Calling Out Feminist Men

I worry a bit that posting this makes me as creepy as Hugo, who seems to have an obsession with FCM’s posts while not actually understanding or replying to them at all.  (Have you noticed they never quote FCM radical feminists in general?  Makes it much easier to misrepresent what they say.)  But I don’t think it does, because there are a few major differences.  Firstly, the major reason this needs to be pointed out is to say with big neon letters that even “feminist” men can be creepy rapist motherfuckers. It also is a sort of case study on what FCM said in On Crediblity.  And as to why I’m motivated to this, Hugo is essentially going back on his word, where he invited to reopen comments on his posts describing the affairs, since I might have a “new take.”  Only if he believed my analysis of his past to be irrelevant to the topic does my ban really make sense, since calling his “affairs” outright rape is obviously a “new take” on them.  But since he didn’t mention me being off topic, I can only guess I analyzed his past a little more than he would have liked.

Alternatively, I was banned because I was “arrogant and entitled,” and “threw the word rape around” for nearly any sexual act, by calling Hugo a rapist for fucking his students.  It’s interesting to me they say these things, because the rationalizations of these commenters are the same ones I have seen from rapists and rape apologists I’ve encountered (or been raped by).  The general lack of seriousness with which they treated my judgment of his actions also says quite a bit about “feminist” men’s definitions of “consent” and how they react to women accusing men of misogyny, in this case manifesting as rape and an abuse of power.

One of the most frightening responses was from someone who said I had a “right to my opinion” that he had raped his students, but that I shouldn’t apply labels based on it.  Which I assume translates to: You can think he raped those women, but don’t call him a rapist because that’s mean and irrelevant.  Thanks! But more so than this guy’s concern for Hugo’s fee-fees, the analogies that followed this are incredibly frightening, considering the subject matter.

Ms Citrus – No one that I’m aware of is saying “that liberal men don’t consider a professor sleeping with student rape, or even predatory”.

If I had several accidents caused by drunken driving where I injured or killed others – I would clearly be a “murderer” or similar to some. To hear that years later would be different from shortly after the last “accident”. (None of this happened.)

There is plenty – if you want to criticize Hugo – related to his past and certainly material he writes of now. There is no need to make things related to Hugo or others as a: “you’re with me or against me” mindset as you are (unfortunately) doing. Thanks!

The key words in his analogy are “accidents.”  This commenter is, yes, comparing accidents that happen while driving drunk to a teacher fucking his students.  As though you can accidentally fuck someone.  The fact of the matter is these “affairs” of his takes intent.  He could have, I am sure, found willing sexual partners in his own age range.  But he didn’t.  He could have even dated people half his age who weren’t his students, or simply waiting until whoever he was interested in graduated.  But he didn’t.

He deliberately chose to fuck his students-whether that’s because he knew they weren’t in any position to say no, or simply because he had some sort of fetish for student/teacher relationships isn’t clear.  What is clear, however, is that his affairs with students were no “accident” and not due to any spiritual or emotional connection to the women involved, since he fucked multiple students in the same time period.  Despite what “feminist” men like Hugo, my ex, and the commentators who support him might imply, you cannot accidentally fuck someone, nor can you accidentally rape them.   Rape is never a “mistake” on the part of the rapist, to use the same term of another commenter.  Nor is fucking students a mistake that everyone could make.  It occurs when a man wants to fuck a woman, regardless of what she wants.

I don’t think it any different than how people have labeled Andrea Dworkin and may others. Dworkin was obviously Much More Profound an influence on most of us than Hugo is and didn’t have a Past of which she was Ashamed due to things she’d done – as Hugo does, but she wasn’t “perfect” in her visions. Criticizing specifics of her ideas is fine, but labeling her as oft times is done shows More of the limitations of the Labeler than anything about her.

Because labeling someone as a bitch or a “misandrist,” based on their theory, is just as bad as calling someone a rapist based on their actual history of  fucking their students.  Most of the time I’m convinced this is deliberate stupidity, because I don’t see how else anyone could say things like this and not realize how moronic they sound.

I was able to recover one of the comments I believe I was banned for, which *just so happened* to contest his account of those “affairs,” although I added some points and stuff so it fits into the post better:

Of course I’m going to be hostile-Hugo is a fucking rapist as far as I’m concerned, and “feminists” are listening to him.  You cant sleep with someone you have that kind of power over “consensually,” and even if HE says it was consensual, that doesn’t mean it was.  We’re hearing the perpetrator’s perspective, and the sad thing is people are taking it seriously.  I’m not going to take the word of a man who fucks women half his age while in an authority position over them on whether or not they were willing.

He has every reason to lie on whether or not they “consented;” and I’m willing to bet he is.  Since he never says who initiated these relationships, yet lists every other excuse for them imaginable (she wanted it, she was older than me, blahdeblah), I’m lead to conclude that HE initiated some of these relationships, which qualifies as sexual harassment and makes any prospect of “consent” on their part far more dubious, even if you think it’s possible for them to consent.  And even if you don’t think he raped them, he’s still a fucking creep who sexually harassed (past tense?) his students.  And he now teaches classes made up of predominantly women-women in the same age group and social position as others that he habitually fucked.   It’s akin to putting a “transformed” pedophile in charge of an elementary school class so he can redeem himself.  Like hell anyone would support that.

His “past,” as he euphemistically calls it, isn’t exactly the only shady thing either.  He is currently on his fourth wife-which to anyone with a lick of sense suggests that something about the way he treats and interacts with women is off.  It’s just plain pathetic that people are taking what he says about women and other feminists to be true.

My nigel actually pointed out when I was discussing this with him, that I was “warned” in a way by Hugo, that I needed to shut up about his past: he’s made amends publicly, and “grieve[s] the harm [he] did” with” patient and persistence and the complete absence of shame.”  Which roughly translates to: I apologized, you bitch, what else do you want?

Heard the same before from my rapist and his supporters.  When I confronted them and they had the actual sense to realize they were wrong and apologize, if I didn’t immediately drop the issue, I was reminded it was years ago, that I needed to just let it go, and that they apologized.  When I pointed out that them wanting me to just shut up about it meant their apology is just a way to dismiss their crimes, they blocked me or just walked off, depending on if I confronted them on chat or IRL.   So no wonder Hugo banned me!  He made amends and grieves the harm he did, and I was still not letting it go.  What could he do but ban me, right?  It causes him so much pain to be reminded of the fact that he raped his students, and he’s made amends so I should just stop talking about it.  And men should never have to deal with pain or guilt, even if it comes as a direct consequence of their actions.  The fact is, if he lacked shame about his crimes, he would let me post my interpretations of his “affairs” and “acting out years,” as he euphemistically calls them.

This whole episode, their attitude towards going without PIV, and the manipulative mansplaining I feel the commenters did, left me doubting myself.  So I did what I usually do when I feel insecure, and started picking arguments apart and analyzing things.  Eventually I was left with a  pretty big piece of writing, and I figure I might as well make it a post since most of it was already written.

(I have to say though, the comment about me having to be a creationist because I think the idea that the desire for intercourse is socially constructed was hilariously sad, at least.)

Advertisements

45 responses to “Calling Out Feminist Men

  1. That is the thing about claiming to be a Christian or a Feminist for fun and profit. They are assumed to be whatever they say they are because why would anyone lie about a thing like that. They can only maintain the pretense for as long as no one calls them on the obvious fact that they do not walk their talk.
    The world is full of cheap hucksters eager to posture for our admiration and quite willing to let us service them.
    Thank you for calling this one out.

  2. mscitrus– you are on a roll! I am so proud of you for going into the lion’s den and battling the men claiming they are feminists.
    It takes real guts to challenge those men, who could well have raped young women. Certainly, no man would admit doing that if they were teaching a womens’ studies class.

    Like the divorced man who is a total dead beat dad, or who says it’s all his wife’s fault, a man who’s had four wives is not a very credible source.

    Liberal male pretenders to feminism can’t address radical feminism, because it is the real deal. They don’t want to face what the porn industry actually does TO women as a class. I don’t think they can fully comprehend the kind of damage men do to women in the world.

    They want to “move on” but that is not real atonement, that is not real change. That is avoidance of the women who are old enough and wise enough to do real intellectual battles with guys like this.

    See how the argue and avoid the issues. See how they actually don’t teach essential feminist texts. They think of themselves as liberal men, who have no idea what they have done to the women they used for PIV and to bolster their egos. Don’t care, don’t want to know. How convenient to say that radical feminists hate men. That would be saying that Jews hate NAZIS– they have no idea that the idea if social justice itself, or the fact that rape is a male tool of oppression of women. Women hate the world men have created and radical feminists hate the fakes and the users out there.

    We are on to their tactics, and ultimately, you were banned because Mr. Coward doesn’t have the guts to have you writing about rape.
    He wouldn’t know what it was to be a rape survivor or to know that men deny what they do all the time to the victims and thus victimize them again. The crimes men are expert at are done behind closed doors, where the police can’t get them. Cowards, hypocrites and pretenders. Feminists? No way.

  3. Ms.Citrus, you are my shero for calling Hugo out on his shit, and I think I love you more because you got banned from there (he still hasn’t banned me, even though that’s what I’m aiming for, but just doesn’t always approve my comments, prick.)

    Rape is never a “mistake” on the part of the rapist, to use the same term of another commenter.

    Yes, yes, yes, are you sure we don’t have the same rapists? A couple of mine said they “accidentally” stuck it in. COS YOU CAN TOTALLY DO THAT BY ACCIDENT.

    That fact that Hugo thinks he’s a feminist and even believes in marriage is a huge fucking red flag to me. That raping of students is the icing on the turd cake. Anyone who calls themselves a supporter of womyn, but still supports the open trade of them through marriage is a shit-wrangler eh?

    I have to say though, the comment about me being having to be a creationist because I think the idea that the desire for intercourse is socially constructed was hilariously sad, at least.

    Yeah, that gave me some good lolz. I would wonder if they were serious or not, but then I usually realise I don’t care 😉

  4. @thebewilderness
    You’re welcome! I totally can’t stand fakes or people who blabber on about how “liberal” or whatevs they are and don’t back it up.

    @Sheila
    “They think of themselves as liberal men, who have no idea what they have done to the women they used for PIV and to bolster their egos.”
    He has a newer post (and I think some in his archive on the same subject) about how older men fuck younger women because they still want to feel attractive and feeeeeel bad. As if their poor little egos just NEED validation. When women hit middle age, we get Botox or a breast lift….and when men do, they fuck girls half their age. Somehow I dun feel sorry for them, at all.

    I just can’t believe that he’s allowed to teach women’s studies classes. It just blows me away. (Though not as much as finding out he got PAID to lecture or somethin’ at an anti-sexual harassment seminar.)

    @bb
    I actually didn’t think I would get banned after my first few comments went through, but the moment I started questioning his credibility and past I think I was doomed.

    YOU CAN TOTALLY STICK A PENIS IN BY ACCIDENT BECAUSE VAGINAS ARE JUST GAPING AND OPEN ALL THE TIME RITE. I don’t get how analogies that involve “accidents” can even come to mind when the topic is sex or rape, let alone be posted as an argument in a debate. What the hell is wrong with liberal dudes, seriously…

    • Oooh, loving the new theme for your blog ms.citrus!

      • D’aw thank you! 🙂 It’s from that game I draw gay art of all the time love, Persona 4. It fits really well whether or not you’ve played it (but better if you have) which is what made me pick it.

        …I just realized that’s where my icon’s from too. I am such a nerd.

  5. This is only kinda-sorta related to this post, because the author of this failure of a post was from Hugo’s thread. But it’s my blog so I can be off topic I suppose. It has pretty much every radfem stereotype out there in it. Dworkin said all sex is rape? Check. Radfems are like conservatives? Check. Against sex? Yup. It’s kinda hilariously sad.

  6. Yeah, they seem to always go down this check list of radfem stuff– sex negative check, all sex is rape check, radfems are like right wing christians check. I can’t believe that 25 plus years since Right Wing Women was written, they are still saying this about radfems.

    So my guess is we still pose a significant threat to their little liberal invasive kingdoms, and now that they are stealing the jobs in women’s studies, they might have a lot to loose if women on hugo’s campus got wind of all this and started angry protests to boycotte his classes, and warn women about his past. Not that would pose a clear danger, so they have to keep using the same tropes on radfems, and will continue to do so. Also, the game is to try to scare young women with tales of evil radfems, and create straw women out of true radical commentary, which men pretend not to understand. They understand all right, they have a vested interest in keeping things as they are, with plenty of sexual access (in reality or in fantasy) to young women on campus. Again, imagine taking a woman’s studies class with a male who treated women like that, and who still has sexual fantasies about all the students in the class. Creepy, and completely degrading to the spirit of women’s studies in the first place.

  7. mscitrus, i love your new header too. heh.

    re the “radfems is conservatibbs!!!11!!1” post you link to, i went over there and read it, and i dont even think any of those quotes he attributes to me are even mine. i dont remember writing them, and they arent in my style, and he doesnt link to me either. they might be from a reader here, but he doesnt even link to any of my articles, so i cant even check without re-reading literally thousands of comments and dozens of posts on my own blog. so either he is fabricating all of this, or hes stealing someones writing from my blog without linking to it.

    anyway, he is only proving me right. piv = sex = piv. exactly like i said. and exactly as YOU said, when you went over there and handed him his ass, on his ridiculous and unprofessional post, thats impossible to fact check. this cite-check failure is common actually, and its clearly deliberate, and you caught that immediately when you noticed that NOONE EVER QUOTES RADFEMS DIRECTLY. because it makes it easier to lie about and misconstrue what they said.

    also, its NEVER creepy to call out men on their shit. its necessary, and it needs to be done. so, thanks!

  8. Liberal is such a misused term. May I ask what piv is ?

  9. pfft, the fact that you used all three in the same sentance speaks volumes to me catdaddy

  10. THIS is why you are so amazingly courageous. I am just in awe. Like, whoa. You’re my shero. Seriously. ♥ ♥ ♥ ♥ ♥

  11. I believe that a number of your quotes in your blog entry reference things I said related to things you said in Hugo’s blog. Hugo obviously can speak for himself.

    The key points I hear you making are that Hugo:
    1.) was a rapist,
    2.) has a bad track record (e.g. his four marriages) and
    3.) doesn’t have credibility because of 1.) and 2.) and

    That you and (some) other radical feminists are:
    1.) banned or similar when you confront the behavior and label such men rapists.

    I fully agree that you can believe that Hugo’s past makes him Not Credible with his college students who are predominantly female because: 1.) he may be a threat to do similar things in the future based upon what he has done in the past and/or 2.) he is a bad role model/influence because of his past behavior.

    I fully agree that you can label Hugo’s past behavior “rape”.
    I believe that you:
    1.) Are sincere in your beliefs and
    2.) Have significant insights based upon your life experiences, your reading, and your interactions with others.

    I also disagree with you in part related to what you say and how you say it. You have every right to say to Hugo (and other similar men) things such as: 1.) You raped your students and 2.) I don’t trust you because you raped your students. You have every right to explain Why you feel as you do related to this. You can be most informative and helpful when you discuss Andrea Dworkin and other radical feminists coming from a position of actually having read their works and seriously thought about what they’ve said.

    It is however not a “fact” that Hugo: 1. IS a rapist, 2. is not trustworthy and/or 3. is a bad influence on his (predominantly female) students.

    I would argue that Hugo’s relationships with college students were totally unethical. The power imbalance of him “the teacher” and they being students at his college in of itself made things totally wrong. Even if a particular student wasn’t “his student”, he as “the professor” had a “plausible deniability” that is troubling, if not significantly more (bad) than that.

    Hugo was an alcoholic, immature, exploitative (in some ways “typical”) young White, American male. Whether or not he was a “rapist” to me depends upon one’s definition of “rape” as well as possibly knowing some of what went on in these relationships. IF one believes that any sexual behavior in an unequal relationship (comparable to sexual behavior with an intoxicated person who thereby can’t consent to sex) is “rape” then yes, clearly Hugo was a rapist with every student he was with. Personally, my definition of rape would indicate that Hugo may or may not have been a rapist with each student he was with.

    I need not agree with various things that Hugo says to respect him. I find his “Christian” belief system questionable in part, while recognizing that it is Important to him, particularly because of his past.

    You have every right Not to Respect Hugo!

    I would have No problem with you saying essentially: “Hugo, you raped every student you were with because …. (related to the unequal relationship)”. I would have no problem with you saying essentially: “Hugo, I don’t trust you because of your past and I think that you should Not be trusted to teach female college students”. I also could and do understand the obvious reality that IF you were to say such things, they obviously wouldn’t be in simple, polite “neutral” language.

    What I heard and still hear though is a repetitive Denunciation of Hugo and a frustration with others who don’t agree with you. I hear you and your critics (sometimes in differing ways) talking past each other. I don’t want to selectively pick out quotations of yours to try to “prove” my point, because that would simply play into the dynamic of “winning the argument” and “I’m right and you’re wrong”. (If would wish, I would discuss such things privately with you via email.)

    There is No Serious Question as to What Hugo did. I believe that there are serious questions as to What the meaning is now-today related to Hugo in his roles as a professor, blogger, husband, man and human being. To you Hugo clearly is “a rapist” and carries the distrust that a rapist (quite logically) has.

    It is sad for me to note that dialog is seemingly not possible that can get at the issues that are important here both in forums such as both Hugo’s and your blogs. You and your detractors both seemingly talk past each other and do not end up primarily debating the issues. You say a lot of perceptive, important, good things in some of what you write.
    You also seemingly are stuck in your anger (understandably) related to the rape(s) and related exploitation by men that you’ve faced in your life.
    I don’t ask that you “be reasonable” or “not be yourself”. I hope that you will listen to my words and take in that which is helpful, discard that which is Not helpful, and if you wish dialog you will respond or otherwise make contact.

    • The fact is, as a professor, Hugo controlled the grades (and thus somewhat the future) of the women in his classroom. You can’t say “no” without consequences, unless you trust that he wouldn’t interfere with your grade-and really, who would trust a professor who fucks his students not to do that? It is akin to fucking someone too drunk to consent, because even if the drunk woman doesn’t fight or whatever, the man still chose her to fuck, knowing that she couldn’t say no. Which makes him a rapist and a predator. I was banned for pointing out the things I did in this post, despite his saying he’s open to comments on his past actions. I can’t imagine just banning someone for saying something I did makes me a rapist, especially if I knew I had had “unethical” affairs in the past. To me that suggests an unwillingness to take seriously what he did and destroys any credibility he might have had, making him a hypocrite and a defensive asshole.

      I still don’t see where I’m “talking past” people like hugo and glen. If you could cite specific instances of this, I would really appreciate that…because it seems as though every male on these threads talks past me and doesn’t directly respond to me, although they keep saying that’s what I’m doing. And when I ask them to clarify they just throw their hands up and accuse me of being verbally abusive. My email is anonifem @ gmail.com

  12. hey ms.citrus, did you know jolly ol hugo’s linked to us on his blog about that utah blog calling radfems ‘strict fathers’ and how wonderfully helpful we are? (sif he would admit we’re right)

    • Shit, no, I didn’t know that. And of course now when I go look, he says glen is “winning,” despite ignoring half of my comments. Wtf.

      • And the fact that no-one on that thread will ever address me by my tag (Either AileenWuornos or berryblade would be fine!) and everyone always totally ignores both of our points.

        I was so stoned when I found that link, so all I could do was just cackle.

  13. MsCitrus, if you’re interested, I’ve opened up some of my old posts on teacher-student relationships. Make the case you want to make, just please do it without attacking anyone of my commenters, which was the deciding factor in banning you more than anything else.

    I’m fair game, and while I disagree that my behavior in those years amounted to rape, and indeed object strenuously to that characterization, you’re welcome to explain why you take the tack you do.

    I’m holding ALL comments in moderation right now, so if you comment, you’ll see it held up for a while, but it will appear.

    • Dude, I don’t see where I attacked any of your commenters. From what you said, I was banned because of calling you a rapist. I didn’t call anyone an idiot, immature, or any of the variety of things I was called (such as Id) and they went unbanned. So I seriously do not know what you mean. I’m sure you have the comment where I “attacked” someone somewhere, so if you could please post it that would be great.

      If you read my post you’d see why I call it rape. But I might as well post it on your site for all the people who worship you to here.

  14. It was a deleted comment attacking Glendenb. If I’d had a real problem with the rape word I’d have deleted all your comments to that effect rather than leave them as part of the record.

    • Allowing one where I just call you that and deleting the ones where I analyze why rape is quite an apt description of what you did serves to make me appear crazy. I don’t believe I attacked glendenb-I believe the closest to attacking someone I got was saying someone was a jerk. Is that an “attack”? Because I thought it was ok to say stuff like that, considering I had been called an idiot several times over by Id and others, yet none of them had been banned. So even if I did “attack” glen, you’re still selectively enforcing your “no-attacks” policy, so that attacks from people who agree with you are a-ok. I believe before I was banned you also had told people to “stop making personal attacks,” which I presume was directed at me because, again, I was the only one banned. Yet, I was unable to find any personal attacks from me in the comments. Not to mention, in your own words, you imply that me calling you a rapist is in fact why I was banned:

      Selah, at this point, I’m done with the endless repetitive claim that I’m a rapist. It’s not true, I’ve heard it six ways to Sunday, and frankly, anyone who calls me that loses the right to expect me to engage them. I’ve read most of the Dworkin oeuvre, and taken her very seriously; I used to assign “Pornography: Men Possessing Women” in class. I think FCM and her commenters made some interesting points. But the personal attacks were unwarranted, even within a radical feminist analysis. I get how the word “rape” is used in radfem discourse and that that usage differs from what one might find elsewhere.

      Call me a rapist and we’re done having a conversation. As with Middle East peace, a recognition of the legitimacy of the other is a precondition for dialogue.

      Here, you express again a complete unwillingness to consider the fact that maybe you are a rapist. You do have a “real problem with the rape word,” contrary to what you’re saying on my blog. I could not even dismiss claims that I raped someone when my ex, who had raped me, said that he was the real victim of rape because I was “raping” him by not having sex with him how he wanted to, and would only “consent” to it under certain conditions. But maybe that’s because I’m not an arrogant coward who refuses to engage in a debate on any turf not my own?

      Everyone can see you aren’t responding to my actual points here, just vehemently denying that anything you did could be considered rape. Oh, and inviting me back to your turf for a debate, so that your commenters can repeatedly imply that my sexuality is defective, call me an idiot, and then some.

  15. Ms. Citrus,

    I want to apologize for stating incorrectly that you’ve “talked past” either Hugo or Glen. I copied and pasted all the posted responses you’ve made to both of them (at least that I found) onto my computer.

    Re-reading what you wrote gave me a Lot of New Respect for your consistency in Trying to Respond to the substance of the discussion of both Hugo and Glen, and added distaste for Some of those who responded on both of those blogs to things that you’d said.

    (Related to Hugo and to a much lesser degree Glen’s blogs [not within your own blog which is really none of my business],) I still think that How You Express some of your Anger, particularly at Hugo detracts from many easily Hearing the Main Helpful Insights that you have. I also still believe that Where your Goal is to reach others and Not have them be “taken in” or similar by Hugo, that How You Express the Anger oft times makes it Less, rather than More likely that you will reach young women.

    I will email you privately – with my copy of your postings and my responses and more. Thanks again and I want to repeat my apology for totally incorrectly stating something that you didn’t do.

  16. THANK YOU for actually engaging with them. It must take much of your energy. Discourse like that is badly needed in feminism, I wish I had enough time to do it myself.

    Also, this Utah blog you linked too: he now talks about your “bizarre personal revelations”. You know, saying you were raped is a bizarre personal revelation in his book. When people still feel the need to listen to him after this completely insensitive, ignorant comment which cleary shows how much he thinks of you it’s their own fault. (Really, I cannot get over the fact he called your experiences “bizarre”, WTF.)

    • You’re welcome! I’m really bored in college so it’s something to do, even if it’s frustrating as hell. I did see that comment-I didn’t address it because I thought he’d reply to you, but big surprise, he didn’t. I guess I’ll just be “bizarre” along with at least 25% of women in the US.

      On a lighter note, your username and icon makes me think you’re into jmusic or manga and stuff? 😀

      • Sorry for replying so late, I got lost in a Don’t-want-to-do-homework-the-deadline-is-approaching-arrrgh-abyss, lol.

        Yes, I used to be really into manga until some years ago, but it’s really difficult to keep up with the series I started to read because of money and time constraints. Sometimes I still buy volumes but it only happens periodically now. I actually got into anime and manga with yaoi and used to consume everything boys’ love I could get my hands on when I was still in my teens- but today there are only a few select manga-ka who write this stuff I can tolerate and actually like. You know, you can only go that far with 90% of stories practically portraying rape as form of needed aggressiveness to overcome the bottom’s squeamishness.

        I’m much more heavily into jmusic at the moment. Pretty much a visual kei addict for some years (my icon shows the guitar player for Aicle., Rubii), but have only been to one concert so far because I have social anxiety which can become very bad. And the username, well. I’m not entirely comfortable with using it anymore because it’s a song by Kinniku Shoujo-tai and although the vocalist is this crazy otaku which means he does some seriously awesome, out-of-the-norm stuff music-wise he still seems to have the negative male otaku trait of being very interested in schoolgirls. CREEPY.

      • dfasklfjslkj it won’t let me reply to you, I guess because it doesn’t want comments to be nested too much.
        Oh, it’s cool. I do the same thing with homework. <<;

        I don't read much manga or anime either anymore, and if I do it's usually the fansubs before it's been licensed. I've been into yaoi and stuff since I was in middle school too. I know what you mean about trying to find stuff that's tolerable as you said. I'm more into fan fictions and doujins than original stuff, and in the series I obsess over the most (Persona 4) it's pretty easy to avoid the bottom-just-needs-to-be-forced crap by avoiding certain pairings. Me being so into yaoi is why I giggle everytime I'm called anti-sex. Thankfully I can draw halfway decently so I can make my own yaoi sometimes. ;D
        Now I know at least one person might get the post I’m trying to write on fanfciction! 😀

        I get what you mean about the school-girl inerest too. Eeeep. I never really got into visual kei, cause it’s too similar to the musicmy ex listening to and makes my PTSD flare up. I’m more into hiphop and girl bands in general-tho lately I’ve been listening to mostly Korean stuff.

    • “(Really, I cannot get over the fact he called your experiences “bizarre”, WTF.)”

      Neither could I eh, and then he called us “trauma junkies”.

  17. geo, you also “totally and completely” revealed that you are a fucking asshole, for telling a rape victim that she is expressing her anger wrong. go fuck yourself.

    the sad thing is that geo is one of the more reasonable posters over at old liverlips i mean hugos blog. what a disgusting collection of psuedo-pedophiles and rape apologists ay? they deserve each other.

  18. i also am not surprised AT ALL that these assclowns are left with the impression that ms.c and hugos minions were talking over “each other.” i am sure they also believe that domestic violence is “mutual combat.” we already know what they think about rape. namely, that its consensual! oh, and that rape victims need to caretake everyones elses feelings, when they talk about being raped.

    i am sorry, but from my persepctive, these douchebags arent even worth anyones time. and if old hugo is worried about having stirred the radfems hornets nest here…well he should be worried. these platitudes are both too little, and too late.

  19. how much he thinks of you

    I feel the need to say it out loud: it’s obvious that he thinks that you’re not to be taken seriously, that you are a lunatic (he mentions the “rabbit hole”), that you are removed from our common reality. And this only because you were honest. He is a sheltered little boy who never experienced anything you had to experience and therefore everything you say is invalid. I wish it would surprise me that Hugo linked to him but it doesn’t- this is not the first time he had beef with feminists.

    • Yeah, that was pretty insulting. God forbid I be honest and point out the fact that I’ve been through stuff he says I have no knowledge about.

      Personally, I think it’s the fact that I’ve experienced them that makes anything I say invalid. I’ve seen this kinda thing from dudes a lot-womenz can’t think “objectively” or “rationally” about the issues because they’re suffering from them; rape victims can’t speak “rationally” about rape because they’re too emotional about it. But his instance that he doesn’t know any men who support rape (because he’d totes know if they did, right?) also suggests what you say.

      Who knows what’s going on in his head other than some intellectual wankery tho?

      • God forbid I be honest and point out the fact that I’ve been through stuff he says I have no knowledge about.

        Yeah, we are supposed to make men’s lives comfortable, i.e. we are punished for telling our truth because it’s too inconvenient. Take man-hating, for example. We cannot have a normal discussion about its roots, its existence and what it means to women without someone chiming in and screeching “MARY DALY GENOCIDE!!!!”.

        Personally, I think it’s the fact that I’ve experienced them that makes anything I say invalid. I’ve seen this kinda thing from dudes a lot-womenz can’t think “objectively” or “rationally” about the issues because they’re suffering from them.

        Yeah, damn silencing tactic. Basically, and you learn this in sociology 101, everyone is biased. So the only reason why men seem to feel the need to constantly tell us that we are wrong because we have been victims is their perception of themselves as objective on account of their maleness. What once happened to me on SocImages, for example, was that a counter-argument I got from a man pretty much only consisted of him telling me it would be useless to talk to me because I was biased (he said he could produce data to disprove me but told me I would reject it because the people who had collected it were men). I answered: you telling me this pretty much means you are biased. And that was the end of our discussion. However, I also wrote one long-ass comment, so perhaps I succeeded in exhausting him, lol. I still am very annoyed that he didn’t feel the need to engage honestly with me. Obviously, I was just supposed to let his dismissive initial comment stand. Not used to dealing with stubborn women, these menfolk, hahahaha. 😀

  20. Ms.c, I too have ventured into the lions den, and taken on the rapists and misogynists on their own turf. That’s what newsvine was for me. Loretta and I took on literally thousands of mainstream thinkers, and dozens who attacked and “debated” with us directly. I eventually got burned out, and that’s when I started my own blog. Oh, and i got suspended for a week for calling some liberal dickwad “dickcheese” when he told me I could give all the liberal men blow jobs at their next meeting of liberal men. That was rich! He of course only got suspended for a day, because me calling him a silly name was so much worse than telling me and all women that we could literally suck liberal men’s dicks if we weren’t grateful for how progressive they were, and how much they cared about women’s rights. Abortion rights equalling the totality of “women’s rights” of course, which is completely typical of how liberal men think, because abortion benefits THEM.

    Anyway, if you have the time and energy to do it, good on you. As loretta always reminded me, she took on teh menz because of the lurkers, who were always reading, and who needed and wanted to hear what she had to say. You are doing a great job!

  21. I think this is an example of the Humpty Dumpty language rules so very popular among the wilfully ignorant.
    You “attacked” one of Hugo’s commenters by virtue of your failure to show sufficient respect when disagreeing with them. Geo repeated this theme by explaining that if you were nicer and not so very angry then surely men would listen and respect your words. History says no, but men continue to promote this silly myth that men are open to reasoned argument from women.
    I wonder what euphemism for rape Hugo would be satisfied with applying to his predatory behavior with his students. “Seduction”? “Conquest”? “Dalliance”?

    Perhaps he should teach from “Man Made Language” in his pseudo feminist classes. He might learn something.

  22. “I also still believe that Where your Goal is to reach others and Not have them be “taken in” or similar by Hugo, that How You Express the Anger oft times makes it Less, rather than More likely that you will reach young women.” (Geo)

    Geo repeated this theme by explaining that if you were nicer and not so very angry then surely men would listen and respect your words. (thebewilderness)
    ———————–
    How does “more likely you will reach young women” – e.g. – Students and related where Hugo teaches – who presumably are a Prime concern regarding the issue of Future potential rape – translate into “surely men…”?

    I presumed and presume that you (Ms. C) are Trying to Reach Women and that much of the time You Presume that your message May well not reach Us Men or at least Most of Us.

  23. “How does “more likely you will reach young women” – e.g. – Students and related where Hugo teaches – who presumably are a Prime concern regarding the issue of Future potential rape – translate into “surely men…”?”

    Criminy!
    Read that over a few times. I think it will come to you.

  24. Pingback: SEVAS TRA – T.R.I.C | anti social butterfly

  25. It has been my experience that hardly anyone is interested in a reasoned argument! lol

    Anyway, dude’s been married four times, anyone know how soon after each divorce that he got married again? Because there is a type of individual who is so deperate to have a companion, any companion, that they grab the first person who looks at them twice, and so these types of individuals usually find each other pretty quick. Few of these marriages are all that happy because the marriage is based on avoidance and fear of being alone rather than having anything other shared interests in common, but at least they are both spared the horrors {gasp how can they cope} of being alone.

    A short time span between divorce and remarriage, especially when that pattern is repeated several times, indicates EXTREMELY high levels of insecurity. No, HIGHER than that. These people are walking neuroses.

  26. TBW, each sentence must contain a subject, verb, and predicate or other referrant in order for me to discern the freaking point. That sentence is a hieroglyphic word salad.

  27. Criminy! you are just so picky!
    How else could he avoid grasping the concept of “theme” and acknowledging Hugo’s position as gatekeeper? Word salad was all he could toss.

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