Harassment as Activism: Men’s Rights Redditors Gleefully Dox a College Student, Face No Repercussions

No long post today. Instead, I urge you to go over to the AgainstMensRights subreddit to read about how several long time Men’s Rights Redditors have doxxed and harassed a college student, with one of the regulars gleefully setting forth a plan to stalk her and ruin her life and another seeming to suggest he might want to pay her a visit to “debate” her.

Some screenshots from the original Men’s Rights subreddit discussion:


AceyJuan -2 points 12 hours ago (4|6)  High school or University? If it's HS, then report everything to the administration on a weekly basis.  If it's University, then she's an adult and deserves what she gets. Here's what you do:      Gather several photos of her, her full name, and a good collection of her most hateful posts.     Post all of it to some lovely webpage that will rank highly on search results. Facebook or Google+ comes to mind. Be sure not to identify yourself as the author.     Let her own bile destroy her future careers. Unless she plans to become an academic feminist, then it might actually help her.     Stop engaging her online, except very short responses like "this is hate speech."     If you've the time, do the same for her most enthusiastic followers.     (Bonus) If you're still angry in 2 years, keep track of where she works and be sure to share her writings appropriately.

TracyMorganFreeman 1 point 7 hours ago (3|2) White men are 72% of all suicides, and have the highest occupational deathrate and second highest occupational injury rate after Hispanics. Either she doesn't know this, or thinks "deserving of help" isn't based on who is most hurt in a given arena, although it could be both. In any case, she appears to be in Connecticut. I don't live too far from CT, and would gladly debate her.

The thread (which remained up for many hours) has now been scrubbed by the Men’s Rights mods — I got these screenshots from u/Aceyjuan and u/TraceyMorganFreeman’s respective timelines —  but as of right now none of the doxxers have been banned from the subreddit, or from Reddit itself.

The “crimes” of the woman in question? According to her main stalker — who has apparently been harassing her for months — she’s tweeted comments like “white men are like the gum on the bottom of my shoe” and “Jared Leto looks like the kind if guy that gives you herpes.”

Yep. Apparently the second-worst evil misandrist comment she made was … a joke about Jared Leto. For these comments, apparently she deserves to have her life ruined.

Here’s the thing: If you don’t like someone’s comments online, you are certainly well within your rights to quote them and point out why you don’t like what they said. That’s kind of the point of this blog. But it’s one thing to point out these comments, and another thing entirely to track down their identity and stalk them in real life. It’s another thing to whip up a virtual mob against them.

Doxxing by Men’s Rights Activists isn’t an accident; it’s the inevitable result of the peculiar style of Men’s Rights Activism.

MRAs, you see, seem utterly incapable of engaging in any kind of activism that might actually benefit men in the real world in any concrete manner. What they as a group specialize in is demonizing women, and in the case of too many MRAS, nothing gets their activist juices flowing faster than the opportunity to attack an individual woman.

That’s why A Voice for Men “activists” put up “wanted” style posters featuring their favorite feminist villains of the day; it’s why they started Register-Her.com. That’s why a certain red-haired Canadian activist who yelled at some MRAs once at a protest now finds her image splashed everywhere online as a visual representation of an evil feminist. That’s why MRAs show up at protests with cameras and threaten to expose the women they film — even if they’ve done nothing more than stand there with a sign.

And that’s why they doxx.

The Men’s Rights movement isn’t a civil rights movement.  As it stands right now, it’s a union of abusers, and their enablers.

EDITED TO ADD: Lest anyone claim that the OP didn’t “really” dox the woman in question because he didn’t literally post all her personal details, he provided enough to allow anyone with even rudimentary Google skills to find out her real name and a great deal of other personal identifying information in less time than it would take to order a pizza online.



About David Futrelle

I run the blog We Hunted the Mammoth, which tracks (and mocks) online misogyny. My writing has appeared in a wide variety of places, including Salon, Time.com, the Washington Post, the New York Times Book Review and Money magazine. I like cats.

Posted on April 9, 2014, in a new woman to hate, a voice for men, antifeminism, doxing, evil women, harassment, men who should not ever be with women ever, misogyny, MRA, not-quite-explicit threats, reddit and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 238 Comments.

  1. I think a lot of the issue with communication between asexual and allosexual folks is society’s fixation with sex, and how it simultaneously idealizes and villainizes sex. People who have lots of sex are less pure, deviant, slutty, or objects of envy but at the same time don’t you know that sex can be the ultimate expression of love between people? And look at all these products meant to attract (sex) partners, don’t you want these? Better watch out though, you don’t want to catch any filthy STIs. But there’s definitely something wrong with you if people don’t want to have sex with you. Sex is the most peasurable experience there is! But don’t be a hedonist!

    It’s a constant tug-of-war between the two extremes and I think it’s ridiculous. I really don’t think that sex is as good or as bad as it is made out to be, and the media definitely amps up the sexuality that is shown, because that sells.

    Ace folks live in a culture that is saturated with sexuality and how important it should be and how people who don’t want to have sex are frigid, repressed, traumatized, etc.

    Allosexual folks, on the other hand, have to deal with the other prong of this bullshit, where they are told they can’t/shouldn’t have sex the way they choose because IT’S DIRTY.

    So when there is dialogue between the two, sometimes there’s misunderstandings, especially derived from media, wherein allosexuals come across as “You don’t want to have sex? Clearly there’s something wrong with you.” and asexuals come across as “Clearly nothing matters to you but having sex, it doesn’t even matter who they are!” When neither of these generalizations are right, and sometimes not even intended to come across that way.

  2. ::applauds::

    So true.

  3. With one single solitary exception, every guy I’ve dated has been a guitar player or a DJ.:/ I guess that’s why I’m still single?

  4. @catalpa

    Even if the difference only comes in how the individual decides to define themselves, if that makes any sense?

    I… think. Or at least I hope I have understood you. But I also think therein lies the problem. Basically, I feel it’s a bit of “overlabeling”. As you say, sexuality can be pretty fluid, and in any case, observing several people, will pretty much always be a gradual thing. But I kinda draw the opposite conclusion: Given that fact, do we need a label for every little bit of variance? Especially as such labels pretty much always imply a variance from “the standard” – what you call allosexuals, in this case. Personally, I think the variance between what you define as allosexuals and demisexuals is not that great to warrant own labels; certainly not when compared to the variances between hetero-, homo-, bi- and asexuals (hetero- via bi- to homosexuality might also be a gradual spectrum, but one with a great enough width to have those categories). I suppose our difference is how we look at these labels: You say they can be pretty helpful on a personal level, which sounds to me like a subjective approach. For me the question is rather how much use in observation and categorization they have, so a more descriptive approach.

    For me personally at least, I think the difference comes in that allosexual people can generally conceptualize there being people who they would like to have sex with, wherein demisexuals have no concept of someone they would be sexually attracted to until they in fact do bond with someone. This idea might be erroneous, though, because I am neither allosexual or demisexual and I can’t really speak from experience about their outlooks.

    Hm. This is an interesting question. There are women where my first mental reaction to seeing them is “She’s hot/cute”. But that doesn’t mean I’d imagine sexual acts involving me and such strangers (while there are some people who totally do this). Does this count as sexual attraction? If you really define it as “would imagine having sex with that person” vs “would not imagine such a thing”, then I suppose your distinction makes sense, but I still think that’s a very narrow difference. After all, it does not mean the ‘demisexual’ could not have sexual thoughts unrelated to any emotional bonds – sexual thoughts not focused on any specific person, or not even involving oneself, are a thing, after all.

    Ah, damn. That does sound bad. Good to hear that at least now things are better for you, especially love-wise. Yeah, okay, what you say makes sense. But it also kinda fits to what Kitteh says about pigeon-holing; in this case pigeon-holing gay men. I can see where simply choosing another pigeon hole can in fact be a helpful personal strategy. But that says nothing about the validity of those pigeon holes; not how much sense they make as observational categories. As I’ve said above, in discussing those terms I guess it depends on what you stress more.

  5. Is it just me, or does anyone else expect to hear allosexual in a really bad fake French accent?

    I think that’s an alloallosexual.

  6. Octo- I think that because sexuality is such a complicated and fluid thing, descriptive labels will always tend to fall short of the mark, and attempts to make them specific enough to apply to everyone’s interests will indeed lead to what you consider overlabelling.

    My opinion on such things is: If someone finds a label that they identify with, that makes them feel more comfortable in their own skin, then all the power to them. If someone doesn’t feel the need to label themselves anything specific, that’s fine too. If two people with functionally identical sexualities decide on different labels for themselves, that’s up to them.

    And I believe, when it comes down to labelling what sexualities other people have, you really don’t need to know it unless you’d like to be sexually involved with them, in which case you should ask if they are interested in doing that with you. Choosing a label for yourself and having one arbitrarily applied to you are two very different things, and I don’t think many people appreciate the latter.

    But that’s just my two cents. *shrugs*

  7. Basically, I feel it’s a bit of “overlabeling”. As you say, sexuality can be pretty fluid, and in any case, observing several people, will pretty much always be a gradual thing. But I kinda draw the opposite conclusion: Given that fact, do we need a label for every little bit of variance?

    I think it’s a matter of “some do need it” and “some don’t”. It is fairly common for people to feel like they can’t get a mental handle on something unless they can name it. So putting a label on something that they’ve felt weird about and could never name can feel liberating. And sharing that label with others can make you feel less alone.

  8. I think that’s an alloallosexual.


  9. This kind of shit makes me sick, and it scares the shit out of me on behalf of all feminist women (feminist men seldom have to worry about this kind of treatment, which only goes to prove that misogyny is the core of the MRM). It makes me sad, too, because as a man, I truly wish that there were a real sort of “men’s liberation” movement that sought to free men of the prescribed gender roles that continue to cage us — but this “men’s movement” (which is anything but) only seeks to perpetuate those gender roles while making sure that women are treated as much as possible as non-human, just things to be used as adjuncts to men’s lives.


  10. Hey! That’s not fair. My animals never try to enforce gender roles.

  11. New Pierre! All the squees!

  12. Hey! That’s not fair. My animals never try to enforce gender roles.

    They haven’t time. It’s a full-time job enforcing species roles.

  13. RE: Kittehs

    LBT – cripes, that sounds a traumatic way to fall in love.

    Well, let’s face it, I was not really in a condition to be falling in love in the first place. I was the exact opposite of thrilled. (And I still find the calmer, steadier love we have now to be much more pleasant! Seriously, fuck the butterflies.)

    oh gross, is there ANY term that can’t get made homophobic? D:


  14. For me (sorry, late response) I’m sometimes… not happy about being asexual. Probably because I think I’m aromantic as well, as it’s very rigid in both cases, there’s nothing fluid about it. So sometimes it makes me very depressed and and I feel like I have nothing to live for because I’ll never be sexually attracted to someone or want to date or fall in love, you know?

    And I have to remind myself a lot that those are just things society tells me I’m SUPPOSED to want and that society has very narrow views about what humans are, want, and need. Still, I do often feel like I’m missing out on really important things in life, especially as my friends are mostly all married or in relationships (recently my best friend found like the PERFECT guy for her). And it’s not like someone who can’t get a date or sex, right now I have several guys pursuing me and I’m going out on a date with one of them next week to TRY and see if anything clicks romantically, but I don’t have high hopes. My friend who recently found the perfect guy has been encouraging me, that was the first time in her almost 21 years of life she’s felt romantically attracted to someone so maybe I just haven’t clicked with anyone yet but I do feel as though I really am aromantic even though I want her to be right.

  15. @Kim & @Kittehserf

    Haha, fair enough! While this kind of obsessive, horrific persecution of feminist women just angers me so much (not to mention how much it depresses me), I should be more sensitive to speciesism! I just have a hard time viewing them as human, as they’re utterly inhumane, but calling them “boys” is unfair to young males who haven’t had a chance to mature yet. Maybe man-boyz to show that they’ve had that chance and chose not to?

  16. Lids: A good thought experiment might simply be to ask yourself what you feel you want out of a relationship or a family, if you had one. It might be that your ideal relationship is really just having a friendly room-mate, or caring for a foster child.

  17. A life without a romantic partner isn’t necessarily empty, and plenty of people choose alternate family arrangements for themselves, Lids, not to be nosy, but where do you live? If you’re currently in a not so progressive area that might be adding pressure to hop on the dating/marriage/buy a house/have kids train that might potentially be minimized a bit by living in an area where there’s less pressure to follow that life model. Like leftwingfox said, what do you want? What would be your ideal living situation?

  18. Balarick – LOL I’m thinking of the Furrinati enforcing their dominance over mere humans. Not that they have much trouble doing that, it comes nat’ral.

    Lids – seconding cassandra, lack of romantic partner (especially when you’re not romantically or sexually drawn to people anyway) doesn’t equal emptiness. It’s almost fish needing bicycle stuff.

    Also, going on a date to try to see if anything clicks romantically sounds like a really bad idea to me. It sounds like trying to force feelings or attraction to exist, or talk yourself into it. Can’t the date just be dinner/whatever with a friend, and enjoyed for its own sake, and if you should develop feelings for someone, let that happen in its own time? Pushing yourself to want someone, or to want to want someone (that’s not a typo) because you’re lonely or because it’s painted as THE way to live sounds like a recipe for unhappiness, at the very least.

  19. Forgot to add: my whole life is without a romantic partner by most people’s standards, and a lot of it had underlying loneliness before I was in contact with Mr K, but it wasn’t empty. Even if one has a romantic partner, that’s no cure for emptiness: look at all the unhappy relationships around, and partnered but unfulfilled people. Don’t fall for the propaganda!

  20. I know, I just feel like I am missing out on something important. I know I can’t change my sexual and romantic orientations, but it doesn’t mean I don’t want to. And honestly, I don’t feel pressured to date, no one is pressuring me to date at all. I guess I just feel like I’m going to be left behind because the people I’m closest to are married and dating and it makes them happy. Like today, I spent today with my two best friends for one of their birthdays. One of them is married and brought their husband, and the other is dating a guy that is their ideal in like every way. And they were cuddling and having private conversations and I guess I feel like a 3rd wheel in those situations. Even though I did have some fun I felt like maybe it didn’t matter that I was there because I was just sort of a background object. And I know my friends weren’t ignoring me, I just feel like the person outside the sphere.

  21. Yeah, been there a lot with the third wheel. Most of my friends (back in the day when I had a meatspace social circle) were partnered at one stage or another. Feeling outside the sphere is just how I felt most of the time.

  22. I think my main issues are a) I feel like I’m missing out and, b) I feel like I can’t really relate to other people because romance and sex are such big parts of people’s lives and I don’t actually desire those things. They just make me uncomfortable and awkward. Whenever I date, even when I think I’m interested in someone, I end up feeling like awkward because I’m supposed to be kissing this person and a deeper inspection of my feelings tells me I just see them as a friend (though, to be fair, I just don’t like kissing – i hate touching other peoples’ faces and I hate how squishy lips are ughghghg).

    And I mean I’m trying to figure out how to deal with the situation with the guy. He’s legitimately nice, and he seems legitimately interested in me but I know that if I go out on a date with him it won’t be any more than an experiment to see if it’s possible for me to click with someone. He’s cute, he’s nice, he thinks I’m pretty and wants to cook dinner for me. But I find him kind of boring, like he’s nice but I couldn’t see myself even trying if I was pursuing him as a friend because he bores me. Our conversations are stilted (though part of it is the language barrier, he’s still learning English) and I don’t know.

  23. To clarify, just in case there are lurking Nice Guys, I don’t find him boring because he’s nice, he’s just boring. Our conversations are boring to me.

  24. I think someone asked this upthread, but are you in a big/small sort of town? What sort of social possibilities do you have? Any interest groups or the like, places where the focus isn’t on ROMAAAANCE but just on sharing interests? Or (one can dream) any contact groups for asexual people? That would be something, to have contact with people where it was understood that sex wasn’t part of the equation.

  25. cassandrakitty

    There’s a reason why I asked that! In the Bay Area, where I live now, and in London, where I used to live, it’s easy to find people who aren’t at all focused on marriage as an end goal, and even when people are dating it’s usually not the focal point of their lives (except maybe in the super obnoxious early stages that most romances go through), and it’s pretty easy to meet people who you can bond with via other stuff that takes up a lot of their time, and that they leave their partners behind to do something else when they’re doing. Whereas where, say, most of my family lives, you don’t see people over say 30 or so hanging out in groups that don’t seem to have a romantic focus or just kind of doing their own thing solo as much.

    TL;DR – I just feel like more cosmopolitan areas might be a better fit for people who aren’t planning to focus their lives on their romantic relationships, because it’ll be easier to find other people who’re similar, and even if all your friends are partnered they’re unlikely to treat you like a weirdo because you’re not.

  26. ::nods::


  27. I don’t live in a small town, no. The area I live in is medium sized I guess? Not a cosmopolitan area by any means though.

    I’ve not met any other asexual people, I mean I’ve talked to a few online via ace groups on facebook, but really I don’t talk to them outside the groups.

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


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 17,152 other followers

%d bloggers like this: