Norwegian Men’s Rights Activist blogger Eivind Berge arrested for death threats against police [UPDATE 3]

Eivind Berge and police

Norwegian Men’s Rights Activist blogger Eivind Berge, known for his violent rhetoric and rape apologia, has been arrested for death threats against police.

Not too surprising, given that he once announced on his blog that “[k]illing at least one cop is on my bucket list.”

Here are some Google-translated details from a news account here:

The right-wing extremist and anti-feminist blogger Eivind Berge has been arrested for having encouraged and glorified the killing of policemen. The police have found both ammunition and textbooks in use of explosives at Berge.

The police regard the threats as an invitation to others to kill police officers, but also feared that he would commit the acts themselves shortly.

He was evidently arrested on Wednesday. According to this story — at least as far as I can tell from the obviously crude Google translation — he made a specific threat to kill a police officer this Saturday:

Berge also writes about how he was planning to attack a policeman with a knife on a Saturday evening:

“Then I used the trial to come forward as a good example for men, and I considered it to be worth 21 years in prison for premeditated murder.”

According to this account, Berge is being held for two weeks. He claims innocence.

Berge, as readers of this blog may well already know, is a fan of right-wing terrorist and mass murderer Anders Brevik. On his blog, he’s also argued (among other things) that “Rape is Equality.”

He’s glorified the murder of police on his blog numerous times.

Some examples, taken from the second news account:

“… attack on the police is something 100% in harmony with everything I stand for.”

“I maintain that police murder is both ethically and tactically correct.”

Some other examples, direct from his blog (each paragraph is from a separate post; click on the quote for the source):

I viscerally despise cops and wish them the worst. Killing at least one cop is on my bucket list.

If ever a victim of psychiatry, here is what I would do. I would first attempt to kill the cops or whoever tried to apprehend me. Failing that, I would feign docility in order to get out as soon as possible and then kill a representative of the industry as revenge. … killing cops is also very much a men’s issue. Every pig killed is also a blow against feminism, so men should be doubly elated whenever an officer goes down in the line of encroaching on our cognitive liberty.

[I]f you are a victim of psychiatry, it is probably in your best interest (as well as a publicly beneficial act of activism) to kill a guard or cop in order to get a fair public trial and possibly escape treatment before it ruins your health completely.

Rather than cowering in fear of the police, I assumed a warrior mentality and started hating law enforcement. I really, really wanted to hurt those responsible for enacting and enforcing feminist sex law.

This was his reaction to a news story about a police officer being killed:

Good news for men is rare in this hateful feminist utopia that is Norway, but today is a joyous day! Today I feel schadenfreude in my heart along with all the hate that feminism and resultant mate deprivation have instilled in me. One blue thug less on the streets.

From another post on the same subject:

The swine Olav Kildal died while trying to enforce our lack of cognitive liberty. This was a defensive, much deserved killing that cheered me up.

Here he threatens a female prosecutor:

To feminist prosecutor Anne Cathrine Aga I have the following message: The Men’s Movement is watching you, bitch, and we are seething with hatred against you personally and the police state you represent. Actions have consequences. Trials are still (mostly) public and they sink into our collective minds, where they form the basis of future activism. Hate breeds hate — that is a fact of life too smugly ignored by feminists. …

2011 is the year Norwegian men as a group emerged out of the blogosphere and into the battlefield. This in turn has led to a breakthrough for MRAs such as my good self in the public discourse, probably for the simple reason that the powers that be now realize ignoring us has deadly consequences. Men are angry now, and we have proven that we are deathly serious about resisting feminism. So the feminist prosecutors referred to above ought to wipe that smug look off their faces before it is too late. Clearly seventy-seven body bags wasn’t enough, but I am fairly confident that you will be sorry one day.

Aside from the explicit threats of violence, the violent and threatening rhetoric here is not unlike much of the rhetoric we see regularly on A Voice for Men and other MRA sites. AVFM founder Paul Elam, for example, told one feminist that:

I find you so pernicious and repugnant that the idea of fucking your shit up gives me an erection. … We are coming for you.

The blogger Emma the Emo, Berge’s girlfriend, has posted comments here in the past defending him. The news account quotes someone identified as Nataliya Kochergova, described as his girlfriend; I assume this is “Emma,” because what she told the media is similar to what she posted here. She of course denies that he planned any real violence. According to the article, she said:

There are not really threats. He has never had plans to kill someone, he has said several times in his blog. When for example, he says that “the police killings are an effective way to prevent stupid laws,” it’s a factual description and not a threat. Even those who love the police agree with it.

Berge, for his part, has stated publicly that if he had not met Emma, he probably would have killed by now:

At the time I wrote my last blog post, I believed I would probably become Norway’s first modern violent activist in peacetime. Celibacy enforced by a feminist regime had driven me to the point where I saw no other option. I would target the pigs who enforce feminist law, knowing I could realistically at least kill one of them before I would be captured or killed myself. Thus revenge would be assured and if I lived, my reputation as a violent criminal would make me attractive to some women. But then in the nick of time this blog attracted a lovely girl commenting as “Emma.”

This is why I take violent rhetoric from MRAs very seriously.

Meanwhile, on this side of the Atlantic, MRAs glorify MRA “martyr” Thomas Ball, who killed himself on the steps of a New Hampshire courthouse last year in hopes that his death would inspire MRAs to literally burn down courthouses and police stations.

Ball’s manifesto is still up on A Voice for Men in its “activism” section, including these passages:

So boys, we need to start burning down police stations and courthouses. … This is too important to be using that touchy- feeling coaching that is so popular with business these days. You need to flatten them, like Wile E. Coyote. They need to be taught never to replace the rule of law. BURN-THEM-OUT!

Most of the police stations built in New England over the last 20 years are stone or brick. Fortunately, the roofs are still wood. The advantage of fire on the roof is that it is above the sprinklers

AVFM tastefully omitted Ball’s specific instructions on how to make Molotov cocktails, but left this in:

There will be some casualties in this war. Some killed, some wounded, some captured. Some of them will be theirs. Some of the casualties will be ours.

For many more examples of violent threatening rhetoric from MRAs, I urge you to go through some of my posts here and  here.

 

About these ads

Posted on July 7, 2012, in a voice for men, antifeminism, misogyny, MRA, rape, rapey, reactionary bullshit, terrorism, threats. Bookmark the permalink. 1,599 Comments.

  1. “Child rape apologist!” They said it 50 times, so it must be true!

    No, I said pedophiles should be taken out of circulation and treated compassionately because they probably suffer from a pathology.

    Incidentally, the same position that this wikipedia overview of pedophillia says US society already takes:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia

    But pedophiles who pay children for sex are not really rapists, because the child consents, then performs the act, indicating they understand the nature of the contract. The elder is still a pedophiles, but the child prostitute is still a prostitute.

    If the child is enslaved – it’s rape, or too young or stupid to know what he or she’s doing – rape. But poor, and in need of food? Not rape. A choice. Unwilling to do other hard labour paying 9 times less than the prostitution route? Not rape. A choice.

    I think there are a too few prostitute feminists on this blog who will do anything to perpetuate the tax-free lifestyle prostitutes are currently legally entitled to in most places.

    Prostitution tax avoidance and accountability avoidance opportunities need to be shut down.
    If a grown woman would make the argument she’s a prostitute due to being victim of circumstance, then a child will be encouraged to make the same argument. Set a better example.

    Whatever your age, follow the golden rule, of never taking money for sex, then prostitution will be eradicated. Only the prostitute can stop charging for sex.

    And of course, that means rejecting courtship gifts, engagement gifts, marriage gifts, divorce gifts, and government largess also.

    I don’t think many of you are ready to renounce prostitution in all its forms.

    It’s such a simple course of action – but manboobzers will conspire to make it seem ridiculous, unquantifiable, un-knowable and so on.

    I know a whore when I see one.

  2. Sir Bodsworth Rugglesby III

    6. BBC documentary I saw one time, BBC (20??)
    7. Willy, C. Antarctic Prostitution: a Reexamination Penguin Press:Mawson Station (2006)
    8. I made this up, but some people in the comments on YouTube agreed it must be true
    9. No citation here, but fail me and I’ll fucking sue you, you whore.

  3. I know a whore when I see one.

    No Tom, you don’t. You couldn’t possibly, since you don’t know what that word means.

  4. But pedophiles who pay children for sex are not really rapists, because the child consents, then performs the act, indicating they understand the nature of the contract.

    No. No. That is rape and you are revolting.

    Whatever your age, follow the golden rule, of never taking money for sex, then prostitution will be eradicated. Only the prostitute can stop charging for sex.

    This pales in comparison to your nauseating wrongness about children being responsible for being raped, but I’m curious to know why you care if a consenting adult decides to do sex work? What makes you think people share your opinion that sex work should be eradicated?

  5. “And of course, that means rejecting courtship gifts, engagement gifts, marriage gifts, divorce gifts, and government largess also.”

    Hmmm. Well I guess I’ll have to get rid of that bottle of Johnny Walker I got for my husband. I wouldn’t want him to feel like a whore, now.

  6. But pedophiles who pay children for sex are not really rapists, because the child consents, then performs the act, indicating they understand the nature of the contract. The elder is still a pedophiles, but the child prostitute is still a prostitute.

    If the child is enslaved – it’s rape, or too young or stupid to know what he or she’s doing – rape. But poor, and in need of food? Not rape. A choice. Unwilling to do other hard labour paying 9 times less than the prostitution route? Not rape. A choice.

    You baffle and sicken me. You can see that prostitution is a dangerous, and you don’t think children should be doing it, and your solution to it is to blame the prostitutes for being WHORES.

    You can acknowledge that a person might choose to prostitute if they are desperately poor and starving, and you still judge the person for choosing not to starve to death.

  7. Sex work should be eradicated because Tom can’t afford to pay a woman to sleep with him. Therefore, all sex is wrong. Women should just have sex with him for free. But of course, no one will. Because they’re all being whores for other men.

  8. Here we go again

    But pedophiles who pay children for sex are not really rapists, because the child consents, then performs the act, indicating they understand the nature of the contract.

    Children cannot consent sufficiently to sex with adults period.

    Whatever your age, follow the golden rule, of never taking money for sex, then prostitution will be eradicated. Only the prostitute can stop charging for sex.

    And of course, that means rejecting courtship gifts, engagement gifts, marriage gifts, divorce gifts, and government largess also.

    Also why is prostitution and prostitutes bad? Why do you loath “whores” as oppose to “johns” since you need both for prostitution? Why don’t “johns” have to renounce being johns? In tom Martin world should no one ever give their partner gifts or is there any acceptable way to give your partner a gift?

  9. Whatever your age, follow the golden rule, of never taking money for sex

    Also, that is not the golden rule.

  10. I meant, therefore all sex WORK is wrong.

  11. In order to give or receive a gift you have to be a man, according to Tom Martin. Only men should ever get anything ever.

  12. Also are men whores if they accept gifts from their partners?

  13. Apparently in Tom-Martin-land all child prostitutes are independent escorts who set up and manage their own businesses and recruit all their own customers?

    Can he really be that stupid?

    Also, wow, we’re really reaching the theoretical limits of “a woman who receives any sort of good or service from anyone in her entire life is a whore” here.

  14. Also are men whores if they accept gifts from their partners?

    No. Of course not. Women owe them for men hunting mammoths and inventing the wheel.

  15. Yeah Tom, my ex-girlfriend bought me a car. Twice! Am I a whore?

  16. Tom why do you only call women whores and not men? Men receive gifts from their partners too, aren’t they whores as well?

  17. If the child is enslaved – it’s rape, or too young or stupid to know what he or she’s doing – rape. But poor, and in need of food? Not rape. A choice. Unwilling to do other hard labour paying 9 times less than the prostitution route? Not rape. A choice.

    So, I take it you’re unwilling to do any research on the brain development and mental capacity of children? Should we also try children as adults for all criminal activity or just prostitution?

    Like I said, submit your beliefs in writing via a letter/essay to a major publication. Everyone likes page clicks; I’m certain your work will be published. If we’re just a group of humorless feminists too emotional and hand-bag clutching to see the truth then surely a broader, more diverse audience will agree with you whole-heartedly. They may even start to send you money so that you can pay your debt.

    Be sure to include a link to that video so people can hear the cries of the six year old boy who was sodomized.

    And of course, that means rejecting courtship gifts, engagement gifts, marriage gifts, divorce gifts, and government largess also.

    Again, this is why you’re an extremist. The penguin thing is just a tangential aside in the freak show that is your rotten soul.

  18. If couples buy each other presents does it mean that they’re both whores or that neither of them whores. I mean, the other week my man took us out for drinks and dinner. The next night I made him dinner and served a bottle of wine and made him a cocktail. In both instances the food and drink cost money but I didn’t factor in the cost of my labor.

    So which one of us is the whore?

  19. I have a hypothetical for Tom. So, last night Mr C and I went out to dinner, and the bartender (restaurant with a full bar inside) gave us both a free drink. Mr C thinks this was because I commented on the fact that the bartender is growing a beard, asked him how long he intended to grow it, etc, but honestly the bartender seems to be about equally fond of both of us. We both got free stuff as a result of being charming and friendly.

    So, are Mr C and I both whores? Am I a whore, but Mr C is not? How does this whoredom theory work, exactly?

  20. Dracula said:
    Yeah Tom, my ex-girlfriend bought me a car. Twice! Am I a whore?

    Yes.

    Peculium AND Jumbofish said:
    Also are men whores if they accept gifts from their partners?

    Yes, if the gifts are one way only and the man does not intend to reciprocate or pay her back.

    Someone said men should renounce being a Jon. Fair enough!
    In case you haven’t guessed, it is already against my religion to give women money or gifts. I renounced being a Jon in all its forms a long time ago. Historically I have paid on dates, or bought a drink etc for a date, but thought about it, and decided not to continue down that route – and I am a much better person for it. When I go on a date, I say “get your money out then” and that is it. She might groan a bit, but soon gets over it and realizes I am confident enough not to have to bribe her for sex.

    Also, someone or other here said I was anthropomorphising human behaviour onto penguin behaviour by calling penguins whores or something.

    But the point is, being a whore, is an animalistic trait, that human females should not need to resort to, given they’re at the top of the fucking food chain already. Google “nuptial gifts” and you can read studies about various animals granting sex to those males who provide the most food, or even the most glittery non-edible trinkets etc, or in the case of penguins, rocks to build nests and shelter with.

    I’m saying women are better than penguins, or at least would be if they renounced prostitution in all its forms.

    A lot of you seem to be very unclear on the egalitarian moral necessity to reject chivalry in all its forms. Marc Rudov is the expert on this subject:

    http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CFEQFjAB&url=http://thenononsenseman.com/article/2006/07/09/chivalry-died-in-the-garden-of-eden-marc-h-rudov/&ei=QKz_T5GVONSY1AX4pOSaBw&usg=AFQjCNF_LIzGnbsMLll9WUu7CJhAJ41LAg&sig

  21. “When I go on a date, I say “get your money out then” and that is it. She might groan a bit, but soon gets over it and realizes I am confident enough not to have to bribe her for sex.”

    I’ll just file this under SHIT THAT NEVER HAPPENED.

  22. Mark Rudov is the author of “How To Be A Tedious Blowhard And Alienate People, And Also Why Did Anyone Give Me A Publishing Deal?”.

  23. Argenti Aertheri

    Steele — “What’s the problem with Hugo Schwyzer?” — Pick one, review it: Hell No, Hugo! and/or Fuck No, Hugo Schwyzer.

    Eurosabra –

    “You’re going to be surprised, if not exactly comforted, that I was led to Berge via the Hit the Bitch and Stockholm the Game controversies when I was tasked with doing an anti-rape PSA’s subtitles. I personally am all sorts of ick, but my work is progressive. Consider it, well, penance.”

    Wait, you were led to Berge, months or years ago (when you tried getting him into PUA), because of a game that only existed in the last month? That comment is just full of fail.

    NWO –

    Just a tiny round of Spot That Fallacy!! for you here –

    @Argenti Aertheri
    “That’s a Godwin, don’t do it.”

    Please forgive me. I shall rephrase it. Manboobz is a place that uses the indentical tactics used at nazi headquarters, scouring the web to search out any who dare criticize the master race. Better?

    Reductio ad Hitlerum (playing the Nazi card) – comparing an opponent or their argument to Hitler or Nazism in an attempt to associate a position with one that is universally reviled (See also – Godwin’s law)

    Knock it off, pick a semi-valid analogy.

    This entire comment.

    Nirvana fallacy (perfect solution fallacy) – when solutions to problems are rejected because they are not perfect.

    There’s no such thing as homosexual or transsexual. All sexuality is due to reproduction.
    Telling someone their actions are repulsive is also good so they won’t continue doing it.

    Those two thoughts directly contradict each other — if there is “no such thing as homosexual or transsexual,” then what “repulsive” actions are being done? This is particular illogical as you have a thing for insisting that all male-on-male rape is by gays because raping a man makes a man gay (that “logic” makes my head hurt).

  24. Argenti Aertheri

    For the sake of not throwing up at the child rape apologia, I’m ignoring Tom. I do want to say though, regarding the whole “female penguins are whores” thing — I’d thought it was pretty damned funny — you’d been funny before this Tom.

  25. Argenti Aertheri

    “Yes, if the gifts are one way only and the man does not intend to reciprocate or pay her back.”

    Hey, a short one from Tom “sometimes funny” Martin! So, I have a standing friends with benefits arrangement, and was curious if you could tell me the conversion ratio of paintings to photography — and where sex factors into this. Thanks!

  26. Because every piece of professional and academic writing I’ve ever seen has “(you cunts)” sprinkled through it.

    It’s listed as YC in the table of acronyms.

  27. In case you haven’t guessed, it is already against my religion to give women money or gifts.

    This must be awkward when you get a female cashier at the store.

    Also: I don’t know whether my boyfriend or I have spent more over the course of the relationship. We trade off paying for dinners, but dinners also have varying costs, and I’ve done more household work for him than vice versa, but I also tend to drink the beer out of his fridge. We’ve never bothered to balance this up.

    We’re going to have to make a spreadsheet to figure out which one of us is a whore!

  28. themisanthropicmuse

    Who knew that buying your significant other was making them become a whore. Seriously though, if this trolling arsehat is half as vile as he presents himself then I have lost all hope for humanity. Seriously, if human beings this fucking stupid exist, this species is just plain doomed.

  29. themisanthropicmuse

    argh, I had a few drinks tonight so I apologize for that mess of a post. What I meant was:

    Who knew that buying your significant other birthday and Christmas presents was making them into a whore. Seriously though, if this trolling arsehat is half as vile as he presents himself then I have lost all hope for humanity. Seriously, if human beings this fucking stupid exist, this species is just plain doomed.

  30. Hey. You know what?

    What if penguins are whores? So what?

    A male penguin brings a female a fish, and she mates with him. End result: two happy penguins! The male got sex and the female got fish (and sex). Everybody wins!

    Why is this a bad thing? The male penguin isn’t being exploited–he’s got plenty of fish for himself, and it’s a small, mostly symbolic act of gift-giving. The female penguin isn’t demanding fish; if you don’t have fish or don’t want to give any up, you always have the option to not give her fish and not mate. (Making you, perhaps, a PGHOW.)

    So penguins are whores. What’s wrong with that?

  31. No, the Stockholm A Love Story Game controversy in Scandinavia began in its early development stages. And then I heard, ” Some guy supports that”, and failed to address him properly.

  32. themisanthropicmuse

    Oh and Tom, real couples that are happy with one another aren’t about tit for tat. They do things for each other because they want to, not out of obligation. Of course you would not know this since I doubt you’ve ever had a successful relationship in your life… especially now that you are reduced to trolling for attention as a pro-pedophile lunatic.

  33. That was 2008-9. Whatever, I mean, you’ll spin anything I say.

  34. CassandraSays

    Every time Tom starts ranting about his fucked up, petty idea of “equality” I keep thinking of the scenes in Joy Luck Club with Rose’s obnoxious husband and his list of things each of them need to pay for on the fridge, and wishing for her mother to come along and deliver a lecture about how ass-backwards the whole thing is. Just me?

  35. Whatever, I mean, you’ll spin anything I say.

    mild gaslighting

    CassandraSays – Me too! He seems to have that same confusion between “fair and reasonable” and “literally 50-50.”

    Then again he also has his little child prostitute foible that’s not even funny so ugh.

  36. CassandraSays

    Yeah, maybe we can encourage him to stick to talking about his obsession with the idea of a 50 cent discrepancy between gift value as being a sign of whoredom instead of his theory of child prostitution. The “whore!” stuff is so much less depressing.

    (Glad it’s not just me)

  37. Argenti Aertheri

    “No, the Stockholm A Love Story Game controversy in Scandinavia began in its early development stages. And then I heard, ” Some guy supports that”, and failed to address him properly.”

    At least he can manage a semi-plausible back story? Or is that worse in his case?

    “PGHOW” = LOL

  38. Oh and Tom, real couples that are happy with one another aren’t about tit for tat. They do things for each other because they want to, not out of obligation.

    I bet Tom’s a fan of those guys who sued their exes after their relationships broke up for every penny they’d ever spent on them, revealing in the process that they’d kept receipts and meticulously noted everything down on a spreadsheet from the day the relationship started.

    After the judges (amazingly, there was more than one case like this, and on both sides of the Atlantic) invariably threw the case out, probably stifling giggles in the process, I’d love to know if the plaintiffs managed to get a date ever again.

    Me, I haven’t a clue what I’ve spent on my wife over the decade-plus that we’ve been together. And I’d be astounded if she was any better informed about vice versa. But that’s because we’ve been pooling our income into the same joint account almost as soon as we decided to start living together, so it would take some pretty forensic auditing.

    (And even then I suspect it would struggle to come up with a definitive total, since a lot of spontaneous gifts have been bought off the joint bank card, with no indication of who actually used it appearing on the bank statement. But I suspect I’ve now entered a realm that’s as fantastical to the average MRA as one full of dragons and unicorns.)

  39. Someone said men should renounce being a Jon. Fair enough!
    In case you haven’t guessed, it is already against my religion to give women money or gifts. I renounced being a Jon in all its forms a long time ago. Historically I have paid on dates, or bought a drink etc for a date, but thought about it, and decided not to continue down that route – and I am a much better person for it. When I go on a date, I say “get your money out then” and that is it. She might groan a bit, but soon gets over it and realizes I am confident enough not to have to bribe her for sex.

    Jon??? Don’t you mean john?? I mean it can’t be a spelling mistake since you did it more than once…..

    Also which region are you part of? I have never heard of a religion that specifies women must not receive gifts.

    You are so ridiculous, people give each other gifts all the time without expecting to be paid back because you know they are gifts. Gifts are things you give to someone which you don’t expect them to pay back, its normal and okay to do this.

    Do you normally think oh kids on halloween and chistmas are all whores for accepting candy and presents when they don’t get paid back? I mean they go knocking on door to door asking for candy and they don’t intend to ever pay them back, dirty whores amiright?

  40. So if I’m a whore because my boyfriend had sex with me and gave me a birthday present. Okay. But my friends gave me birthday presents and they didn’t have sex with me! Is that still whoring? Or is it straight-up theft?

  41. CassandraSays

    Mr C and I have never had a joint bank account (we do have a shared credit card) and even so I can’t imagine trying to quantify who’s spent what over the years, much less provide a detailed Excel spreadsheet. Who does that shit?

    (Apart from characters in novels meant to symbolize their partner’s lack of self-confidence because they actually put up with it.)

  42. The worst is guys who, when you say, “I don’t believe in 50-50,” think you’re angling for 60-40. I think some of it’s just a Strictly Logical mindset (frequently infected with “logic is masculine and superior, emotion is feminine and inferior”) that thinks “there always has to be a number, so if she doesn’t want 50-50 she must want a different specific number.”

    The idea that roughly fair can actually be better for both partners than exactly fair is apparently not intuitive to some people.

  43. CassandraSays

    Not Rose, Lena, I had a memory failure moment. For anyone wondering what the hell we’re talking about, here you go.

    I interpret the guys who say that stuff as insisting that they want 50/50 but not actually wanting that at all, it’s more like they have a mindset in which it’s assumed that both parties must be out to screw the other over and so that’s why a balance sheet is needed. It’s partly a trust issue, I think, and partly sexism of exactly the kind that Tom illustrates so nicely.

  44. CassandraSays

    Also OT but for me the most touching moment in both book and movie was the conversation between Lena and her mom about the ice cream and why it shouldn’t be on the list.

  45. M Dubz:

    This is a lie. We call one another out respectfully ALL THE TIME. I just participated in a rather long conversation about some questionable comments on another thread yesterday. And in turn, I have been criticized on more than one occasion. In fact, as a commentariat, I think that we are REMARKABLY good about criticizing one another in order to promote a more inclusive and supportive atmosphere among the non-trolls. It’s something I love about this site.

    Absolutely seconded. When it comes to self-policing, the commentariat here does a better and more respectful job than any other blog I’ve ever seen.

    Hit’n’run commenters like Tom Martin probably don’t notice because such discussions are generally over in a polite two or three-comment exchange and are therefore easily missed – but they happen, and they happen daily. Sometimes hourly.

    Why do MRAs mischaracterise this blog and its commentariat so blatantly? Are they genuinely deluded enough to think that their claims will stand up to scrutiny, or do they assume that no-one will check? And if the latter, why? Since they’re precisely the kind of people who… oh, I don’t know, will argue for 1,000+ comments (999 by themselves) over the precise definition of the word “misandry”, how can they possibly imagine that the people they’re criticising will simply roll over and say “Oh, OK then”?

    Very strange people.

  46. after the sheer horror that has been Tom Martin’s posts…i offer this up

    http://blogs.walkerart.org/mnartists/2012/05/31/internet-cat-video-film-festival-on-open-field/

    *lays down link and backs slowly away*

  47. ShadetheDruid

    I know this is going back like a page and a bit, but did Tom just call us prudish, conservative hookers? Hahaha… (imagine the laughter continuing for about 5 minutes).

  48. Regarding Joy Luck club, yeah, I think if I wouldn’t treat a friend like that, I wouldn’t treat a spouse like that. He goes way overboard.

  49. Shrug.
    I could explain at length, but it’s useless with you lot, because you don’t understand PUA is male sexual empowerment, which it is.

  50. I do think that if you Google ” Clarisse Thorn Clara Rose” you might find it hilarious. She became a minder at a PUA event and the guys just tried to seduce her that much harder. The book tells it from her feminist sex-pos perspective.

  51. ShadetheDruid

    Shorter Eurosabra: “We should be able to harrass women! It’s empowering!”

    Yeah.. and that’s the problem.

  52. ShadetheDruid

    Countdown to him misinterpreting that as “men should be complete disempowered” in 5..

  53. I know clarisse Thorn wrote an ebook about PUAs. Who’s Clara Rose?

  54. “This is a lie. We call one another out respectfully ALL THE TIME.”

    Says the crew that spent an entire thread ridiculing Christianity because they knew it offended me. Endorsed by our host, Dave. Ridiculing a persons faith just for the enjoyment of tormenting them.

  55. Clara Rose was her pseudonym. I don’t know if it was event-specific. Clarisse Thorn is also a pseudonym, of course.

  56. Aw, I really am a whore! Yay!

    But seriously Tommy, you still don’t know what that word means. Her setting me up with transportation was not contingent upon me continuing to fuck her on the regular. She offered to help me with something I needed, because she cared about me. That’s just relationships work, a lot of the time. I couldn’t afford it. She could.

    And even if it does make me a whore, so what? I didn’t hurt anybody. I’m not gonna let anybody shame me for the choices I’ve made, least of all you, Tommy. You’re really not in position to moralize.

  57. …you don’t understand PUA is male sexual empowerment…

    Fuck that noise. PUA is snake oil at best. I’ve seen how it makes you act, and that shit ain’t empowerment.

  58. Men are already disempowered by the demisexuality of many women, and by generalized female hypergamy. Who needs ” it” (sex, relationship, attention) ‘more.’” *has the lesser bargaining position*.
    Before PUA, I was a beggar.
    And I know you want men socially, economically, and politically disempowered too.

  59. Mind you capitalism does that handily on its own.

  60. Men are already disempowered by the demisexuality of many women, and by generalized female hypergamy.

    Bullshit.

    Before PUA, I was a beggar.

    And now you’re a con man. Congrats?

  61. I think PUA is a stop-gap. To arrange the sex life of the average man with 4 lifetime partners (CDC) suits the men and women on top, and women, nature’s demisexuals, far too well. Although once unleashed women’s sexuality is formidable.

  62. Not really a con man, just a niche appeal. I dunno, do I have to do the self-cockblock by advertising invisible disabilities?
    Feeling good beats feeling bad.

  63. I didn’t say shit about advertizing anything. You belong to a cult that adheres to the doctrine of tricking women into having sex. It’s a scam that encourages you to scam others. It’s a fucking pyramid scheme.

  64. Either it is ineffective, and therefore harmless, except for a slight uptick in rejection of men by women.

    Or it is effective but harmful.

    Or it is effective and beneficial.

    My experience, which trumps all is that the 3rd is correct. Most PUAs No True Scotsman as aoon as you don’t follow their preferred scuola.

  65. ShadetheDruid

    Things can be ineffective and harmful, you know. Actually no, I woudn’t expect you to understand that level of complexity.

  66. Argenti Aertheri

    “Things can be ineffective and harmful, you know. Actually no, I woudn’t expect you to understand that level of complexity.”

    Maybe with a simple example?

    Broken microwaves are generally rather ineffective at actually making food hot, doesn’t mean they won’t be microwaving you while you attempt it.

    In any cause, Eurosabra’s experience “trumps all”, and most PUAs somehow go and No True Scotman if you don’t…some PUA lingo. Could you explain how PUAs No True Scotsman?

    Oh and follow the directions on the microwave, those aren’t just there because of Safety Girl (the illustrated Book of Learnin’ needs Safety Girl).

  67. Most PUAs deny what I do is PUA, because I refocus attention on the local art/history/literature or the excitement of the party/bar/club with banter. Hence No True Scotsman as soon as you reject their school of thought.

    Something that is ineffective is not necessarily innocuous, true.

    Fecking literalists.

  68. Argenti Aertheri

    You don’t adhere to PUA tenets, but don’t see how those tenets could be dangerous?

    Or you’re hoping to go with some “mild gaslighting” here? In any case, “demisexual women” — you they exist right? And your usage of the word seems, well, incorrect. (For starters, demisexuals =/= many)

  69. ShadetheDruid

    Argenti: I did start thinking about examples after I posted. I was going with a medical one, where you develop, say, a stomach ulcer, and instead of going to the doctor you decide to try out someone’s “home remedy” they made in their bathtub. It’s going to be pretty ineffective at the stated goal (curing the ulcer), and is likely to make it worse or even cause other issues.

    Microwaves work too though. :D

    In context, this applies to PUA: the started goal is to get sex. Now, it’s pretty shit at that goal (ineffective), but you’re still harrassing women (harmful).

  70. Has been effective for me.
    The cake (female sexuality) is a bit of a lie.
    It’s the velvet rope at the club, for straight male sexuality.
    Any romantic overture by an unattractive man is an aggression in feminist eyes.
    If he merely looks it is a microaggression LOL.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,806 other followers

%d bloggers like this: