Men’s Rights & Feminism At UofT- We Must Admit There Are Bigots On Both Sides…

A good time was had by all...

A good time was had by all…

Thursday night another chapter was held in men’s rights activists (MRA’s) plight to get a foothold in Canadian universities. The Canadian Association for Equality (CAFE) held its third meeting at the University of Toronto and nobody was disappointed by the lack of excitement. The usual group of anarchists, student unionists and feminists came to protest- each had their own motivations.

The festivities began about half an hour before the 7pm start time. Protesters opposed to the MRA’s gathered on the grassy knoll in front of the (appropriately chosen) zoological sciences building.  A television reporter was interviewing people while the speakers denounced the MRA’s in the background. A few of the MRA’s mingled with the protesters trying to engage in debates. This didn’t work out well at first- but, as the evening progressed, there were glimmers of hope that MRA’s and feminists have the opportunity to find a common ground.

For anyone who’s been following Toronto’s old-left anarchist community there were a few of familiar faces present. My assailant Alex “Flagpole” Balch was there at first, but he quickly left. There were a couple of anarchists from last month’s anti police march– both turned out to be quite pleasant. The person left speaking to the media was anarchist schoolteacher Ashleigh Ingle- who openly lied to the reporter saying that MRA’s initiated violence at CAFE’s meeting in November (the anarchists did actually.) Rob Chamberland, the anarchist president of the CUPE 2073 was also in the crowd.

Ingle supports anarcho-syndicalism, she’s the former Recording Secretary for the CUPE 3902, and has been actively involved with the Canadian Federation of Students (CFS)- an old left dominated organization with strong ties to the anarchist community. She self-describes herself being against corrupt union executives (something I deeply respect), but she also leads f##k the police marches, and has been deeply involved with the agitators at Queers Against Israeli Apartheid who’ve been disrupting Toronto’s Gay Pride events.

The student unions have a big problem with the people who are trying to bring men’s groups to the universities. Organizations like the UTSU , CFS and Public Interest Research Groups (OPIRG’s) take millions of dollars in student fees each year- they have deep connections to Canada’s marxist/unionist communities (and the NDP) who have taken a stranglehold over them. Organizations like CAFE represent a genuine risk to their hegemony over student affairs. The unionists will not let this battle pass without a good fight.

Shortly after the meeting began, the protesters came inside of the building and created a rabble beside the lecture theatre. They chanted, screamed into megaphones, stamped their flagpoles on the ground- and a couple of the anarchists began kicking on the doors (damaging one of them). Then, just a few minutes later, someone pulled the fire alarm- this was an exact replay of what happened at CAFE’s meeting last month.

This was another example of how many radicals take a very selfish approach to their activism. First, the people inside of the lecture hall had a genuine right to conduct and attend their meeting- there was no talk of hate, no hint of misogyny or violence.  Also, when the alarm was pulled, it required a couple of fire trucks to be dispatched to attend, had there been a genuine emergency people’s lives and property could be at stake. That’s not to mention the cost of all this- once again, society pays for the agitator’s follies.

The MRA’s were guided out of the east exit and the protesters were sent out through the north. A couple of minutes later the protesters made their way around the building and re-launched their carnival of angry jeers. People on both sides slowly began to get into conversations.

At this point the group began to grow as people walking down the sidewalk stopped to revel in the bedlam. Some of them were students, but one of them was an older man who didn’t appear connected to any of the assembled groups. He stood up on one of the planters and began heckling the protesters- yelling at them and waving his finger around. A protester wearing a balaclava yelled back at him through her bullhorn, he called back at her, and when she responded he jumped down from the platform and swung his arm at her bullhorn.

As the bullhorn hit her face she responded by hitting him on the head with it. There’s no question that the protester provoked the man to do what he did- but, the bullhorn wasn’t actually that loud (I was within range of it more than once), and it was absolutely unnecessary to get physical. When I asked him what happened, he said that the protester put the bullhorn right beside his ear- the video show’s he greatly exaggerated.

When the building was deemed safe many of the MRA’s streamed back into the lecture theatre. A few however decided to stay outside and try to engage in conversations with the protesters. It didn’t go well at first – both sides were highly charged.

One of the women read out a list of feminist ideals that should appeal to MRA’s with very colourful animation (and language). Everything she stated was agreeable, and much of what she said addressed concerns expressed by people who are skeptical of feminism. But, like many of the protesters it appeared she’d been fed an entirely skeptical view of anyone allied with MRA’s with a little bit of misinformation. The radicals have said everything bad about the MRA’s short of violating Godwin’s Law.

One of the men who spoke was a Russian engineering student- a man not only studying a very hard subject, but who was also trying to understand this vastly strange culture of our’s in Canada. When a protester brought up the subject of privilege he explained that he took a white privilege self-test since he’s been in school and that he actually scored very low. Aghast, the protester said to him ‘how could you say that!’- he gave examples, like how most engineering students are from other cultures, and how his half-Ukrainian heritage caused his family great discrimination in his part of Russia.

It was an amazing moment. Suddenly a brief spark of understanding occurred- the protester acknowledged that privilege isn’t as black & white (pun intended) as it seems on the surface. One of the feminists then acknowledged that misandry does exist, the man acknowledged that women often face a more difficult challenge with sexism.

Every Movement Has Its Extremists…

Many of the most vocal criticisms the MRA’s make about feminism are based on based on the behaviour of feminist extremists. They use examples like Vanja Krajina, the woman who yelled out at MRA’s (and others) that they were ‘rape apologists’ for simply attending CAFE’s event back in November. Or they grasp at low-hanging fruit (pun intended) discussing women who make comments about castrating men. These people are valid examples of a problem, but they don’t represent feminism as a whole.

Some of the feminists acknowledged this problem and openly stated that they don’t support ‘man hating feminazis’- but, at the same time, they expressed how that sort of language was deeply offensive. The question was asked ‘is it possible that the deepest flaws on both sides come from the extremists?’

The feminists expressed that they were actually uncomfortable with some of the actions of the militants, and would rather that they hadn’t tried stunts like blocking doors and pulling fire alarms. A couple of the men there agreed to- but, this concept hasn’t gone over very well in the MRA community. Some people, including Paul Elam, the founder of A Voice For Men have got a bit hostile.

Despite Elam’s seeming rejection of this concept (he’s even erased when I wrote it in his site’s comments section), it’s undeniable there are MRA’s who are equally a part of the problem. While there are many genuinely good people who read and contribute to his publication, there are those who respond with the same level of bigotry we saw coming out of Vanja Krajina.

When I published the video of the conversation between MRA’s and feminists there were some very ugly responses from AVFM readers. Some people criticised her on her clothing style, or her choice of hair colouring- petty stuff. The MRA she was talking to on the video came out with a couple of particularly bigoted and closed-minded remarks:



Many of the people who came for the protest have deep faith in Marxist/Trotskyite/Maoist revolutionary dogma. By definition, they’re not at all interested in finding peace in the war of the sexes- instead, their purpose is to generate anger and discontent. Some of their leaders make a living off of this work. Equally, there are MRA’s who are also want to see unrest- some enjoy the fight, others can profit off of the community.

But, not all feminists are raging butch feminazis, just as much as not all MRA’s are misogynist pigs who refuse to close the toilet seat lid. But both movements (and all movements in general) are statistically bound to experience the impact of extremists who don’t have the capacity (or will) to seek and implement constructive solutions. Activism often attracts some people with deep personal wounds.

One measure of any movement’s success will be how they address these problems. We’re not going to solve this problem by blocking doors or pulling fire alarms. We’re also not going to fix it by insulting each other and using derogatory and sexist language. More importantly, we’re not going to solve anything if we let the narrative be dictated by those at the edge of reason.

It’s time for the quiet people sitting on the sidelines to speak-out…


Permanent link to this article:


2 pings

Skip to comment form

    • Anon on April 6, 2013 at 04:15
    • Reply

    Jesus, Greg. Thanks for covering this so well.

    1. Thank you. :)

    • anon on April 6, 2013 at 10:34
    • Reply

    Greg, I think you’re being a little hard on dannyboy here. Were his comments unnecessary? Yes. Unhelpful? Yes. But try and put yourself in his shoes, I know you’ve been there yourself, when under attack, the human response is to attack back.

    For observers to.this fight, like myself, who recognize the injustice, the misandry and the hypocrisy of our present world, but have been more or less PERSONALLY unscathed, its easy to judge those who let emotion get the better of them.

    But for Paul Elam and company, who have been working tirelessly to raise awareness in a calm and fair way only to be demonized and ridiculed by an uncaring and intellectually dishonest mainstream media? Well is it any wonder emotions are running high ?

    Dannyboy should not have made those comments, but I understand why he did. He was under attack. I think you are being slightly unfair.

    In a related note, the left wing crazies who hate you are even crazier than I thought. You go out of your way to be fair to both sides.

      • Dan Perrins on April 6, 2013 at 14:05
      • Reply

      Yes I made those comments on his video ONLY after assessing the interaction between me and red.
      Since Greg thinks she is so nice and reasonable let him court dialogue with her, but he should be aware she didn’t even have the intellectual honesty to let us know where she got here diatribe from.
      She quasi-plagiarized it from jezebel, that bastion of equality.
      Greg’s site traffic must be down I guess.

      1. She said, several times, that she was reading from a list she got off of a webpage. True, she didn’t mention the site name, but she wasn’t publishing an academic paper- merely trying to share something that was important to her.

        Could she have been more open and polite? Of course! But, like many people, she was very emotional about the situation- and, she had heard lots of hardcore negative propaganda even before she arrived. (I admit, what when I heard the “rape is exciting” quote it threw me off too- but then I read the page and better understood it.)

        It’s fine if you’d rather not stay there and wait until the situation had the opportunity to de-escalate. That said, it’s unfortunate you missed on the opportunity- real progress was made. If you’re truly open to working towards harmony you would have really enjoyed the conversation.

        One important thing to mention is that if people are going to be at a protest, we should expect that they may get emotional. It was impressive how the MRA’s didn’t fall into the trap of getting emotional themselves- that said, perhaps a little emotion (without insults) would have been a good thing. If men and women are going to reach an armistice in the battle of the sexes it’s going to take a few emotional outbursts. Think of it as group therapy.

        What’s important is what happens after we all calm down and start talking. Those who can drop the hurt feelings and aggression afterwards are the people who are going to lead us towards a solution. It’s the people who can’t who will hold us back.

        This is the problem with the anarchists/Marxists/unionists. They have no intention AT ALL to find a solution- their intent is to stir people up into a continuous revolution. The bulk of the problems we’re seeing with feminist extremists comes from this group.

        Now, as for your accusations about my wanting to build traffic to my website- of course I do! But that’s not why I chose this story- it’s because of the anarchists, I’ve been studying them for a while now and this was a natural progression of my work. I’m pretty sure you were just trying to hit with a cheap ad-hominem attack, but thought I should make myself clear in case you just didn’t understand.

        There’s nothing I’d love more than to see you and her sit down and have a real conversation together. You guys should invite some feminists to one of your meetings for a debate sometime- I’m sure it would raise your website’s ranking a bit…

          • Dan Perrins on April 6, 2013 at 23:10
          • Reply

          “I`m sorry Danny boy`s man fee-fees are so fragile, he can`t handle (and neither can the mra mob) being talked down to by a feminist. ”
          Her words, her tumblr
          Sure looks like she is ready to rationally discuss the issues.
          And wasn’t her actions just beautiful when I brought up the suicide problem Canada has with males making up about 80% of that population.
          What song did she break into again?
          Let me refresh your memory “cry me a river” was the tune she carried in a mocking way.
          BTW just for shits and giggles there are 11 papers on issues facing women on CMHA site and only 1 dealing with issues men face, but hey feminists are looking after both males and females right? They’ve been working on it and look at the results 1 paper for men to 11 for women.
          Males can rest easy now feminists have saved the day.
          Red is such an empathetic person, a shining example of feminism in action.

          Do you honestly think red and her feminist ilk should be trusted with the health issues facing males?
          Have you really studied the issues and players in this gender war?
          Have you seen what has come out of the so called feminist experts mouths and keyboards in Ottawa?

          I’ll tell you something else I had a conversation with a feminist on the bus to the Fiamengo event, she agreed on just about every single point but when I went to hand her an AVFM sticker she replied “I tear them down.” A simple sticker which states ‘men’s rights are human rights’ and yet this young university aged feminist could not grasp the bigotry of her actions.

          Invite the feminists over to one of our meetings?
          AVFM is not affiliated with CAFE so that makes no sense.

          However that being said the protesters could have gone inside, listened to and added to the lecture that CAFE put on that night.
          And yet what did they do?
          Engage in riot like activities and pull the fire alarm yet again.

          You claim that red said she got it from a website well @ about 1:50 to about 1:57 in your video she states
          ‘this is a list of things that we (whomever we is) are working towards’
          Maybe you didn’t listen or watch your own video closely enough?

          Another thing you claim in the about section of your video you state this;
          “CAFE and members of A Voice For Men held a meeting at the University of Toronto on April 4. 2013.”
          CAFE put on the event, AVFM was only there to document and observe and ask a few questions.
          Have you made CAFE aware of your fraudulent allegations?

          Christ can’t you even copy and paste properly from the CAFE website or listen to your own videos?

          1. Could you please share the link with her blog? I’d like to read that…

              • Dan Perrins on April 7, 2013 at 00:29
              • Reply

              Bottom of the page.
              I imagine she will erase it sometime soon so have made screenshots.

                • Anon on April 8, 2013 at 23:10

                Well, you called that one right. Would like to see the screenshots.

                • Jo on July 16, 2013 at 13:42

                is that really her blog? I found it before and it looked totally different. had way more posts too. guess she deleted them. anyone know her name too?

          • Brendan Rex on April 6, 2013 at 23:21
          • Reply

          I do just want some clarity here. You are talking about the woman with the red hair who ended in the video mocking people for talking about suicide by singing sardonically “cry me a river”.
          A woman reading a page from Jezebel, a site who parrots much the same attitude. Say for example stating that they care about legitimate male victims of female perpetrated domestic violence while openly celebrating both their own violence in their “have you ever hit your boyfriend” article and have referred to women cutting off their boyfriends penis as “bad ass”.
          The woman I saw in that video and others, who cheered as fire alarms were pulled, are not people who will ever drop the hurt feelings because the hurt feelings justify their outburst and bad behaviour.

          1. You’re right about the cheering for the fire alarm- I saw that this evening after re-watching the video. What I also saw was that she was willing to have an open conversation in the end. If more people could do that we’d have a better chance at making things amicable for everyone…

              • Brendan Rex on April 7, 2013 at 09:35
              • Reply

              If these people are willing to talk rationally then why do they not? No one is silencing them. What has stopped this woman or any other protester from saying something when someone flying the flag of feminism throws every man and child under the bus to make domestic violence synonymous with “violence against women” and why does this need to be done twice as hard in places where domestic violence is more likely to have a male face.
              Why do they remain silent when the defenition of rape was changed in the US to specifically. Exclude male victims of female perpetrators.
              And why are they so unwilling to come to the defence of their beloved ideology when anyone on the MRA side of things asks for reasoned conversation or public debate of the issues?
              Is this about their rights or their fear of losing control of the dialog?

              • Astrokid.NJ on April 7, 2013 at 14:53
              • Reply

              Dude.. Why did you call the cops on the flagpole guy? Poor guy has to be in prison now. I saw him elsewhere after the attack, and he was willing to have a good discussion about society’s problems and anarchy. There are many anarchists who are all willing to sit down and talk. If you could just sit down with him, you could come to an understanding. I dont understand why more people dont do this.

              1. Because he’s a violent and dangerous criminal who hospitalized me? Sorry, there’s no way I could trust to be in a room with him- wouldn’t put myself in that position.

    • The Hammer on April 6, 2013 at 11:00
    • Reply

    This mens rights movement does seem to have a hard time that feminists fall into several buckets. I can remember when I first realized feminism is far more complex than what is often portrayed. There was a feminist protest against the Miss Oktoberfest Pageant on campus back when I was in school. Yet, another feminist group came out to protest the protest and show support for the pageant. On group was concerned with the objectification of women while the other was concerned with the right of women to do what they want.

    It is good too see some bridges were built. Though, the jaded side of me fears the Marxist activistocrat leaders will censure anyone who tried to make peace with the other side.

      • Dave on April 6, 2013 at 12:28
      • Reply

      Feminists are judged not so much on the actions of random groups (good or bad), but on their most high profile organisations and political figures.. I.e. the ones who ahve the greatest impact on all our lives.

      The dominant ideology of such people is that of gender feminism, with zero concern for men, fairness or equality. They don’t’ want equality of opportunity but equal outcomes, and even then they only want this in areas where women are performing poorly. In fact, even when women outperform men, such as in higher education they’re happy for sexist programmes, scholarships and quotas to continue, thus making the gender gap ever greater.

      Even moderate feminists never really condemn the huge amount of hate and sexism in their movement, and most moderate feminists find the term so tarnished that they no longer identify as feminists anyway. As a resuslt it’s become more misandrist and extreme movement by the day.

      • John D on May 3, 2013 at 20:17
      • Reply

      I agree that there are many variants of feminism (including some who think the only way to save humanity is to cull men down to about 5% of the current population).

      However, like variants of christianity they have certain agreed upon dogma.
      Much like no matter the version of christianity they all believe christ is the way to salvation feminists have their doctrines.

      These are “male privilege” and “patriarchy”. The problem is that much like a religion these theories remain immutably fixed despite heaping mounds of contrary evidence.

      This means that all of feminism believes that the culture is setup to disadvantage women and men (when everything is tallied) have more privilege than women.

      In order for men’s issues to be addressed under the feminist umbrella it has to be on their terms. In other words since it is always presumed that women are much more greatly disprivileged (even today in the west) so men’s issues will be put on the back burner.

      I’m sorry but that’s not good enough. Men have a right to open a forum and NOT have it being bullied into falling in line with feminist dogma.

      Feminists are just going to have to grow a thick skin. Because the mrm is growing by leaps & bounds & a TON of that growth comes from women. Lookup videos by wholly bumblebee or girl writes what or typhoon blue.

    • Dave on April 6, 2013 at 12:11
    • Reply

    Sorry but I don’t really buy this at all. Yes there are bigots on both sides but the proportions of said bigots are incomparable.

    When did MRAs ever block doors, tear down posters, wave box cutters, pull fire alarms, endanger people’s lives and openly hurl abuse in innocent people’s faces? You can’t seriously compare a few random silly and slightly sexist youtube comments by unknown persons of unknown age, with far worse and unprovoked behaviour of those who’ve actually gone to the trouble of attending the event. Anyone can view a video and some of these are reaching large audiences, completely unconnected with gender politics. You’re not comparing like with like and sits should primarily be judged by their published content, not by random comments.

    As for feminists who promote castration, FYI they openly do so at educational institutions and the phenomena actual exists. Most of the things even feminist leaders say at these events are complete lies and fabrications, and thus the concern for truth between the movements really couldn’t be any greater.

    As for the abusive red haired lady, much of what she said was “agreeable”, but it was also all complete bullshit. Was she able to cite one single feminist organisation anywhere on the planet doing even one of the things she claimed feminists do? I could cite several actually doing the exact opposite of what she said. Also note with regard to false rape allegations, her concern is still for the effects they have on other vicitms of rape rather than the men who’s lives are ruined by these crimes.

    I’m not in favour of people who insult her, any abuse she gets is a tiny fraction of what she was handing out. She abused others completely unprovoked, in people’s faces, whilst reading out lies. It is inevitable that there is going to be a few who are provoked by this, just as it is inevitable that someone one day will die if fire alarms are pulled often enough. I’m just pleased that her vicitms who were actually at the event were so mature and composed.

    • truthjusticeca on April 6, 2013 at 12:12
    • Reply

    I’m more interested in the mainstream feminist bigots like NOW and LEAF and SWC that have opposed equal shared parenting and reform of domestic violence policies and training by mischaracerizing Fathers Rights Activists as abusers for wanting to be part of their childrens lives.

    I was at Thursday nights event and I didn’t see anything comparable in context or magnitude to the feminist protesters. Still, you fail to provide any evidence of anything comparable.

    Thanks for attending attending and providing video. Hopefully, somewhere, somebody will discuss the issues instead of the drama.

    • driversuz on April 6, 2013 at 13:18
    • Reply

    I didn’t see any examples of bigotry from MRAs anywhere in your piece.

    There are a very few genuine misogynists who claim themselves to be MRAs, but you don’t see them actually ACTING on behalf of men’s human rights. Like any bigots who lack political power, they are little more than Keyboard Jockeys, despised by all, hiding behind their monitors.

    You’ll have to do better than posting a couple of sarcastic asides, to support your statement.

    1. Good to see you here, Suz. Nice to have good company ;)

  1. I understand that you are trying to be even handed, Greg, but one only has to glance over the meniscus of the behaviors of each of the parties in the videos to see the actual dynamic of what was going on. The red-haired woman’s tone, her body language, her repeated, assaulting profanities, are egregious (they made my spine tense just hearing them over and over.) From where I come from, this sounds like verbal abuse. Her words were belied by a very real emotional violence being projected at the MRA’s.
    Dannyboy’s comments, yes, are sexist, yet they need to be put into context. He was one of the objects of her projective anger – one that seemingly forbade any other interlocutor. I find it understandable and human that he should have had a reaction to her in a general sense. It would have provoked emotions within me, for sure. While his words were a little puerile, Danny is a man of good intention, yet one who is not deftly inured with the mindful – yet often mealy-mouthed – rhetoric of the left. He has come from a different place, a different intellectual environment, and his words betray that a little. That is not a crime, that is just his experience and his up-bringing. However, what I know of him, through personal correspondence, he is someone who is open to doing things differently if necessary. Given the fact that many MRA’s have been emotionally (and often legally) devastated by the barbs of the extant misandric culture, I, for one, can forgive them for being a little raw.
    That said, a lone wolf shouting ‘I wish that bitch would die’ does not an MRA make. I have seen a lot of hateful remarks made possibly by men online in response to the feminist’s rant that you posted. Aside from the fact that these may be agent provocateurs, I suspect that these people are emotionally damaged keyboard warriors. Indeed, there is a pervasive consensus among the MR(H)M crowd, that emotional equilibrium is the key aim. If any one of us fail in that endeavor, all it says that we are human-beings – not necessarily bigots. It says that we were caught off-guard, or being reactive to the incessant barrage of feminist hatred. There are bigots within the MRA, but they are usually not associated with the MRHM vanguard. They are usually found elsewhere in the cobwebbed corners of cyber-space. They are, by and large, inactive activists, associated with the extremes of the MGTOW mindset (and are often swayed by Game Theory.) I do not consider these people dyed-in-the-wool MRA’s.
    In my own experience, I will say this. I was for many years, an anarcho-syndicalist. It was commonplace to view certain actions as ‘necessary evils’ – as fulcrums – to leverage our political will, our intent of attrition, against the power structures we wished to destroy. MRA’s wish to overtake feminism, to replace it with something better and more humane. But, on the whole, we do not have a mandate to cause undue harm to achieve our aims. ‘Register-her’ can be argued to ’cause harm.’ Indeed, it is a bone of contention for many of us; at first I, segued into my anger and thought it was a good idea. That it was righteous. Now I am, at best, conflicted about it. However, it is something that I am powerless to affect change over.
    When all is aid and done, feminism, in my experience, seeks to advantage women to the exclusion of men and boys. I, for one, am behind equality of opportunity, but I will not endeavour to unnaturally wrest or mold the equality of those outcomes.

    • Rich on April 6, 2013 at 15:23
    • Reply

    Great report Greg. Was the redhead Ashliegh I?

    In any case, I have to concur with some of the observations above – her hysteria, profanity, over-theatrical emotions and clear hate suggest something is going on inside her head other than offense at the perceived crimes of “patriarchy.”

    Yes, I’m sure you have bad people on both sides, but when you have one group of people trying to prevent another from having the ability to meet and discuss ideas, that says just about everything about the fascist/Marxist nature of their agenda.

    Good work here both on actual coverage and background on why some of those groups find these Men’s Rights meetings so threatening.

    1. Hi. No, it wasn’t Ashleigh. As far as I can tell, she’s not at all connected to the anarchist rabble. If she was, it’s doubtful there’d have been much constructive conversation- that all started after they left.

    • The Hammer on April 6, 2013 at 16:50
    • Reply

    This is all part of a larger trend on Canadian campuses. Too many university campuses are starting to resemble Nazi Germany. Free speech is attacked.The activists now seem to believe that if they do not agree with someone it is their duty to prevent that someone from speaking. And they are now passing edicts to try and prevent Jews from teaching at their campuses.

    As for MRAs. Be very careful. It is a slippery slope. Make sure you are not staring into that abyss too much. If you know what I mean.

    • GOM on April 6, 2013 at 16:58
    • Reply

    The only extreme I saw with the MHRAs on video was Dannyboy being “extremely patient” and calm while the lady was spewing hateful diatribe at him and telling him to shut up when he tried to respond to her. For Christ sake you post your videos on line after the event and quote mine Dannyboys belated jab back at her. Serious, you pass this off as journalism and as unbiased reporting. It does not even reflect what actually happened between these two on the ground at UT?

  2. As an MHRA, I acknowledge that there are bigots on both sides. There are about ten million on their side who have power and influence in our public institutions, and about 1,000 on our side whose extent of influence is to lurk on the margins of the internet.

    • Whatever on April 9, 2013 at 00:30
    • Reply

    I’m not seeing “Menopausal diatribe” as particularly bigoted or closed minded. And listen to enough comedians female and make, and you’ll hear plenty of jokes about it.

    I can agree with you his words may have hurt and were unnecessary but bigoted or closed minded? Not seeing that.

    1. I should have published more of what I found about the person who wrote this- but, I was trying to be gentle. Do some searching, you may be uncomfortable with what you find.

        • Astrokid.NJ on April 9, 2013 at 00:42
        • Reply

        You mentioned over at AVFM that there was at least one person on the MRA side who could be on the “most likely to be Unabomber” list
        Since you documented only Dan Perrins here.. is it safe to assume you were talking about him? If not, can you throw more light on the subject?

        1. I said I’d keep that private- and I will. I mention Perrins in this article because he was the person who was talking to the woman in the video…

            • Dan Perrins on April 9, 2013 at 01:00
            • Reply

            No since you’re making allegation Greg let hear it.
            I insist.
            Cause I think you are full of shit.

            1. Why would you think I’d perceive you as a Unabomber Dan?

                • Dan Perrins on April 9, 2013 at 02:44

                Well given your allegations over at AVFM as pointed out by Astrokid NJ.

                “There was at least one person on the MRA side who could be on the “most likely to be Unabomber” list, as there was one from the anarchist side who was like that. It will all be in my story…” (still there by the way)
                So lets hear it.
                Have at it.
                Is it because of my beard?
                Provide proof of your allegations.
                I know what documents and videos are out there, I put them them there.
                I also know most of the ones that try and smear me.
                And I know what I can prove as fraudulent.
                Many, many people fucked up in the four years of dealing with me.
                Lawyers, nurses, doctors, cops, crown attorneys, members of the judiciary.

                So have at it Greg.

              1. Once again, I never said it was you- only asked why you thought I would believe it’s you. But, after your response, I’m getting the feeling I understand why you think I was referring to you. Über creepy dude…

    • MBD on April 24, 2013 at 22:28
    • Reply

    I find this article to be very offensive–there is nothing cute or funny about violent agitators showing up to protests wearing masks, wielding clubs and bullhorns, disrupting peaceful gatherings and threatening violence, committing petty crimes and acts of vandalism, and dehumanizing people just because they disagree with those people.

    I find it horrifying that you would say of this event, “a good time is had by all.” Would you find it nearly so cute or funny if jackbooted MRAs showed up in masks wielding clubs and shouted at feminists trying to meet peacefully, intimidating them and telling them to “shut the fuck up” and refusing to let them assemble in peace? Would you? I would actually like the author of the article to respond to this, because this is your caption:

    “A good time was had by all.”

    No–for those of us who felt threatened, who felt like we were being judged and discriminated against, for those of us who just came to hear a talk and ended up being on the receiving end of shouting, of masked agitators beating clubs on the ground, and of free speech on campus being viciously, repeatedly, illegally disrupted, I can assure you a good time was NOT had by all.

    1. If you’ve read my other stories you’ll understand that I have a serious problem with the people in masks who came with the intention of causing problems. The point of this story is that these people don’t represent feminism per-say, they represent radical feminism. There’s an important difference- there are many people on the feminist side who are open to dialogue- we shouldn’t confuse the masked assholes as being representative of feminism in general. They’re not…

      Oh, and ‘a good time was had by all’ was sarcasm…

      1. “There’s an important difference- there are many people on the feminist side who are open to dialogue”

        If these other side of feminism people who are open to dialogue exists, I have yet to find them. You aren’t one of them, given your clear hate on for the MRA. It’s far to easy to just label someone who’s opinion you don’t like as a hate movement (you know, like feminists had happen to them in it’s early days, with the label “man-hating bulldyke”), then claim because you’ve labeled them a hate movement, you don’t need to engage. This is, ultimately, demonstrating an unwillingness to engage, not the opposite.

        And whether you like it or not, those people protesting, DO represent feminism. If you don’t like HOW they are doing so, protest those protesters and represent another side of feminism. But when those people are protesting the Men’s issues events, they are doing so as feminists, not radfems, not a specific branch of feminism, but just feminists. This is no different than a couple guys telling dongle jokes getting fired for poorly representing the company they were attending a conference at. They may only be two people at the company, they may not be the owners, but their acting poorly reflects upon the entire company, and the company needed to take action to address that bad publicity. What actions have you taken to address how those protesters are representing you poorly? You’ve attacked the people they were protesting… good job!

        1. I think you’re confused, I have no anger towards the MRA’s – at least, not when I wrote this article. I’m totally shocked how MRA’s have responded though – much more defensive than I would have imagined. All I said is that EVERY movement has it’s bigots, and that movements can be analysed by how it reacts to these people. From the reactions I’ve had, the MRA movement is obviously failing in this regard.

          1. I apologize for the accusation. The gmail update had a jezebel article linked, which I thought was what these comments were replying to.

            That said, your still demonstrating a hostility (if not hate) to MRA’s, given your extremely uncharitable reading of Danny’s comments and digging for reasons to dismiss CAFE. As well as your censorship, as evidenced by the removal of a comment of mine that you had actually responded to. If they come from a white supremacist group, then provide your source.

            1. Thanks for the more open response- I truly appreciate that.

              I’m not hostile to MRA’s, all I was saying is that the sort of language Dan Perrins chose to use was not conducive to fixing anything- the only result those words could have done is to increase hostility. It’s damaging to your cause- anything that pushes MRA’s and feminists further from each other is. The only way to make a better world for everyone is to find ways to build bridges. If there’s anything I learned from the conversation with the red headed woman (after the circus was over) was that there’s plenty of productive middle ground to be discovered.


                • Dan Perrins on April 25, 2013 at 19:20

                And just how is my 2 comments about 16 hours after the fact going to affect any dialogue at all during the event?
                Enlighten us on that Greg?

              1. Of course it couldn’t affect dialogue after the situation Dan- that’s obvious now. But, tens of 1000’s of people have been reading and following the aftermath- many of them are feminists. The woman you were in a dialogue with that night was watching too. How is that going to make anything better? It isn’t.

                Oy Vey.

              2. Are you sure you arent mixing up two different organizations Greg?
                The first CAFE you linked to in this very blog.. is this and there’s no Paul Fromm in there.

              3. Ouch! No wonder nobody approved it! Damn. I need to make an apology for this as it appears I may have the wrong organization. Thanks for bringing it to my attention, I’m removing my other comments now.

                • Dan Perrins on April 26, 2013 at 03:03

                And the reason why I or any other MHRA would want to have any dealings with this miscreant?
                Even feminists are calling her actions deplorable.
                Women / feminists themselves are calling her names that I have avoided. And trust me I know quite a few in more than 1 language.
                Did you happen to catch the widow’s response to red?


                I’ve known Brenda for quite a while now and she is not the only one who feels that red needs to listen to her own words.
                And please red has been doing nothing but slag me from day one.
                Did you catch her singling me out?
                And then stalking me.


                How about her other interactions with the street preacher, Greg?
                All of this shows a pattern from red, and not a pattern civil discourse either.
                Lots more evidence where that came from Greg, things you willfully choose to ignore.

                If you think anyone of those marxist / socialists who engaged in that protest are interested in being reasonable then you are just as deluded as them.
                Also damn interesting how feminism is now trying to co-opt MHRM beliefs after having the chance to address the issues for over 50 yrs.

                Show me just one damn thing feminism has done to benefit men and boys.

                How about advocating for money to address the life expectancy gap which is about 5 yrs.

                Just one damn thing Greg,
                And destroy the mythical ‘patriarchy’ doesn’t count. That is a red herring that is meant to control people (mostly women) via fear.

  3. There was also significant controversy over the move by protesters to barricade the doors. Many patrons argued that the methods used by the protestors suppressed free speech and stifled debate. The protestors argued that Farrell’s talk was hate speech, and did real damage to women. Demonstrators shouted the slogan “No Hate Speech on Campus” on a number of occasions throughout the night.

    1. Thank you for sharing that- one of the protesters I spoke with afterwards said the same thing. As I’ve been saying, let’s not tar everyone with the actions of a few- and, question things when people ask you to do dumb stuff! :)

    2. Sofia Alston: Not true at all, they did not argue that Farrells talk was hate speach. They argued that things he wrote two decades ago was hate speech (yet to be proven in any court) The protest was before the talk and did not involve the talk at all. By the same measurement maoism supports massmurder and in what way is that NOT hate-speech?

    • Clover on May 17, 2013 at 19:13
    • Reply

    In the 2007 book International Encyclopedia of Men and Masculinities, Marc A. Ouellette directly contrasted misandry and misogyny, arguing that “misandry lacks the systemic, transhistoric, institutionalized, and legislated antipathy of misogyny.”[11] Anthropologist David D. Gilmore argues that while misogyny is a “near-universal phenomenon” there is no male equivalent to misogyny. He writes:
    Man hating among women has no popular name because it has never (at least not until recently) achieved apotheosis as a social fact, that is, it has never been ratified into public, culturally recognized and approved institutions (…) As a cultural institution, misogyny therefore seems to stand alone as a gender-based phobia, unreciprocated.[12]
    Gilmore also states that neologisms like misandry refer “not to the hatred of men as men, but to the hatred of men’s traditional male role” and a “culture of machismo”. Therefore, he argues, misandry is “different from the intensely ad feminam aspect of misogyny that targets women no matter what they believe or do”.[12]

    Nuff said……………

      • Mark Neil on May 17, 2013 at 22:10
      • Reply

      So, because a couple guys have decided to assert women have it worst, their outright dismissal and denial of any kind of hatred towards men is final? no discussion needed?

      If that’s the case, then what is the meaning of Gilmore’s “at least until recently”? And how does that change things from what he’s said (or does the fact it is happening now not matter?). And on what basis does Ouellette assert misogyny requires systemic, transhistoric, institutionalized and legislated antipathy, you know, beyond creating an institutionalized exclusion of men as a class that can suffer hatred for being men? And can it really be argued there are none of these factors affecting men? Or is it simply assumed to be true because men’ don’t matter enough to even bother to examine the facts?

      I’d argue not enough has been said, not enough by far.

  4. I fail to comprehend how anyone can justify that viscious, abusive and downright offensive Big Red actions. Her rantings were a step away from the ranting ofaan individual who was possessed. How the guys at that protest stayed calm and resisted any action against that raging, vitriolic, abusive feminist sycophant is a credit to them.

  1. […] the fire alarm, harassing the attendees, and assaulting people trying to enter the forum. In 2013, feminists came back for more, ending with a similar […]

  2. […] að endingu var eldvarnarkerfið sett af stað í herberginu þeirra til að stöðva fundinn (sjá hér). Þegar Warren Farrell hélt fyrirlestur í þessum sama háskóla þurfti að kalla til lögreglu […]

What's your opinion?

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.