In Mala Fide has their say

So here’s In Mala Fide‘s take on me, Mens Rights, and the SPLC. Ferdinand Bardamu wheels out some of his biggest rhetorical guns, calling me “Snerdling.” Ouch.

What I find most enlightening is the comments. These guys seem to believe that the SPLC, feminism, and the likes of me add up to Leviathan–that if we wanted, we could command our minions in the government to round them all up, that they criticize us at their peril. Then Matt Parrott of Hoosier Nation fame pops up to attest to my high sartorial standards and work ethic (we sat next to each other at a white nationalist conference that I covered for the SPLC last year), opening up the door to a chorus of Jew-baiting. Creepy Jew. Goldwag – what an incredibly appropriate name for a Goldstein that wags his finger at everyone. What are the odds that you’d find MRAs, a white nationalist, and anti-Semites in the same comment string?

And these are the guys who take such umbrage at being called haters. Why don’t they just own it?

If you enjoyed this post, please go to my Facebook page and “like” it (there is a button that will take you there on the top right hand side of this page). You can also follow me on Twitter.


20 thoughts on “In Mala Fide has their say

  1. “What are the odds that you’d find MRAs, a white nationalist, and anti-Semites in the same comment string?”

    Pretty good when you go cruising a site speficially devoted to white nationalist MRM’s. Just like if you cruised a lesbian, black feminist specialist site you’d probably find a lot of black lesbian feminists. And those comments in the same thread.

    And you can claim that you and your juggernaut of victim politics are NOT the leviathan when men stop getting rounded up for offending women.Or do you honestly think that not being allowed to face your accuser in a rape trial, and ‘guilty until proven innocent’ is a truly ethical and moral stance?

    When a man spends time in jail because a sick system decided that a woman’s lies were worth more than a preponderance of evidence… When a ‘reasonable doubt’ has been cast aside in favor of ‘not blaming the victim’, can you really expect anything BUT simmering anger?

    How much time HAVE you spent in prison?

  2. I’ll give In Mala Fide that much credit for honesty…. In its “About,” it avows that its members include “men’s rights activists, hedonists, Christian patriarchs, white nationalists and other marginalized groups.” Unlike AVfM, it doesn’t pretend to be in the same business as the SPLC. And unlike so many Reddit threads, it doesn’t attribute its excesses to trolls. They can hate me as much as they want, so long as they’re don’t complain that I maligned them.

  3. Clearly the system’s stacked against men. In some/most jurisdictions a woman’s accusation alone stands as sufficient evidence for a guilty conviction. They don’t even need to show up for the trial.

  4. These guys seem to believe that the SPLC, feminism, and the likes of me add up to Leviathan–that if we wanted, we could command our minions in the government to round them all up, that they criticize us at their peril.

    I know we’ve all got our respective angles and we all fancy ourselves defiant underdogs.

    But did you have a straight face when you typed that, implying that the SPLC is not actively engaged in persecuting and marginalizing a cohort of people?

    And these are the guys who take such umbrage at being called haters. Why don’t they just own it?

    I’ll make a deal with you. I’ll agree that I’m a big hater if you agree that you and your associates are out to persecute and silence haters.

    1. I don’t need you to agree that you’re a big hater, Matt, though I must admit you seem like a perfectly nice guy in person–and I do appreciate the restraint and courtesy with which you refer to me, for all my Cosmopolitan Jewishness and all. You’ve owned up to it yourself, in your review of Greg Johnson’s CONFESSIONS OF A RELUCTANT HATER in the Occidental Review, among other places: “While few of us lack the clarity and sincerity necessary to admit we’re a band of disgruntled haters, Dr. Johnson steps up and confesses it. CONFESSIONS OF A RELUCTANT HATER is an excellent and necessary read for pro-White intellectuals, but it leaves us with more difficult questions than we started with.”

      As for the SPLC’s “persecuting and marginalizing a cohort of people”…. Exactly who is that cohort? White people? Males? How many white male patriots has the SPLC imprisoned? How many white male publishing houses has the SPLC padlocked? I’m not an employee of the SPLC. All of the work I’ve done for them is on a freelance basis. But it seems to me that all of that work has been entirely in keeping with the organization’s self description (the following appears under the rubric “What We Do“):

      We track the activities of hate groups and domestic terrorists across America, and we launch innovative lawsuits that seek to destroy networks of radical extremists.

      We use the courts and other forms of advocacy to win systemic reforms on behalf of victims of bigotry and discrimination.

      We provide educators with free resources that teach school children to reject hate, embrace diversity and respect differences.

      In other words, the SPLC watches, it reports, it teaches, and it sues. The groups it singles out and sometimes directs its lawsuits against “attack or malign an entire class of people, typically for their immutable characteristics.” The “cohorts” the SPLC targets are not “types” of people–they are organizations with publically avowed ideologies, goals, and activities.

      Many groups have taken issue with the SPLC’s characterizations of them and as any Google search will reveal, they have not been shy about broadcasting their disagreement–the Mens Rights movement and White Nationalist movements not excepted (just look at the other comments here, not to mention the articles about the SPLC and me that are appearing all over the Web).

      The word “persecution” generally implies an imbalance of power; “persecutors” have the power of life and liberty over the groups they attack. I’m not sure how the SPLC can be said to be marginalizing the male half of the human race, though MRAs work awfully hard to marginalize themselves, by insisting that they have been systematically disempowered–that they are the “new minority.” In fact that seems to be the movement’s principle mission.

      My article didn’t advocate closing down any of the MRA websites; it didn’t call for the movements’ leaders’ arrests or silencing, despite their grandiose claims to the contrary. It did warn that the military metaphors favored by so many of them (“Thomas James Ball…would have been a hell of a soldier in this war”) combined with their inflammatory language against women, raise real fears of actual violence. For example, in the very string in which your comment appears, the commenter Brigadon has a lengthy back and forth about just this issue:

      I have called it a ‘war’ before, and I will again. It is not a cold war, it is a hot war, with constant and socially-approved violence against men. The only way to fight a hot war is with violence… sitting down and crying just makes you an easier target. Every man has already become a casualty in this war, and 90% of men are ‘walking wounded’……So, maybe it sounds like a call for violence, but at this point any woman that calls herself a ‘feminist’, regardless of their protests that they are ‘not like those other ones’ Is a criminal, a traitor to their species, their culture, their honor, their family, their nation, their gender, and their world. There is only one punishment that fits a traitor.

      The fact that other commmenters disagreed with him in no wise contradicts the spirit of my article–I didn’t say that ALL MRAs are violent or even potentially so. I didn’t say that the MRA movement is monolithic; I pointed out examples of self-criticism and internal disagreement. But I did talk about those “whose fury goes well beyond criticism of the family court system, domestic violence laws, and false rape accusations”–about haters, in other words. And many of them appear to be bending over backwards to prove my point.

  5. You’re attracting alot of attention from the MRAs here. I’d like to say thank you for your post.

    As a feminist, I’ve been familiar with MRAs and their ‘simmering rage’ & general craziness for ages now. I’m pleased that their hatred is finally being exposed to the light of day.

    They’re getting upset because they *know* just how much crazy there is to expose.

  6. Here is an example of the things Bardamu says: The Necessity of Domestic Violence

    Finally, I have no sympathy for most abused women because a great many of them deliberately incite their men into attacking them, if not by being physically abusive themselves, then by creating drama.>

    “Drama” justifies abuse.

    Slapping a girl across the face isn’t just about hurting her, it’s a kind of neg. It says, “I can crush you like an insect, but you aren’t worth the effort.” It’s a tacit acknowledgment that she’s weaker than you, beneath you, and if she crosses you again, you’ll put her in the hospital. You treat her like she’s a child throwing a temper tantrum, not an equal….

    Women should be terrorized by their men; it’s the only thing that makes them behave better than chimps.

    So yeah, the claims that they don’t condone violence? Bullshit. It’s all “no true Scotsman” when you call them on it, but they support them when you aren’t shining the light on them.

  7. As a Gen Y-er, it’s so…eerie to see any new hate group that has all the blatant earmarks of the same ole same ole hate groups that I grew up reading about and thinking of as part of a history that was ended long ago, surpassed by today’s progressive and enlightened thinkers. MRAs study no history, especially not the histories of civil rights movements, feminism, anti-discrimination laws, and especially the Nazi-ism and white pride movements with which they share so much in areas of methodology and language.

    But it’s inexcusable that they do not study these laws and histories and yet expect the citizens of the U.S. to abide their ignorance, as if free speech allows for freedom expression allows freedom from criticism. As if it is our obligation to coddle them in their ignorance and hate. “Men invented everything.” Well, no, they didn;t, and if men had been lawfully restricted from educational institutions, especially those of higher learning, until the last half decade at best, I would expect that they wouldn’t have invented shit. That’s the kind of historical ignorance that stems from hate and breeds more of it, on par with holocaust deniers.

    Thank gourd they are relegated to a few small areas of the internet, and they can thank Reddit for allowing them to foster their ignorance. More and more places care about high levels of discourse wrt to discussions on the Internet, and the places that don’t attract the ilk of Reddit MRAs, giving them a place to freely breed their conspiracies and discuss their joke of a movement.

    However, the Internet is not boots-on-the-ground activism, and never will be. If MRAs were to ever take to that method, they would find themselves protected by the ACLU, but not much else in the way of support because their message is hate, anger, rage, and ignorance. Not solutions to the problems that ail them. Keeping ignorant young men angry gets the donations, not curing the problems that they dreamt up in the first place.

    To paraphrase, “You cannot make a movement from some other movement’s invective.” Those factions attempting to do so will never be widespread because as stupid as humanity is, we are still smarter than that.

  8. Men’s rights extremists? They’ve got nothing on these guys!

    “The crematorium was in the background and I could see that people were being sent in one end and that there were ashes at the other end ten minutes later…. I washed in my own urine….”

    Kitty Hart in “Kitty – a return to Auschwitz”. BBC, 1979

  9. You will be happy to know that Inmalafide now shows a spread eagled bunghole on the frontpage…

    maybe the white nationalists have moved on to making erotic art of themselves after they recreate the brutal shower scene from American History X….

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s