should be afraid of holding a banner for fear of feeling the wrath of online dissenters, and those who make would-be protesters feel this way are not champions of free speech, they are champions of fear tactics, and no group on the left or right can call itself a an ally to free speech whilst employing them.

Whatever one’s opinion of the Men’s Rights movement, this kind of behaviour is no different to the artless strategy employed by Red Watch: It should be denounced by anybody who believes in the right for people to protest without anxiety or apprehension.


I have emailed abuse@softlayer.co.uk, the internet providers for the A Voice for Men website, in order to raise concerns about the legality of posting the details of Emma Claire. For the sake of future protesters who will be targeted for nothing more than holding a sign, I hope that others will do the same.

This was first posted to Maya Esslemont’s blog

    Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  


About the author
This is a guest post.
· Other posts by


Story Filed Under: Blog ,Feminism ,Media

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


Help me out here, why is it that they are protesting against mens rights? If a group of men were protesting against womens rights and in the public domain one of those men had listed there political position as “kill all women”, would any come back to that person be critisized as “just because he or she has different beliefs” ?

Stormfront uses similar tactics to discredit someone and attempt to ensure they’ll never work again.

A quick look at the Voice for Men website shows that they believe that women need to be put down in order for men to have a voice. Not very manly, really.

@3 Well they’re probably all Beta males anyway…

“:A quick look at the Voice for Men website shows that they believe that women need to be put down in order for men to have a voice. Not very manly, really.”

Just looking over it, its new to me, can you quote some of the things that lead you to that belief?

“Mens rights”? This is a patriarchal world. How laughable.

While I think many feminists have abandoned the left and got sidetracked by naval-gazing and trivialities, it’s fair to say that the “men’s rights movement” are a bunch of wackos. Jerks as well by the sound of it. I don’t know what their issue with women is.

8. Chaise Guevara

@ 6 buddyhell

““Mens rights”? This is a patriarchal world. How laughable.”

I think “patriarchal” has become a bit of a thought-terminating cliche. We live in a country where men and women have equal rights in almost every respect. We lost the vast majority of our patriarchal tendencies a good while ago.

Let’s assume that despite that, women are still more likely to get the short end of the stick. Does that really mean injustice against men is funny? It’s also worth noting that some men’s rights – equal paternity leave, for example – would actually benefit women too.

That’s just one of the reasons that we should support equality whenever we can, rather than scoffing at the very idea of some people deserving rights.

@Chaise

I think you’re missing the point here. Campus politics can often be a bit daft, but the online pillorying of this woman in the name of men’s rights is excessive and disgraceful. The group who have done it appear to have a strong anti-feminist agenda. I can’t see how that helps anyone.

10. Chaise Guevara

@ 9 Cherub

“I think you’re missing the point here. Campus politics can often be a bit daft, but the online pillorying of this woman in the name of men’s rights is excessive and disgraceful.”

If the facts as presented in the article are true, then yes it is. I haven’t read up on the issue in the OP beyond the article, hence my caveat here: LC isn’t always that fair with the facts.

But you’re missing the point. I’m not saying that this specific group is ok. I don’t know them. I’m criticising Buddyhell for his lazy blanket attack on the idea that half of the planet should have rights, apparently on the bizarre assumption that if you’re in a perceived/real privileged group you can’t possibly have anything to complain about. Feminists and andrists (?) attacking each other over who deserves rights “more” is a bit fucking stupid when the end goal should be equal rights and treatment across the board.

“The group who have done it appear to have a strong anti-feminist agenda. I can’t see how that helps anyone.”

It doesn’t. And again this goes vice versa, too. I’m sure I recall* plenty of feminists attacking attempts to improve gender equality in custody cases, or more trivially the EU’s recent move to ban gender stereotyping in car insurance.

That said, my experience is that men’s rights groups are far bigger hotbeds of misogyny than women’s rights groups are of misandry. Off the top of my head I’d venture three reasons for that: 1) a hell of a lot of members seem to feel they have been done wrong by a woman, normally in a divorce case, 2) men’s rights groups are naturally going to attract misogynists anyway, and 3) while 1 and 2 are also relevant to feminism, men’s rights is a much smaller movement – smaller groups tend to have a higher weirdo/arsehole ratio.

*Weasel words, I know – don’t have an example to hand.

or more trivially the EU’s recent move to ban gender stereotyping in car insurance.

Didn’t that ‘result’ for equality see everyone’s insurance costs shoot up?

After having a nosey about the linked websites the only reason that I can tell for why they’ve focused in on her above the women swearing is because she wears bright red lipstick. Sets em off apparently. Her friend next to her on the other hand had calming blue hair, so seems to get completely ignored, even with a big spiked collar.
Moral of the story is don’t wear flame orange ties near MRA’s if you don’t like being punched for no reason.

Blah – the protesters were there because Warren Farrell, the speaker, is an awful human being, who believes incest shouldn’t be a crime because children enjoy it among other horrid things. This wasn’t about “men’s rights” it was about Warren Farrell.

Though consider that men’s rights activists think Farrell is a hero and idolize him, that justifiably raises suspicions about their “movement.”

The leaders at A Voice for Men claim they don’t hate women but the opinions they express prove otherwise. Many posts are dedicated solely to disparaging women. One of my favorites is this one http://www.avoiceformen.com/women/socialized-psychopathy-modeling-female-misbehaviour/
in which John Hembling of Vancouver (aka John the Other) claims: “Excepting a tiny minority, it appears that Western women, through a failure of socialization, are trapped at the socialized developmental level of a 4 year old child, or a chimpanzee. The MRM as a whole may not be a hate group, but A Voice for Men is.

@13 my googling revealed no such suggestions. Have you evidence for your allegations?

By the way, I believe their internet provider is one of them.

Ack, A Voice for Men.

A couple of years ago various bloggers (including me) had a minor online argument with AVFM’s resident psychologist. After we made a few posts ridiculing some very offensive statements she made about people with mental health problems, she (yes, she, the MRAs have a Women’s Auxilary) hired a UK lawyer and started trying to track us all down in the real world.

She spent months trying to pin people down and demand damages from us, claiming that by ridiculing her online we were engaging in harassment and breach of privacy (note the irony in that in the context of the OP). She eventually sued one guy, but the claim against him was so shambolic that it collapsed pretty much as soon as it saw the light of a courtroom. Last I heard she was desperately trying to evade liability for an eye-watering amount in legal costs.

So yeah, A Voice for Men have some unpleasant people among their ranks.

Emma wasn’t just standing behind a sign like an innocent angel who accidentally got mixed up in something she didn’t understand.

If you cared to watch the other videos, you’d see that she was also at the back door trying to block people’s entrance and pleading with them irrationally. She also removed posters. Before and after the event she proudly proclaimed her misandry.

And now she plays the victim and everyone rushes in to console the little angel. Typical female behavior – and you know it.

@Pat

Typical female behavior – and you know it.

So, no particular ideological bias on your part then?

@ 9 Cherub: “I think you’re missing the point here. Campus politics can often be a bit daft, but the online pillorying of this woman in the name of men’s rights is excessive and disgraceful.”

Agreed. If the Men’s Rights Activists group wishes to be taken seriously, members should not bully anyone. Attack ideas rather than people.

@10. Chaise Guevara: “…the end goal should be equal rights and treatment across the board.”

The Men’s Rights Activists group is a bit weird. I find it hard to understand them but their suggestion that there is a power imbalance wrt child custody (as an example) is painful. Decisions about child custody must be shown to be about child welfare, and solely that. Sometimes we have to ask ourselves whether the correct decision has been taken and whether unpopular or unlikeable people have been casually disregarded.

Equal rights and equal treatment? Men and women deserve equal rights, but they are different. 99.9% (9 recurring for a long length) of men cannot conceive a child; it is possible for some intersex people who identify as male and for some transmen. So most blokes don’t get pregnant.

Men and women are different, and if we are to provide equal rights, we have to understand difference instead of pretending that it does not exist.

21. Chaise Guevara

@ 11 Cylux

“Didn’t that ‘result’ for equality see everyone’s insurance costs shoot up?”

On average, as was happening anyway. Are you saying sexism is cool as long as people are better off on average? Like we shouldn’t have brought in legislation on equal employment rights if that made average wages drop?

22. Chaise Guevara

@ 18 Pat

“And now she plays the victim and everyone rushes in to console the little angel. Typical female behavior – and you know it.”

Y’know, I’ve noticed a lot of people like to be the bully while playing the victim, and I haven’t noticed a disproportionate amount of them being female.

I have an alternative theory, one that I reckon will bear out under analysis. You’re a pillock.

23. Chaise Guevara

@ 20 Charlieman

Are you saying that custody should automatically go to the person who gave birth? That’s what I’m getting from your post, and it’s pretty bloody weird. Parenting counts for something, surely?

If, on the other hand, you’re starting to say in an extremely roundabout way that we shouldn’t be surprised if a fair system sees more women than men get custody, then I agree entirely. But the impression I have is that men very rarely get custody, which suggests bias along the lines of “women are caregivers”. If true, that’s insulting to both genders, but massively damaging to men.

@ Chaise

You sound bitter. Some man must have really hurt you. Not all men are like that. You’ll never attract a husband with your attitude.

I am so sorry, I saw they were looking for her, on a site that talks about raping and killing women (anti-feminism) on face book….I was, so worry about her….. these people are over the top sick, they hate me because one of them used My Name and blog in a custody case to protect a pedophile……when I started to tell the whole world, How I never saw naked pictures of this child that they claims I did…..they sent me death threat and rape threat, these men are the lowest form of humans to do this to people and mostly to children

26. Ovaries Before Brovaries

1. Misandry does not exist, in the same way that reverse racism does not exist. Women who proclaim themselves misandrists do so in irony and given the reactions they evoke (cries of what about teh menz??!?) they have my full support.
2. Equality between men and women is impossible in a patriarchal society. We can only be equal in a system of equality that men approve.
3. I won’t be notified of follow up comments, and I’ll probably forget I was even here so…..go for it.

Those old farts just can’t stand young women having opinions. What they can’t stand more than that, though, is young women who would likely call them on their old fartitude and who would probably laugh at them.

I’m an old fart, too (though of the old lady persuasion). Tell your friend a lot of us normal people think the world of her and offer our support.

she committed a crime in Toronto

she should be prosecuted for assault and intimidation

her name should be a matter of public record

if the police and the newspapers won’t do their job, then the bloggers have to do it

she was in a public space shouting obscenities and slander and intimidating people trying to attend a speaker who was talking about the problems that men and boys face

the fear tactics were perpetrated by your “friend” and the anti-men’s rights protesters with their well-documented nazi salutes and oink oink noses directed at the police

this blog post is a fear tactic

i see that emma claire is not the same as the woman at the end of the video who said “f-ing scum” over and over

my mistake

mea culpa

whoever that person is, and whoever else intimidated the people trying to attend the warren farrell speech, should be arrested and prosecuted for intimidation

has anyone actually watched the video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iARHCxAMAO0&feature=plcp

not all feminists are perfect saints doing divine work

and not all men’s rights activists are evil demons doing the work of satan

most mra’s just want equality before the law

if you want to see a real backlash, check out what happened to Erin Pizzey when she started publicly saying that some women actually are violent and men deserve domestic violence shelters too

i admit my mistake about the primary subject of this particular blog post, but you and your commenters and the protesters at that rally are using fear tactics to stifle the free speech of people who support men’s rights

it is most certainly not a “brotherhood”

i humply and respectfully request that you adhere to your own comments policy and change at least that one part in your main blog

thank you very much

real mra marmoset

http://youtube.com/mramarmoset

@26 ONB

Of course misandry exists. Haters gonna hate. Or are you denying women free will?

@28 mrmarmoset trial by Internet isn’t a recognised form of justice. Being pilloried by a bunch of obsessive misogynists with a sense of victimhood bears no resemblance to justice.

I had to chortle at the remark from the clearly perfectly sane Pat about Chaise ‘never attracting a husband’. Since I’m aware he’s far more likely to be in the wife market…

More on topic, I think Charlieman was saying the focus in child custody cases should be on whats best for the child, rather than on being ‘fair’ to both of the squabbling parents.

@30

I think you’re right. The prevalence of custody awards to mothers probably reflects the wider working habits today. Women tend to have to balance caring with working while men earn more and concentrate on work and careers. If we want a more balanced response from courts in custody cases then we should be looking at how to change the balance in society as a whole.

Oh dear Lord, this thread is really starting to bring out the MRA flying monkeys.

Warren Farrell ~ The myth of male power is on youtube for anyone who cares to listen and judge for them selves.

By “reverse racism does not exist” do you mean that only white people can be racist?

LOL as they say.

Disgraceful behaviour outlined in the OP but I also do not approve of “no platforming” anyone.

36. Chaise Guevara

@ 24 Pat

“You sound bitter. Some man must have really hurt you. Not all men are like that. You’ll never attract a husband with your attitude.”

I suppose that’ll be a big problem if I suddenly turn gay.

Also: project much?

37. Chaise Guevara

@ Ovaries before Brovaries

“Misandry does not exist, in the same way that reverse racism does not exist. Women who proclaim themselves misandrists do so in irony and given the reactions they evoke (cries of what about teh menz??!?) they have my full support.”

When my Asian ex-girlfriend’s father (who hated me despite never meeting me and refused to have me in the house) told her to “dump the white boy”, I’m sure he was just being ironic.

Pat’s still outperforming you at sexism, but you’ve pulled an early lead with racism. Well done.

38. Chaise Guevara

@ 31 Cylux

“I had to chortle at the remark from the clearly perfectly sane Pat about Chaise ‘never attracting a husband’. Since I’m aware he’s far more likely to be in the wife market…”

Indeed! Or the girlfriend market, at least.

people need to know they are a Hate Group…. http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2012/spring/a-war-on-women… their Hate has put 58,000 children in the hands of abusive people http://now.org/ Family Courts Failing Protective Moms, Children (PDF)
NOW’s Family Law Committee reports in its current newsletter that “father’s rights” groups are having a devastating effect in family courts. “Parental Alienation Syndrome” — a false accusation of mental illness against mothers who report domestic violence or child abuse — often results in abusive parents winning custody, further risking child safety.

I am proud of her to stand up to a Hate group supporter…

40. Derek Hattons Tailor

I don’t see the problem. If a man had protested at a feminist march and used that kind of language he may well be arrested for a public order offence. And the And surely equality is good for both men and women, so why would women object to a male equality movement ?

41. the a&e charge nurse

As an aside why were people afraid of what Warren Farrel might have to say?

According to Kenny Rogers doppelganger “All women’s issues are to some degree men’s issues and all men’s issues are to some degree women’s issues because when either sex wins unilaterally both sexes lose” … are such sentiments unacceptable in the home of the mountie?
http://www.bestinterestofchildren.org/Warren_Headshot_72DPI.jpg

@31. Cylux: “More on topic, I think Charlieman was saying the focus in child custody cases should be on whats best for the child, rather than on being ‘fair’ to both of the squabbling parents.”

Ta. Very well expressed.

43. Chaise Guevara

@ 41 a&e

Who is this doppelganger? I don’t get the reference, but that’s the smartest thing I’ve heard on gender issues, possibly ever. I was trying for a similar quote of my own, but the best I got was “men and women should stop fucking with each other”, which I have to admit seems like a hard slogan to sell.

44. the a&e charge nurse

[43] Hi, Chaise – silly reference to the fact Farrell reminded me a bit of Kenny Rogers!
Don’t know much about the guy, or why he has aroused such hostility (Farrell, not Rogers).

Here are some of his musings
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/w/warren_farrell.html

On the substantive point of the OP I strongly agree that such a tactic (targeting an individual via the net) is highly vindictive, and can only damage the credibility of any movement or group that stoops to this kind of intimidation.

So here we have, on the one hand, a dangerous anti-women movement that grows by creating and exploiting a perception among men with concerns about issues like child custody that feminists are driven by a hatred of men; and on the other hand, a group of feminists who think it’s a terrific idea to “proclaim themselves misandrists… in irony… given the reactions they evoke”.

Ah yes. What could possibly go wrong?

Just slightly OT:

Kimberly W on this thread asserts that MRAs “[promote]’Parental Alienation Syndrome’ — a false accusation of mental illness against mothers who report domestic violence or child abuse — often results in abusive parents winning custody, further risking child safety.”

Sadly a great many women’s organisations campaign against any recognition of PAS as an issue – perhaps simply because they believe it is usually fathers who are negatively affected.

I dearly wish people would understand that parental alienation syndrome is NOT a gendered issue. Indeed one of the highest profile cases (that of Lady Catherine Mayer – see link ‘My Husband Stole My Children’ below) involved a husband turning his children against their mother.

http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/my-husband-stole-my-children-6474701.html

@15 Your Google-fu is incredibly weak if you don’t know that about Warren Farrell. Methinks you didn’t really check it out. Stamping your foot and saying, “It’s not true! It’s not!” doesn’t work.

“@15 Your Google-fu is incredibly weak if you don’t know that about Warren Farrell. Methinks you didn’t really check it out. Stamping your foot and saying, “It’s not true! It’s not!” doesn’t work.”

Neither does doing all you can to avoid providing credible evidence which was all that was politly asked for.

@47 I looked at the first few pages of results and there was no suggestion of the accusations posted. That’s normally enough in such cases. Have you anything to offer?

51. So Much for Subtlety

The event was set to be fairly minor and only a few tweets and a couple of posters acted as publicity for the protest. Police turned up in order to forcibly remove the students from the entrance of the hall.

The police turned up because however it was meant to turn out, the feminists there decided to make it a violent protest and tried to use force to stop Farrell speaking. Whatever you think of what he has to say, that was wrong.

Nobody should be afraid of holding a banner for fear of feeling the wrath of online dissenters, and those who make would-be protesters feel this way are not champions of free speech, they are champions of fear tactics, and no group on the left or right can call itself a an ally to free speech whilst employing them.

You know, I don’t recall anyone around here saying these sort of things when someone stole the BNP’s membership list and published it on line – names and addresses and all. Can we all agree that it was wrong of people to actually get real people fired because of this act? After all, no one should feel afraid of holding a banner saying “>Deleted< Out! Britain for White People" for fear of feeling the wrath of on-line dissenters, right?

It should be denounced by anybody who believes in the right for people to protest without anxiety or apprehension.

No one should have the right to protest without anxiety or apprehension – rights that these speakers were seeking to deny Warren Farrell by the way. They should have the right to protest peacefully. But people who break the law should suffer the consequences (and indeed people who protest for the BNP ought to be concerned about other people finding out).

52. So Much for Subtlety

17. Zarathustra

She spent months trying to pin people down and demand damages from us, … Last I heard she was desperately trying to evade liability for an eye-watering amount in legal costs.

So yeah, A Voice for Men have some unpleasant people among their ranks.

Sorry but I am not seeing how that made her unpleasant. Surely that was just a normal and acceptable exercise of her legal rights? She failed, so the system worked, but are you saying no one should ever pursue anyone for libel or slander committed over the internet? For instance, Kimberley K has just accused Farrell of supporting incest. I think he has a legal right to pursue legal redress. You do not?

20. Charlieman

Agreed. If the Men’s Rights Activists group wishes to be taken seriously, members should not bully anyone. Attack ideas rather than people.

The irony here is that the girl in question was trying to bully Farrell. I don’t see you condemning her. She was not out to attack his ideas, but to prevent him speaking.

The Men’s Rights Activists group is a bit weird.

Sure. Worse than that really. But they have a point.

I find it hard to understand them but their suggestion that there is a power imbalance wrt child custody (as an example) is painful. Decisions about child custody must be shown to be about child welfare, and solely that. Sometimes we have to ask ourselves whether the correct decision has been taken and whether unpopular or unlikeable people have been casually disregarded.

But child welfare decisions are never taken with the child’s best interests in mind. That is the official justification but actually no matter what the women does, she gets custody. Even when she is mentally ill or a regular drug user. The system is strongly biased against men. Even though men tend to provide a safer environment – children are at greatest risk from their mother for non-sexual forms of abuse and their mother’s boyfriends for all forms of abuse – and tend to have more money to look after them. But the Courts simply reflexively give custody to women.

Men and women are different, and if we are to provide equal rights, we have to understand difference instead of pretending that it does not exist.

Yeah but what does that mean? That men are so evil they are not entitled to the legal protections thieves and murderers get if they are accused of rape? That they should always be assumed to be guilty in cases of domestic violence and hence always arrested merely on the say so of a police officer or girlfriend?

When it comes down to practical issues, what do you mean by that statement?

53. So Much for Subtlety

13. gypsy87

the protesters were there because Warren Farrell, the speaker, is an awful human being, who believes incest shouldn’t be a crime because children enjoy it among other horrid things. This wasn’t about “men’s rights” it was about Warren Farrell.

It would be an odd person who said that no children ever enjoyed any incestuous act at all. But Farrell talked about a book he was writing on the subject of incest – which recognised that the vast majority of cases are traumatic for the girls involved – in 1977. He did not in any way call for incest to be legal. By way of an interesting coincidence, 1977 was also the year that Le Monde published an open letter calling for the legalisation of all sexual acts between adults and children (including the defence of a man who had been living with some girls between the ages of six and twelve). The signatories were:

Louis Aragon, Francis Ponge, Roland Barthes, Simone de Beauvoir, Judith Belladona, docteur Michel Bon,psychosociologue Bertrand Boulin, Jean-Louis Bory, Franois Chatelet, Patrice Chéreau, Jean-Pierre Colin, Copi, Michel Cressole, Gilles et Fanny Deleuze, Bernard Dort, Franoise d’Eaubonne, docteur Maurice Erne, psychiatre Jean-Pierre Faye, docteur Pierrette Garrou, psychiatre Philippe Gavi, docteur Pierre-Edmond Gay, psychanalyste docteur Claire Gellman, psychologue, docteur Robert Gellman, psychiatre André Glucksmann, Félix Guattari, Daniel Gurin, Pierre Guyotat, Pierre Hahn, Jean-Luc Henning, Christian Hennion, Jacques Henric, Guy Hocquenghem, docteur Bernard Kouchner, Franoise Laborie, Madeleine Lak, Jack Lang, Georges Lapassade, Raymond Lepoutre, Michel Leyris, Jean-François Lyotard, Dionys Mascolo, Gabriel Matzneff, Catherine Millet, Vincent Montail, Docteur Bernard Muldworf, psychiatre Négrepont, Marc Pierret, Anne Querrien, Grisldis Ral, Franois Régnault, Claude et Olivier Revault d’Allonnes, Christiane Rochefort, Gilles Sandier, Pierre Samuel, Jean-Paul Sartre,René Schérer,Philippe Sollers,Gérard Soulier,Victoria Therame,Marie Thonon,Catherine Valabrgue,docteur Gérard Valls, psychiatre Hélène Védrines, Jean-Marie Vincent, Jean-Michel Wilheim, Danielle Sallenave, Alain Cuny.

So would you support anyone trying violently to stop Sartre or Guattari from speaking (you know, assuming they could) at a university? Does that letter make all of Derrida’s views disgusting?

Though consider that men’s rights activists think Farrell is a hero and idolize him, that justifiably raises suspicions about their “movement.”

The fact you need to lie about it raises suspicions about you.

50. GO

Here y’go.

Notice that while that is interesting it is not evidence of any of the accusations made. Farrell does not call for incest to be legal. He does not even support it. He simply says that his research showed what everyone else’s research said – that not all cases of incest were totally devastating to the victim. A trite common place.

Also notice that he said this in 1977. Back when he was a prominent member of the NOW. He published Liberated Men in 1975 I think. It was about then that he started to re-think his feminism. But he did not come out as a MRA until the mid-1980s. So he was doing that from an unclear but possibly feminist position. Just as Danny Cohn-Bendict was whipping his penis out and getting his kindergarten students to play with it from a liberated political position. The 70s were a weird time. The fight against that has been by Christian conservatives who don’t think sexual abuse is acceptable. Interesting to see the Left has adopted their position.

@50 GO. yuk. Thanks.

Farrell needs to admit his mistake. Keeping schtum suggests he still believes that rubbish.

@50 I’d say I’m shocked by those revelations, but in my own delving into MRM sites I’ve noticed unfortunate links to the Pick Up Artist movement (which is generally white supremacist as well as overtly misogynistic), pro-rape websites and even pro-Nazi websites because of Hitler’s determination that the role women should play was that they should be good mothers bringing up children at home while their husbands worked. So I’m not all that surprised that a leading MRA once had an interest in ‘the good’ of child sexual abuse.

I should note the irony that the main thrust that men are apparently oppressed the MRM uses is child custody cases…

I watched the video of the protest on YouTube and it was very hate filled, if people are going to behave that way they have to accept some consequences.

WOMEN HAVE NO RIGHTS, BECAUSE MEN LIKE THIS, HAVE STOLEN THEM AWAY. YOU THINK YOU KNOW? YOU HAVE NO IDEA… Women who have to fight men for their children, truly know how few rights we have. And the “men’s rights movement” WHY SHOULD THERE EVEN NEED TO BE SUCH A THING? THEY HAVE ALL OF THE RIGHTS NOW, WHAT MORE DO THEY WANT? They rule the government, they rule the businesses, they rule the banks, they rule the home, and now, THEY WANT OUR CHILDREN.

What do men need with ALL OF THE POWER? WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO DO WHEN WOMEN ARE JUST GONE FROM THIS EARTH? THEY ONLY WANT WOMEN TO HAVE SEX WITH, THEN TAKE THEIR CHILDREN? How many truly good FAMILY MEN would take part in a MEN’S RIGHTS MOVEMENT? ONLY A MAN WHO WANTS TO DOMINATE EVEN MORE THAN THEY DO NOW, WOULD FEEL A NEED FOR SUCH A THING.

THE MEN WHO RUN AND RUIN THIS WORLD ARE NARCISSISTIC PSYCHOPATHS, AND IF MEN WANT MORE RIGHTS, LET THEM GET RID OF THOSE GUYS FIRST, AND LEAVE US ALONE WITH OUR CHILDREN, TO BE MOTHERS, WHICH IS ALL WE EVER WANTED TO DO IN OUR LIVES, AND NOW THEY WANT TO TAKE THAT TOO.

it is the truth, and if you don’t believe me, do your own research, and if you don’t believe that, well, you just have a bag over your head… simple as that


Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Liberal Conspiracy

    How the 'Men's Rights Activists' tried to target my friend by leaking personal details http://t.co/zq9c1Zaj

  2. Jason Brickley

    How the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ tried to target my friend by leaking personal details http://t.co/mognsAiE

  3. NemesisRepublic

    How the 'Men's Rights Activists' tried to target my friend by leaking personal details http://t.co/zq9c1Zaj

  4. Annabel Jones

    How the 'Men's Rights Activists' tried to target my friend by leaking personal details http://t.co/zq9c1Zaj

  5. leftlinks

    Liberal Conspiracy – How the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ tried to target my friend by leaking… http://t.co/hKiUoOgE

  6. Sunny Hundal

    How the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ tried to target my friend by leaking personal details http://t.co/hbXiYERg – by @messlemont

  7. Displaced pleb

    How the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ tried to target my friend by leaking personal details http://t.co/hbXiYERg – by @messlemont

  8. ???YOLOTIDE ???

    How the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ tried to target my friend by leaking personal details http://t.co/hbXiYERg – by @messlemont

  9. Martin Grouch

    When "misandry" is just an excuse for misogyny – horrible idiocy

    http://t.co/atLrQgQ7

    HT @sunny_hundal

  10. Martin Grouch

    One for @EverydaySexism

    http://t.co/atLrQgQ7

    ( @sunny_hundal )

  11. kelly bergstrom

    Rage! RT @DavidFutrelle: Worth reading: How MRAs tried to target [ @goawayforever] by leaking personal details http://t.co/Wy2Fj6kT

  12. Violet Verbena

    MT“@DavidFutrelle: Worth reading:the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ target woman by leaking details http://t.co/YIi2Pgb4 via @libcon” @SamdeBrito

  13. EllenBeth Wachs

    Worth reading: How the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ tried to target my friend by leaking personal details http://t.co/jVz9tR8J via @libcon

  14. T Karney

    Worth reading: How the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ tried to target my friend by leaking personal details http://t.co/jVz9tR8J via @libcon

  15. Tythesaurusrex

    "How ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ targetted Emma Claire" | Now on Liberal Conspiracy: http://t.co/jaALIFaU @goawayforever

  16. Meghan Murphy

    "How the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ tried to target my friend by leaking personal details" http://t.co/mJ2KTaso via @libcon

  17. Chris Clukey Reece

    "How the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ tried to target my friend by leaking personal details" http://t.co/mJ2KTaso via @libcon

  18. Jeff Perera

    Rage! RT @DavidFutrelle: Worth reading: How MRAs tried to target [ @goawayforever] by leaking personal details http://t.co/Wy2Fj6kT

  19. MothersPoliticalPrty

    How the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ tried to target my friend by leaking personal details | Liberal C http://t.co/BqXvVFqo

  20. Jane Hippie

    How the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ tried to target my friend by leaking personal details | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/fi1gHCQv via @libcon

  21. Steve Caunce

    Creepy, disturbing, dangerous shit. http://t.co/C3XLw4PW

  22. Tantoo Cardinal

    Creepy, disturbing, dangerous shit. http://t.co/C3XLw4PW

  23. Rebecca

    Worth reading: How the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ tried to target my friend by leaking personal details http://t.co/jVz9tR8J via @libcon

  24. Silvia Alba

    Worth reading: How the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ tried to target my friend by leaking personal details http://t.co/jVz9tR8J via @libcon

  25. Socio Imagination

    How the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ tried to target my friend by leaking personal details http://t.co/bwjxdnXp

  26. Thabo Mophiring

    How the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ tried to target my friend by leaking personal details http://t.co/bwjxdnXp

  27. TheCreativeCrip

    How the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ tried to target my friend by leaking personal details http://t.co/bwjxdnXp

  28. TheCreativeCrip

    When "misandry" is just an excuse for misogyny – horrible idiocy

    http://t.co/atLrQgQ7

    HT @sunny_hundal

  29. Gareth Hart

    How the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ tried to target my friend by leaking personal details | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/35m9Z7iI via @libcon

  30. MothersPoliticalPrty

    How the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ tried to target my friend by leaking personal details | Liberal C http://t.co/Rks120Hu

  31. MothersPoliticalPrty

    How the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ tried to target my friend by leaking personal details | Liberal C http://t.co/iL1oAr2e

  32. braingarbage

    Worth reading: How the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ tried to target my friend by leaking personal details http://t.co/jVz9tR8J via @libcon

  33. Soupy One

    Worth reading: How the ‘Men’s Rights Activists’ tried to target my friend by leaking personal details http://t.co/jVz9tR8J via @libcon

  34. Deborah Parks

    RT @libcon: How the 'Men's Rights Activists' tried to target my friend by leaking personal details http://t.co/rYe24mKu





Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.