Search Results for johntheother
JohnTheOther is sick of the term “mangina,” for all the wrong reasons.
Subtle political satire, MRA-style, from Artistry Against Misandry
Over on A Voice for Men, our old friend JohnTheLiarOther has decided he has a problem with calling men the MRAs’ favorite made-up word: “mangina.”
Why? Because the term is misogynistic, assuming that the worst insult you can deliver a man is to associate him with a woman’s vagina?
Oh no. His problem is that, while mangina “is appropriately insulting, it lacks explanatory power.”
Apparently, instead of using one word, JtO would prefer to use lots and lots of words. Some of them over and over. In his post, he launches into a sarcastic attack against “manginas” and “white knights.”
This slave, this coward, this supplicant seeking approval – he is the good man, and to prove it he will scourge every other man; every other man, who is not, like him, demonstrating that he is one of the good men; on his knees, or already busy attacking other men who don’t yet know they should live in a state of ongoing apology for existing. …
A man, surrendering reason, morality, surrendering the right to an identity as a human being, in favor of the consensus identity afforded to him by the group, based on his utility, his conformance, or his affectations of supplication to the preferred members of the group, such as women.
Posters getting torn down: A crime against humanity? (Includes video footage of JohnTheOther’s epic confrontation with alleged box-cutter wielding gang.)
Farting kittens: The real oppressors?
So I’ve been mostly avoiding writing about the whole Men’s Rights postering controversy in Vancouver, because it’s such a tempest in a teapot. The tl;dr: Some posters got torn down, and some of the people tearing them down yelled at the blabby MRA videoblogger and A Voice for Men second fiddle known as JohnTheOther.
MRAs: Given that virtually none of you have any experience as actual real world activists, you may not be aware of this, but POSTERS GET TORN DOWN. It’s annoying, and I don’t support it myself, but it happens all the time. Sometimes, you may actually run across people tearing down your posters, at which point there is usually some sort of awkward confrontation that may include yelling.
You know what you do when this happens? You put your posters up again. You know what you don’t do? Compare the experience to rape. Because, on the list of the grand injustices of the world, having posters torn down is pretty far down the list, somewhere around “stubbing your toe” and “kitten farts on you.”
JohnTheOther: the Aurora heroes aren’t heroes. KEYWORDS: calculus of death, vagina, drug addled slut
Children: Not worth saving, apparently.
JohnTheOther, blabby videoblogger and Number Two at A Voice for Men, has now weighed in with his own, slightly tardy, manifesto on the Aurora shooting and the evils of supposed male “disposability.” I didn’t read the whole thing – seriously, dude, OMIT NEEDLESS WORDS – but a few things stood out when I skimmed it. For example, this lovely passage, which seems to be a longer and fouler version of that ill-advised tweet from the Wall Street Journal’s James Taranto that I mentioned in my last post.
Our mainstream, which is to say, our corporate media – that which bends and fawns for access to the corrupt elected officials and modern robber barons of corporate statehood – is telling you, young man, that in order to be worthwhile, a real man, you’d better be prepared to die without complaint for the child, or the little old lady, or the drug addled slut in the next seat.
But Mr. TheOther is having none of it:
The instinct – expressing itself variously as chivalry or as fatal self sacrifice — is just one more that no longer has any discernable benefit. It is an encumbrance to any real pursuit of a civilized society in which one class of humans is not legally and socially elevated over another.
Sorry, kids; sorry, old ladies; sorry “drug addled sluts” — you’re on your own. Apparently, in a truly civilized society, no one ever looks out for anyone else. Altruism is for barbarians and Bill Bennett!
Here’s JtO’s stirring conclusion:
Those three men are not heroes, they’re just dead. The calculus of death, where one life is traded in celebration for another by preference of a vagina, is pathological and regressive. It must be recognized as the sickness it is. Those who lionized these men, whose fatal and unexamined instinct led to self-destruction; those who held them up as a heroic example to follow, are cordially invited to go first — or to go fuck themselves.
Charming as always, Mr. TheOther.
In the discussion of Mr. TheOther’s post in the Men’s Rights Subreddit, AVFM’s Paul Elam expands on the whole they aren’t heroes” theme, arguing that we need to retroactively strip away the hero status of the three men who died protecting their girlfriends — because they died protecting women.
JohnTheOther channels Hugo Schwyzer in this disquisition on pseudo-mystical spooge
Sorry to return so quickly to the fetid mind of MRA blabologist JohnTheOther, but, well, you’ll see why I have.
Here is Mr. TheOther in AskReddit, responding to the question “Women of Reddit, how do you feel about cumshots?” (No, he is not strictly speaking a “woman of Reddit,” not like that’s going to stop him.) Enjoy the irony of the A Voice for Men second banana rehashing, apparently with utter sincerity, an argument once set forth, rather infamously, by a feminist fellow named Hugo Schwyzer. And enjoy the also-very-special response from fellow MRA SuicideBanana, whom we met earlier in the week.
I know Mr. TheOther is concerned about people “quote mining” comments, and presenting them out of context, but in this case, there is no further context. His comment, which I have presented unedited in screenshot form, isn’t in response to any other comment; it’s simply an answer to the question I alluded to above. Mr. TheOther does respond to SuicideBanana’s remarks about him being an advocate and facilitator of violence, as you can see if you clicky click here, but sheds no more light on the issue of porno cumshots as a “pseudo-mystical representation of the sexuality of the viewer.”
MRAs to women: You make us hate you! (Also, don’t call JohnTheOther a neckbeard. He’s clean-shaven!)
Racists – victim blamers extraordinaire — like to pretend that their racism isn’t their fault, that they’ve been driven to their racism by the bad behavior of some members of the group they’re bigoted against. Do a search for the phrase “I don’t hate blacks, but” and you will find thousands of examples of this “logic” at its crudest. “I don’t think blacks are ignorant just the NIGGERS,” one YouTube commenter writes, encapsulating the racist “logic” in a phrase.
Misogynists are fond of making similar “arguments” about women. As one commenter on the Scott Adams blog puts it:
I don’t hate women, but I have a pretty low opinion of women overall. I think they have poor priorities, they have poor analytical skills, they tend to be disorganized, they tend to be impulsive, and they think the world revolves around their feelings. I don’t think all women are like that, but it’s the impression I have of the gender in general, and I don’t like those traits.
Naturally, variations of this general argument (such as it is) abound in the “manosphere.” “Misogynists are not born they are made,” writes MRA/MGTOW elder and proud misogynist ZenPriest in an oft-cited rant titled “Hate Bounces.”
“Once, a long time ago when the world was young, I loved women with all my heart and soul,”ZenPriest (also known as Zed) writes. But then along came feminism, which ruined women so thoroughly that poor ZenPriest found himself more or less forced to become a woman-hater:
I began to see women as vicious creatures whose only agenda when it came to me, or any man, was to see how much they could get from the man - then when he had nothing left to give because they had taken it all, toss him out with yesterday’s garbage. In short - as nothing but users. …
I took to avoiding women, particularly groups of them, because I could never sit quietly and put up with the bashing and would always challenge it, which ended me up in a lot of fights and added greatly the count of times that I got called “misogynist.”
Gosh, why would anyone who “see[s] women as vicious creatures” get called a misogynist?
[A]fter 3 decades of listening to it, and hating it, and trying to keep the animosity which had been building in me over it … I caved in and began to really hate women. …
I will not allow most women in my house unless I have known her a long time and she is old enough to have escaped being infected with the plague of man hating or is escorted by someone I trust, nor will I enter theirs except on the same conditions. If I pass a woman stranded on the road, I will not stop to help her because it is as likely as not that she will be afraid of me. …
I changed from a man who loved women and thought they were just about the greatest thing in the world, to a man who can’t stand them, or anything about them.
And of course it is all the fault of women and their alleged incessant man-hatery:
Man bashing and man hating harms women, because it makes men hate them back - eventually. A puppy returns love for love, but if you beat it will eventually turn mean and will one day turn on you when you raise your fist or your stick (or the club of words) to hit it. Men are no different.
As this last bit makes clear, this “she made me do it” logic is the very same logic used by abusers to justify their abuse.
Now our old friend JohnTheOther has offered a similar blame-the-ladies explanation as to why he’s developed what he calls an “indifference to female opinion.” In his telling, the straw that broke the camel’s back was some unnamed feminist who had the temerity to use the word “neckbeard” in an internet posting.
The culture of easy, casual insult by women against average men, creeps, neckbeards, mother’s-basement-dweller and so on, has a effect which might not be recognized by women. Guys generally don’t need to be told they’re held in contempt as a group, our wider culture makes this sparklingly clear. However, individual instances of circumstantial ad-hom have the very real effect of making men not care about women’s opinions.
Yeah, that’s why these guys don’t give a shit about what women say.
Naturally, Mr. TheOther feels the need to tell us that 1) he doesn’t have a neckbeard and 2) he has a (presumably human) girlfriend.
Am I a neck-beard? No, I’m clean shaven, Im not an online gamer, I have a girlfriend, a career, I dress well et-cetera. But whenever I see some casual, throw away comment like creeper, neck-beard or other minor belittling insult used to describe average men, it cements my not giving a shit about the opinions of women.
After being criticized for his blatant misogyny by a commenter in the Men’s Rights subreddit (virtually the only MRA site online where misogyny is ever called out), Mr. TheOther altered that final bit to read “it cements my not giving a shit about the opinions offered.” He evidently thinks that changing the wording of this one sentence, and complaining about “quote-mining” will convince readers that the misogynistic argument set forth in detail in the rest of the post somehow isn’t misogyny. (And, on the Men’s Rights subreddit, that ploy seems to have worked.)
Naturally, like so many misogynists, Mr. TheOther insists he’s really not a woman-hater:
I don’t hate women, I don’t believe in any “back to the kitchen” nonsense, or any other female-targeted belittlement. What I’m talking about is my personal attitude towards women’s opinions, their utterances, their writing, their thoughts, their contribution to society. If you are a woman reading this, that means your thoughts, ideas, speech, writing and so on.
Well, that clears it up. You don’t hate women; you just don’t give a shit what women think or say or do. Obviously there’s no bigotry in that!
Utterly dismissing “female opinion” because some woman called you a neckbeard: Men’s Rights activism at its finest!
JohntheOther: I totally didn’t lie about Rebecca Watson, Take Two
Totally not a liar. Whatever is coming out of his mouth here, it most definitely is not a bunch of lying lies.
Hey, you remember that thing the other day, when A Voice for Men’s second banana JohntheOther said some awful things about evil feminist atheist Rebecca Watson because she made a joke at a conference and he didn’t realize it was a joke?
And then he said he didn’t realize it was a joke, even though she explicitly revealed it was a joke in the video of hers he said he watched ? And so then he tried to pretend explain that he hadn’t watched the whole video, even though he had clearly downloaded the whole thing and incorporated parts of it in his video?
Well, now it turns out that some of the parts of her video he used in his video, well, they included the bit where she revealed the joke. Only – OOPS! – John just happened to edit that part out.
Unsophisticated folks might conclude from this that JohntheOther is a lying liar who lies about his lies. And that maybe he should henceforth be known as JohntheLiar.
But no. Apparently, as JoththetotallynotaLiar explains in a new video, he was just so, so convinced that Rebecca was a mean evil sociopath that he just didn’t realize what she was saying! He basically thought she was babbling nonsense, making a complete non-sequitur, so he cut it out of his video.
I mean, a feminist making a joke? Instead of being a mean evil sociopath? Beep Boop does not compute! His complete inability to understand the words that were coming out of her mouth? That was just good old confirmation bias at work, he explains in the video.That’s his actual explanation: he’s not a liar, just someone — to phrase it a bit more bluntly than he is willing to — who is so blinded by his own ideology that he cannot tell that a joke is a joke, even when someone announces that it is a joke.
He goes on to explain that it would be “illogical” to conclude that he is a liar because, come on, who would lie so blatantly, knowing that they would be caught?
And then he eats a baby.
Oops! My bad! I watched the video again, and it turns out he does not in fact eat a baby. Instead, at this point in the video, he apologizes to Watson for calling her a sociopath. I blame confirmation bias for causing me to misinterpret the video at this point. The apology seemed like a total non-sequitur to me, so naturally I saw it as him eating a baby.
In reality, what happens is that he apologizes to Watson, and then he eats a baby.
Here’s the video.
Oops! Mea culpa! Here’s the video, for reals:
EDITED TO ADD: It turns out that after eating the baby apologizing to Watson for calling her a sociopath in the video, John told one of the commenters that he still thinks she’s a sociopath. So his apology wasn’t really much of an apology after all, was it? It wasn’t even a “sorry if you were offended” fauxpology. Since he was apologizing for saying something that he still believes and that he went on to repeat, it’s really more of a liepology.
Brother JohntheOther Mansplains it All For You: Rebecca Watson misrepresentation edition.
Blabbity blabbity blab.
Check out this post from PZ Myers, tearing apart a sleazy JohntheOther video about Rebecca Watson. In the video, JtO, the number two man at A Voice for Men, declared Watson a sociopath for allegedly mistreating a “handler” assigned to her at a Skepticon convention.
Trouble is, Watson’s “mistreatment” never actually happened, and her public recounting of her (wholly imaginary) selfish behavior was part of a good-natured prank, with the humor directed not at her handler but at herself and the conference organizer. The handler was of course in on the joke. It would seem that JtO either misunderstood the joke, or simply decided to misrepresent what happened in order to make Watson look like a sociopath.
Are there any truly honest MRAs out there? At this point I cannot think of a single one.
JtO, evidently stung by the criticism, has made the video in question private. And he’s made another video responding to the criticism from Myers, Watson, and the handler from the convention itself.
In the video, he offers his own explanation for why he missed the obvious fact that Watson was making a joke: he claims he didn’t actually watch enough of the original Rebecca Watson video to get to the punchline of her joke before making his diagnoses of her. That might seem to reflect poorly on JtO’s research skills. But he’s not overly troubled by this, evidently. “My bad,” he says, cheerfully.
But he still thinks she’s a sociopath, and argues that the criticism he’s gotten doesn’t stem from his complete misrepresentation of Watson’s joke, but because he’s “struck a nerve.” Then he babbles on about various other crap including Jessica Valenti and weapons of mass destruction and, well, I wasn’t really paying much attention at that point. He ends by calling PZ Myers “Sunshine.”
Here’s that video. I watched the whole fucking 11 minutes and 11 seconds of it. I wouldn’t really recommend that to anyone. You only have to watch about 11 seconds of it to conclude, correctly, that JtO is an ass.
Why is the Secular Coalition for America giving Justin Vacula — online bully, A Voice for Men contributor — a leadership position? [UPDATE: He's resigned.]
NOTE: Just one more day of the Man Boobz Pledge Week! Big thanks to everyone who has donated!
If you haven’t yet, and want to, here’s the button you’re looking for:
UPDATE: Vacula has resigned.
As most of you are no doubt aware, the atheist and skeptic movements have had just a teensy bit of a problem with misogyny in their ranks. You may recall the unholy shitstorm that erupted last year when Rebecca Watson of Skepchick casually mentioned in a YouTube video that it might not be such a good idea for dudes to try to hit on women in elevators at 4 AM. The assholes of the internet still haven’t forgiven Watson for her assault on the sacred right of creepy dudes to creep women out 24 hours a day, every day.
Imaginary feminists shut down debate with other imaginary feminists (allegedly) [UPDATE 2]
UPDATE: In a new post on his blog, Marshall explains what (he says) actually happened. See below for details.
UPDATE 2: AVFM says “Oops!” (See end of post.)
I just hope none of you were planning on attending the Great Vancouver All-MRA Debate on whether or not feminism has “gone too far.” Because the already strange story of this debate has taken an even stranger turn, which seems to involve a large degree of blatant lying from someone, or a bunch of someones, connected to the debate. Which, by the way, isn’t going to be happening, at least not any time soon.
A Voice for Men yesterday announced that the much ballyhooed debate would be “delayed due to outside interference.” The announcement told a dramatic tale:
Chris Marshall, a father’s rights activist and the manager of a Vancouver business where a scheduled debate addressing the question, “Has feminism gone too far?” reported that he has just been fired from his job, and escorted from the premises by Vancouver Police after 30 months of employment. The timing of Mr Marshal’s ejection comes 48 hours prior to that scheduled event.
“You can’t have social equality for women without sexual equality for men,” and other completely baffling Men’s Rights slogans.
Over on the Men’s Rights subreddit, a bunch of the locals are doing a little brainstorming, hoping to come up with a pithy slogan or two for posters that will allow them to better sell their alleged movement to the misandrist masses.
The results so far are, well, intriguing. The front-runner, so far, is this highly upvoted one from deluks917, though as you can see it has received some criticism:
