Ferdinand Bardamu Caught Monologuing Again
“You don’t know the power of the dark side!”
Is there something about being an MRA that makes you want to monologue like a cartoon supervillain?
Over on In Mala Fide, our dear friend Ferdinand Bardamu has responded in an amusingly monologuey manner to Arthur Goldwag’s followup to his earlier article for the Southern Poverty Law Center on the Men’s Rights movement. Bardamu whips himself into a bit of a lather, describing “Snerdling and his compadres” – for some reason he’s decided to call Goldwag “Snerdling” – as the
vanguards of a dying institution, desperately jamming their thumbs in the dike to keep the truth from drowning them. They’re on the losing side of history. Their shrieks are the shrieks of the dying and damned.
Their shrieks?
Oh, but there’s more. This earlier comment in Bardamu’s post is sort of a classic in the “implied threat” genre so beloved by MRAs like Paul Elam and his gang:
You’ve bitten off far more than you can chew here. You’ve antagonized the fastest-growing and most relevant movement/entity in America and the Western world. With every sling and arrow, the manosphere swells in size, a voice for the most powerful and deadliest force on Earth — the disenfranchised young man.
Emphasis mine.
Amazingly, in the very next paragraph, Bardamu waxes indignant that Goldwag had the gall to refer to “threat[s], overt or implicit, of violence” from MRAs. Bardamu responds with a big, insincere “who, me?”
I’ve made threats of violence? Leftists always pull this game — they never give specific examples … .
You want a specific example? LOOK AT WHAT YOU JUST WROTE IN YOUR LAST FUCKING PARAGRAPH. That bit about Goldwag allegedly antagonizing “the most powerful and deadliest force on Earth — the disenfranchised young man?” That is an implicit threat of violence. It’s kind of hard to miss.
You want to see more specific examples of threats from MRAs? I’ve got post after post full of them.
Heck, he doesn’t even need to look at Man Boobz. All he needs to do is to look at the comments on his own post, starting with the very first one:
SPLC: Thanks for kicking the sleeping dog,that dog needed to learn to bite rather than sleep.
Then he can scroll down the page for this more explicit threat from Brigadon:
I prefer practicing real, unmistakable violence.
Further down the page, in response to a feminist who has stopped by to call the IMF regulars on some of their bullshit, Brigadon elaborates further:
I have called it a ‘war’ before, and I will again. It is not a cold war, it is a hot war, with constant and socially-approved violence against men. The only way to fight a hot war is with violence. …
So, maybe it sounds like a call for violence, but at this point any woman that calls herself a ‘feminist’, regardless of their protests that they are ‘not like those other ones’ Is a criminal, a traitor to their species, their culture, their honor, their family, their nation, their gender, and their world. There is only one punishment that fits a traitor.
How dare Goldwag suggest that MRAs ever threaten violence!
Apollo, meanwhile, somehow manages to overlook the threatening language in Bardamu’s post and suggests that the real threatmongers are … you and me:
[T]he Internet is full of people making violent threats. … Yet in the Manosphere, where I think real injustices are being brought to light, and people surely have a right to anger, you will NOT see the threats of violence that are so very common in so many other places of the Internet. When such a violent comment does pop up in the Manosphere, it is usually very quickly squashed by mods. And any such comments stand out simply because of how rare they are.
Yet one visit to Manboob, or any other Feminist site, and you will be able to quickly be able to find threats of violence. The blatant hypocrisy here is just sickening
[Citation Needed]
Also, though this is a whole other kettle of beans, the fact that Goldwag is Jewish seems to have inspired a number of the anti-Semites in the In Mala Fide crowd to crawl out from under their rocks – one of them being our old pal JeremiahMRA, who weighs in with a comment calling Goldwag a “creepy Jew,” in two words combining anti-Semitism with “creep shaming,” which in the weird world of the manosphere is the most hateful kind of hate ever perpetrated upon any mortal soul. (Goldwag offers a brief but pointed response to Bardamu’s post, and to the anti-Semitism, on his own blog.)
Is any of this really surprising on a blog whose name means “In Bad Faith?”
Someone posted this in the comments a while ago, and I couldn’t help but think of it as I wrote this post:
Yes, MRAs, you ARE the baddies.
Like this:
Posted on May 23, 2012, in anti-Semitism, antifeminism, douchebaggery, grandiosity, hypocrisy, irony alert, men who should not ever be with women ever, misogyny, MRA, threats. Bookmark the permalink. 130 Comments.
executive summary: the splc screwed up by writing about people who are not True Scotsman, instead of focusing on me, toysoldier, the most wonderfulest and super-special person on the planet.
he also claims he’s not casting aspersions on goldwag personally, and then immediately turns around and accuses him of ‘intellectually dishonest cowardice’ because that i just how toysoldiers rolls.
I know a backwards bee when I see a backwards bee!
YES. THIS.
It’s hard to tell what’s going on with Kellett or Filler, without more information. There’s plenty of BAD info out there — including that piece by Robert Franklin “Esq.,” who presumably doesn’t know how to research state statutes (among other things), as well as its companion piece in AVFM, which helpfully misunderstands the nature of bar disciplinary actions. But given the MRM’s quickness to protect white straight men at all costs and demonize women at every opportunity — as well as the Maine Supreme Court’s rather tepid description of the lower court’s errors in its 2010 opinion — I’m inclined to think that this is another example of the MRM working itself into a lather just because … that’s what the MRM does. And of course this is not determinative, but Fathers and Families Director Glenn Sacks’ support does little to convince me of Vladek Filler’s innocence (see Sacks’ heartwarming work bullying other abused families here.)
@bee
according to the article antz linked, it’s OBVIOUS to sacks that filler is innocent and his ex-wife is crazy. so yeah, that about sums it up.
Antz,
Hil-arious, the idea that one person’s mistake reflects on an ENTIRE gender. It’s almost as if they’re not individuals at all! You come here looking for an audience, and all you get is a mirror. The point, as Shakesville put so well, you are proving it.
Don’t you know that if a guy says he is completely innocent of abuse and that his wife is a lying bitch that is the only evidence you need toward his innocence? Why abusive voicemail and emails, that can be fabricated! IT’s a conspiricy! Judges and prosecuters need to be over zealous sometimes or tragedys like this happen:
http://voices.yahoo.com/baby-wyatt-garcia-judge-lemkau-may-lose-james-hosking-5513763.html?cat=9
One of the most telling things that I have seen about the movement to trash Ms Kellett has been the utter lack of links to anything. Not even the report that says “Ms Kellett violated X”. One would think it would be all over the place but nope.
weird my comments keep disappearing…this is a test
Judges and prosecutors need to be over zealous sometimes….Abusers WILL do ANYTHING to slander their victim…and will dismiss evidence by saying that the lying bitch is fabricating emails or voicemails…there was a tragedy in Victorville, CA where an abusive man got custody of his infant son because the judge beleived him when he said that the abusive emails and voicemails he was sending were lies. The “father” ended p murdering the baby and himself all because a stupid misogynistic judge decided that women are lying whores….So yeah I will speak out when I hear about these men who lie about false accusations
Um, no, racist imperialism=not okay.
Um, what? “atheist code”? O_O
@blackbloc, yeah, I understand a sympathy for people whose arguments have been taken out of context. It’s a claim of substance though, not a get out of jail free card. Either they have been removed from context that considerably alters the meaning or they haven’t…
re: Mary Kellett & Vladek Filler, the Bangor Daily News has covered this fairly extensively, including the involvement of men’s rights groups. (The names of many of the commenters may be familiar to some of you.)
Cloudiah, at least they’re consistent-they’re still raging assholes when they take their show on the road outside the manosphere.
Agreed and they couldn’t give a flying fuck about men who are actually abused and hurting…what they are about are abusers, they want to make sure men are allowed to abuse their wives with impunity. They hate prosecutors and judges like Kellet because they are harsh and don’t kiss their asses.
If it was a legeitame reason to get her disbarred there would be MORE then the MRM trying to get this guy off…In the tragedy that happened in victorvile there was a HUGE protest that happened all around California to get this judge disbarred….the mother f the baby that was murdered was even on DR phil….I tried to post a link earlier but the link wouldn”t go through for some reason….but anyway the judge actually did something wrong it wasn’t just hearsay of this person is trying to get a good guy in jail…disbar her!
“You’ve bitten off far more than you can chew here. You’ve antagonized the fastest-growing and most relevant movement/entity in America and the Western world. With every sling and arrow, the manosphere swells in size, a voice for the most powerful and deadliest force on Earth — the disenfranchised young man.”
LOL!
“the most powerful and deadliest force on Earth”
Now if I said that, I’d get in trouble.
—————————-
Hey you’re talking about Filler?
I read an article on that, and I could not see how not having enough evidence on that guy proves him innocent. He was convicted of battery, just not the rape, and GOT HIS KIDS THROUGH THE WHOLE ORDEAL.
I fail to see how that guy suffered in any way. I only read one or two articles (only one having decent informtation) So I don’t get the whole “Filler” outragemobile.
Do these guys just look for people accused of rape that could not be convicted and build a case around them? The guy is a convicted batterer. What’s so heartbreaking about him FACING CHARGES. Nothing even happened to him. grrr.
This post made me laugh, now I’m agitated from the Filler topic. lol.
Even if there were photographic proof of Filler hitting his wife, I`m sure MRAs would defend his actions by saying, “What he did was wrong BUT she had it coming”. I mean, Thomas Ball admitted to smacking his daughter in the motuh and MRAs still rallied around him.
There was photographic proof, that’s why he was convicted on those counts.
And yes, Thomas Ball only drew a little bit of blood from her mouth. grrrr.
Oh so MRAs are defending a CERTIFIED wife-beater. Of course they are. Ugh.
Well, of COURSE you can find threats of violence here on Manboobz. Too bad for Ferdy it’s all quoted from MRAs.
On another note, for a minute I thought that was a Dark Helmet costume in the pic. “So Lone Starr, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb!”
Meanwhile over at AVfM Paul E. manages to work his hate crush of David into a post on violence against women. Don’t worry, he admits that a tiny minority of women are “true victims” of violence, but only if it happens at the hands of a complete stranger while they are working at soup kitchens. Or some shit like that. I really can’t read any more of that overwrought prose.
Is it possible that MRAs don’t know they are the baddies? It isn’t as though it hasn’t been pointed out more than once.
http://www.inmalafide.com/blog/2012/02/27/the-necessity-of-domestic-violence/
oh sure he just admitted to hitting his ex and thinks DV is just peachy and “women should be terrorized by their men”……but…but…Zombie Solanas and Zombie Dworkin!!!!!1
Hey MRAs? see that link up there? that is the reason feminism still exists and will not disappear until sick beliefs like that do. That is the SPLC is fucking watching you.
Domestic abuse advocate right out in the open. Not even subtext, it is written right there in the open.
@cloudiah:
Elam has yet another post up about white knights and how terribl inferior they are to real men like Paul,because clearly we needed to hear him rant about that topic again. What a miserable hack he is.
Ugh. I still have not been able to bring myself to read that Bardamu post. At some point I need to write about it.
The Thinking Housewife’s commenters have been talking to NWO, it seems:
“Immodest dress is analogous to male violence”
http://www.thinkinghousewife.com/wp/2012/05/why-immodest-dress-is-a-form-of-aggression/
David — you’ve really got to read it for the full horror show, he manages everything from how a woman abused him once, to how his girlfriend was (verbally) abusing him…so he hit her, to hitting children being like hitting women — it’s a royal train-wreck in other words.
But they aren’t violent? (Also, you put children throwing temper tantrums in the hospital?!)
And an appearances by “but Chris Brown and Rihanna are back together!” and “gina tingles” to close out his disaster of a post.
Oh goodness, how’d I miss this — “This post is the equivalent of a Bond villain’s expository monologue.” — very meta of him.
This is for NWO, and the rest of the people who say that being alone with a woman is a quick trip to being falsely accused of rape:
Woman found guilty of culpable homicide
How could this happen? She said he sexually assaulted her. That’s all she needs to get away with murder, right?
@Bostonian
the commenters are revealing themselves as abusers too. And they wonder why we call them violent. Which MRAs will renounce them I wonder?
Those comments are really disgusting, serious trigger warnings if you decide to wade through that shit. Excellent examples of “not violent?!?” though. (urgh they’re repulsive)
http://www.menarebetterthanwomen.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=27&sid=9f8e47a8e666c75da3a94be4159b004b
I did not read the comments on Mala Fide, the post was toxic enough. I am not surprised to hear of other abuse cheerleaders.
No MRAs will ever renounce abusers. They are the abuser’s lobby and they wear that badge with pride.
Rush Limbagh though.
nobody cares, factfinder
@ArgentiAertheri
I should have put a trigger warning in my post, sorry.
Quackers — it’s fine, the one you picked is no worse than the usual trolls, I just wanted to note that that comment was an oddity, the rest are much worse.
I guess that it goes to show that when they don’t think of women as people, the violence towards women becomes as blase as violence towards a cardboard box that happened to trip you up when you were trying to walk down the street.
When these men say that they are not “violent”- what they really are saying is that they are not violent toward those who they see as “fellow humans” (other males). Everyone else is fair game.
Is anyone else getting a massively sociopathic vibe here?
@Argenti
like this one?
TW
What a twisted little fuck. It’s all about power, not about equality as MRAs like to pretend. The law says you can’t beat your spouse and that takes away his “power” on top of that, sex appeal is equivalent to physical abuse for this creep. Its classic misogynistic abuser logic. Even Ferdy himself is surprised he hasn’t gotten as much shit for his article. Goes to show just how much the MRM cares about calling out their extremists eh?
@Nanasha:
Yes, but sadly not any more than I get from the rest of the MRM.
although to give credit where credit is due, at least the r/mensrights banned JeremiahMRA
That’s sort of the ones I meant, yeah. Though I was thinking more like how comment #5 spelling out the victim blaming “logic” of domestic murder *shudder* — or the ones not speaking in hypotheticals.
“Is anyone else getting a massively sociopathic vibe here?” — that set does seem particularly fucked up
I don’t think I can check any of these links. It is so much worse than I thought. :/
The guys who did theactual banning aren’t much better though. Isn’t Factory one of their mods?
I’m not sure…AnnArchist is pretty fucked up and he’s a mod :/
I really hate these kind of arguments. It totally ignores the fact for abuse to happen - for their victims to stay - it requires far more emotional manipulation than the victim supposedly uses. That is, abuse isn’t strictly about physical power, it’s got a heavy emotional component as well, in order to keep the victim from leaving. Most people wouldn’t get into a relationship if it started out violent (there are exceptions, of course), so most abusers test the waters with emotional manipulation and escalate from there. That argument is more about an abuser’s justification for the abuse, rather than the reality of abuse, and it pisses me off. What really makes me angry about that statement is the “truce” - there will never really be one, as the abuser will always find a way to abuse, no matter the excuse.
I prefer to think of my relationships not as adversarial combat but of partnership. But then again, I’m not into trying to control people.
The equation of emotional manipulation with physical violence just serves to justify their misogynist, barbarian views and the physical violence they obviously want to commit. Physical violence is re-cast as justified retaliation and its use merely the preservation of a perverted “equality.” Of course, manipulation is nowhere near as dangerous as physical violence, so really it is about controlling what women are allowed to do. Viewing a personal, intimate relationship as merely a stable truce perverts and twists that relationship into something deeply unhealthy. Life behind the eyes of people who believe such things must be horrifying.
I don’t know about you guys, but when I’m in a stable truce with someone, my first thought is usually I don’t want to date this person.
When these men say that they are not “violent”- what they really are saying is that they are not violent toward those who they see as “fellow humans” (other males). Everyone else is fair game.
Exactly.
because the man retains his physical power as a weapon and she retains her sexual and emotional manipulation as a weapon.
I despise this argument too. What they’re saying is that women’s “power” comes from being able to please men-by being attractive, being emotionally accommodating, making themselves desirable to have around.
The thing is, men have that power too. These particular men simply choose not to use it.
The EL DUDE Brothers
It is incredibly gross when people talk about “disciplining” their partners. To discipline someone, you need to have authority over them. There’s also the implication that you would be a better judge of correct behaviour than they are. I can’t imagine ever wanting to have that sort of relationship with another adult human being, either as “discipliner” or “disciplinee”. It sickens me, honestly.
Thing is, if you want to do discipline as part of a kink relationship, and everyone involved is agreed on that? No problem. But these guys a. won’t acknowledge that it’s a kink, b. want to impose it on everyone else, and c. wouldn’t actually enjoy it as part of an openly kinky scenario, because the fact that the woman isn’t going to like it, but isn’t going to have any choice in the matter, is what they want most out of the whole deal.
“…because the fact that the woman isn’t going to like it, but isn’t going to have any choice in the matter, is what they want most out of the whole deal.”
I think deep down they believe women WANT to be disciplined, i.e. hit, by their partner (at least any submissive, feminine, REAL woman). They think that if you don’t want your partner to hit you it is because you are a masculinized, feminist shrew. It goes back to the whole despicable “gina tingles” argument.
That is horrifying.
Oh damn :-$ I totally erased everyone who enjoys discipline consensually. Thanks for checking me on that, Cassandra.
Sorry guys. :-$
The “this is what women really want” stuff reads like rationalization to me, honestly.
I can honestly say AVfM has improved my life. Without it I might never have heard of Goldwag, whose blog I just added to my reader.
Kyrie:
I think the idea is that when they grow tired of their disenfranchisedness, they express unofficially the resentment they are unable to express officially. Since men have no voice in the government — it’s not like the president, mot of the cabinet, most state executives, and most legislators at all levels are men or anything — we have no choice but to rise up in violent rebellion.
Sharc:
Because if he had to look for an example of the system failing resulting in harm to a man as a man at the hands of a woman as a woman he’d have no examples at all.
People constantly conflate discipline with punishment. They really are not the same at all.
Discipline is something we exercise over ourselves. We make choices in accordance with the expected result.
Punishment is commonly used in many societies in an effort to “teach discipline” to others.
But punishment is not discipline.
Beating someone into submission to your will is not discipline. It is abuse. Manipulating them into accepting that they caused you to beat them in to submission is not discipline either. It is also abuse.
the most powerful and deadliest force on Earth — the disenfranchised young man.
This is sort of true, though — it’s why there’s so much violence in the Middle East. Even if you took religious claims to Israel out of the equation, you’d still have packs of roving poor angry males who, because they’re too low-status to marry in a polygamous society and because women are veiled and locked away, can’t direct their energies towards sex or raising a family and feel the need to be pissed off about something. It’s like every documentary you see about lions: the males are kicked out of the pride by the alpha lion when they come of age, so they wander around starting trouble.
The thing is, though, these “disenfranchised” young men never amount to anything. They’re an obnoxious population, but for them to be a truly threatening force they need to be exploited and organized and managed by some older, calmer visionary. LIke Osama bin Laden. Unlike jihadis, MRAs can’t be put to any productive use.
One question… doesn’t “mala fide” already mean “in bad faith”… so “in mala fide” would be… “in in bad faith”???
Women don’t “enjoy discipline consensually” in a vacuum. Ever heard of societal Stockholm Syndrome?
Rape culture, we live in it.
Yisheng Qingwa I disagree. People of all genders and orientations enjoy kinky stuff, not just women. Are they victims of societal Stockholm Syndrome also?
*straight women, that should be.