GirlWritesWhat on “The Necessity of Domestic Violence”: “I don’t really find too much [that's] seriously ethically questionable.”
Yesterday, we took a look at Ferdinand Bardamu’s manosphere manifesto “The Necessity of Domestic Violence,” a thoroughly despicable piece of writing that concludes:
Women should be terrorized by their men; it’s the only thing that makes them behave better than chimps.
I decided to take a look at Bardamu’s post yesterday after running across a discussion of it in Reddit’s new FeMRA subreddit, a forum ostensibly devoted to what “women can do to advance men’s rights as women.” It’s a strange little subreddit, started by a man and dominated by some of Reddit’s most unsavory MaleMRAs, some of them banned in the regular Men’s Rights subreddit.
Recently one of the most unsavory of the bunch, calling himself JeremiahGuy this time, posted a link to Bardamu’s domestic violence manifesto, which he hosts on his website. Jeremiah naturally used the discussion as an excuse to post more apologias for domestic “discipline” along the lines of the quote from him I featured yesterday.
But I was a little surprised to see GirlWritesWhat, the blabby FeMRA video blogger who’s captured the hearts of Reddit’s Men’s Rights crowd, step into the conversation with something of a defense of Bardamu’s noxious views. After reading Bardamu’s manifesto – the one advocating that men “terrorize” their women to make them behave – GWW blithely concluded:
I don’t really find too much in the article that strikes me as seriously ethically questionable.
Have I taken that remark out of context? Yes. In context, it’s worse. Here’s the entire quote from her, and a further clarification of her position.
She wasn’t the only one in the discussion to get upvotes for suggesting that men slapping women around from time to time isn’t really such a big deal. MaunaLoona (a MaleMRA) wrote:
Lots of MRAs like to pretend that they care about male victims of domestic violence. But the Men’s Rights movement hasn’t done shit for them. And here, I think, is why: too many MRAs are less interested in helping male victims of domestic violence than they are in providing excuses and justifications for male abusers.
Like this:
Posted on August 16, 2012, in antifeminism, antifeminst women, domestic violence, FemRAs, men who should not ever be with women ever, misogyny, MRA, patriarchy, reactionary bullshit, reddit and tagged alpha males, antifeminism, creepy, domestic violence, feminism, men's rights, misogyny, MRA, patriarchy. Bookmark the permalink. 662 Comments.
Andre: “I know you are, but what am I? Nyah.”
Jesus, kid, crawl back to your hole to wank over GWW far away from us.
Talking about courageous women, I was just at an awards ceremony that honored (among others) a woman who went to jail for refusing to testify for the prosecution in the conspiracy trial of a number of (male) anti-Vietnam War activists. Someone asked her how she had the courage to do that, and she looked kind of baffled. “Well, how could you go along with something that violated all of your most deeply held principles?” Very cool lady.
Cloudiah, very cool. See, Andre, THAT’S courage, not some chick begging for MRM scraps because she’s so different from those other women.
(Reminds self to look cloudiah up next time I’m in LA.)
@Cassandra. This thread is about GWW’s response to a opinion piece, and the clarification of her position in response to questions. The characterisation of her by David Futrelle is dishonest. That’s why I jumped in on his blog. No doubt he will get applause for his dishonesty. He’s dishonest because he’s a spineless coward playing to an audience of spineless cowards. I think he knows he’s being dishonest. In fact, I’m certain of it.
@claudiah. You are a mixed up person. I’m glad you admire courageous women. The greatest courage is to kick against orthodoxy without considering the cost. That doesn’t mean that kicking against orthodoxy is itself heroic. Any fool can contest anything. I don’t think GWW is like this. She’s an interesting woman. She doesn’t make random assertions - she constructs clear arguments. Like everyone she seeks explanations that make sense in the light of her own experience. It doesn’t have to be about sex. Not everything is about sex. Did the woman that you spoke about refuse to testify because she had penises on her mind? It’s not impossible, but there are other possibilities. On grounds of plausibility, my assertion that this blog is a mutual masturbation society has a more substantial basis in evidence than the other sexual innuendos that have been fired off. If you were as courageous as the woman you claim to admire you would admit it. I dare you to say it because it is true. However, I think you don’t have her courage. 99.9% of people don’t, so you have no need to feel ashamed.
GWW isn’t cut-and-paste and she doesn’t make unsupported claims?
Reminds me of that time she cut-and-pasted a whole section of some misogynistic blog post making the completely unsupported claim that women used to own men as beasts of burden:
http://owningyourshit.blogspot.com/2012/03/transcript-of-fempocalypse.html
She doesn’t link to it, not even in the description of her youtube video, probably because she knows any fool can see how misogynistic it is:
http://no-maam.blogspot.com/2008/02/questionators-should-women-have-right.html
Oh Andre, “no matter the cost?” Really? My example of a courageous person went to jail without any hesitation to defend free speech and freedom of association. Your example got mocked on a blog.
No contest.
But by all means, keep digging.
Well, when blogging is all you’ve ever done in terms of activism/social justice work I guess being mocked on a blog would seem like a high cost to you.
There is a contest, but you would need to think outside your box. Everything you need to know you already know. You merely need to know it better. Lol, you and Cassandra make a good tag team.
*blink blink* What the fuck does this even mean? What contest are you talking about? Have you never heard the phrase “no contest” before and think that it’s a literal thing?
It’s like you’re trying to communicate. Bleat once for yes, twice for no, okay?
This is a mutual masturbation society. Join the tag team, Nepenthe.
How can it be a mutual masturbation society if I’m alone and wearing pants? I signed up for wanking people! Let’s get this party started!
*checks url* *blushes*
Huh, wrong tab… carry on all!
I’m in a box? [cloudiah puts on unitard and face paint and starts miming being trapped inside a box.]
And I got your contest right here (“I’m loaded with rocket fuel!”):
Wait, maybe that song IS about mutual masturbation!
Andre, seriously, try speaking in something other than cliches and catchphrases.
Okay, Cassandra, your turn. XD
Sorry, the contact high I was getting from Andre made me hungry and I wandered off to get some mochi.
(I’m being generous and assuming “stoned” rather than “imbecile”.)
Gasp … does this mean you’re Schrodinger’s Cat? :O
She’s Schrodinger’s Feminist. She could be out to kill all men, or she could be harmless. No way to know until Andre figures out how to open the box.
Open the box, Andre, I dare you.
[cloudiah tags Nepenthe]
I must, must put a Pratchett quote here now. It would be criminal not to.
Greebo had spent an irritating two minutes in that box. Technically, a cat locked in a box may be alive or it may be dead. You never know until you look. In fact, the mere act of opening the box will determine the state of the cat, although in this case there were three determinate states the cat could be in: these being Alive, Dead, and Bloody Furious.
Shawn dived sideways as Greebo went off like a Claymore mine.
“Don’t worry about him,” said Magrat dreamily, as the elf flailed at the maddened cat. “He’s just a big softy.”
*throws fruit at cloudiah* Sorry, it’s an automatic reaction to mimes. One thing that Vetinari got completely right. If I hit you, consider it a tag.
Also, not only is it that song about mutual masturbation, it’s about public mutual masturbation. Everything really is about sex. Dirty, crazy sex too.
Andre: A troll is a person who hides beside a persona – a caricature. GWW is not that. Such people are a rarity. All that caricatures can see are other caricatures. They hope that everyone is the same as them, but that is not the case.
A troll is a person who writes to cause drama. As to the “doesn’t trivialise anything”. She says she doesn’t see anything ethically questionable in abusing your partners.
That’s a bit trivialising.
Nota bene; it’s hide behind, not hide beside.
p.s. Why the return to a dead thread? Is there some need to get the last word in? Do you think you can make it seem you had an argument so telling no one would be able to respond; in the theory no one would notice?
p.p.s. If you want to convince us you are fond of originality, and a bastion of original thought, stretch yourself and take the effort needed to not repeat the same; banal, attempt at cutting retort.
Andre: I think he knows he’s being dishonest. In fact, I’m certain of it.
Based on what? Your personal knowldege of him? Or your opinion that GWW is some sort of paragon; ergo anyone who disagrees with her is either stupid or dishonest?
There is a contest, but you would need to think outside your box. Everything you need to know you already know. You merely need to know it better. Lol, you and Cassandra make a good tag team.
So… this is your idea of what, “A well constructed argument?”.
I was wrong, you’d do better sticking to the cut and paste. That at least would make it seem you were (perhaps) engaging in bored disdain.
As it is, all I can conclude is you think complicated verbiage = complex thought. That, actually, might explain the reason you have such a little bundle of “intellectual” lust for GWW.
Please, oh wise Andre, explain to me how I may become more enlightened. Long hours have I spent dreaming of cock, ere I set such thoughts aside for more pressing business, and thought I had understood how cock was not all there was to life. But now I learn that even in mocking misogyny, I show myself enthralled by sex.
How may I be free? Use small words and speak plain, for I am unskilled with metaphor.
So, Andre, “neg”ing Cassandrasays , how’s that Game going for yuh?
PS What does your hat look like? So we can get the full picture?
@Nepenthe. “How can it be a mutual masturbation society if I’m alone and wearing pants? I signed up for wanking people! Let’s get this party started!”
Just for a moment I thought you were going to start something wholesome there, and then you went and spoilt it all. Sad. I would have left you to party with your friends whichever way. Be nice to each other. Bye.
Sorry* to disappoint Andre. I can’t speak for anyone else here, but the only thing “wholesome” *snort* about me is my breakfast cereal.
*Not actually sorry.
Wholesome now means giving something to Andre to wank over, does it?
Look Andre, there are plenty of places on the net featuring people wanking for your voyeuristic pleasure. This is not one of them.
And yes, we totally understand how smug and superior you feel compared to the regulars here. Can you move on to another topic please?
Andre: You are going on about wholesome? Let me refresh your memory about the OP.
“I also think it would be good for women to take boxing or karate or some other form of training… it would demonstrate that being hit isn’t going to break them into little pieces.”
That’s the woman you are crushing on saying women need to train up, so they can take the beatings men hand out with equanimity.
That’s what you call wholesome.
That was after she said, I don’t really find too much in the article that strikes me as seriously ethically questionable.
in response to
Women should be terrorized by their men; it’s the only thing that makes them behave better than chimps.
That’s what you call wholesome.
That’s what you praise; as you denigrate people having fun together as “not wholesome”.
Your value system… is fucked up.
Wait, is he Pell or not? I want to know if I should be updating the biography as I read back.
It lacks the arrogance of Pell, IMO. Also, he’s not made any stupid claims about medicine/psychology.
So I’d hold off.
Do we know GWW’s actual first name? I feel like there’s a parody of “Pictures of Lily” to be written here, but I don’t want to have to keep working “girlwriteswhat” into it.
In all the Pell sightings I’ve been here for, he couldn’t seem to resist tearing of the mask once there was serious suspicion that it was him. If it is Pell, this “who, me?” act seems like a new trick.