Thanks to the latest and thoroughly excellent Carnival Against Sexual Violence, I’ve discovered PC Bloggs, a policewoman in the U.K. who blogs about police crap. (Police crap: It’s a technical term, folks. Work with me.) PC has two posts in the carnival, and the first one is a doozy.

In Look how EQUAL we are, PC neatly illustrates the difference between how female and male rape victims are treated. She cites “two examples of the kind of regular updates entered into Blandshire’s Incident Control System by the on-duty control room supervisor following different reports”:

Incident #1:
Caller reporting her 17-year-old daughter was raped last night by two named offenders after going out drinking at her local pub. Daughter is very distressed and sore.
Update from supervisor: Officers to attend and establish the following:

1. Is the daughter making an allegation?
2. Names and descriptions of alleged offenders.
3. How much alcohol was consumed?
4. If allegation is being made, locate scene.
5. Will the victim attend court?
6. If allegation could be true, will she consent to a medical?

Incident #2:
Caller reporting her 18-year-old son was raped last night by a male known to him, following a party at his house. Son is in pain and upset.
Update from supervisor: Officers to attend and establish the following:

1. Locate the crime scene.
2. Arrange medical examination and take victim to rape suite.
3. Name/description of offender.
4. Preserve forensic evidence, seize clothing.

It would be mind-boggling if our minds hadn’t already been boggled from birth by the same kind of crap here in ‘Murka every goddamn day of our lives.

PC’s second post in the Carnival, An Idiot’s Guide for Rape Victims, is a tongue-in-cheek commentary on the absurd obstacles to getting a rape conviction, at least when the victim is a woman. But check the comments: it’s like an MRA propaganda bratwurst exploded in the pan and spewed greasy lies everywhere.

“95% of all rape allegations are proven, in court, after the evidence being tested by qualified barristers and subjected to examination by jurors, to be false.

“In other words the women lied.

“I makes you wonder just how many innocent men have had their lives destroyed by lying women.”

…writes one serial rapist from his jail cell as he takes a break from penning his latest demand for parole. And a divorced father who sexually abused his daughter and is still fuming over losing custody chimes in:

“But when we get the Feminazis and their pussy-whipped supporters who want the inconvenient facts ignored and accused men to be convicted merely on the say so of a hysterical, neurotic or drunken woman then, quite frankly, it is difficult to consider that they are not delusionally insane?”

I’m thinking I need to make an exception to my self-imposed ban on travel. Like the Accidental Tourist, my goal when travelling is to find an environment as similar to home as possible so as to avoid even a twinge of culture shock. I believe Britain can provide me with that kind of experience. I can go there and encounter exactly the same kind of rape-denying MRA fucktwits I enjoy so much here at home.

And there’s more: British feminists get pornified by book publishers, too!

PC Bloggs, you see, has written a book:

Notice anything? Like, maybe, how the title makes it sound like a prostitute’s tell-all? And how the cover features a good-looking woman with bright red lipstick (and no eyes, ’cause that could confuse men into thinking she’s a human being)?

You know, if Andrea Dworkin wrote Intercourse today it would be published with a lurid pink cover and a picture of a naked porn actress on all fours with a pair of bunny ears on. Intercourse! The too-hot-to-handle exposé from deep inside the Battle of the Sexes!

I’m betting PC Bloggs has written a smart and incisive book. But dig the publisher’s product blurb:

WPC BLOGGS is a 21st Century policewoman… a cross between Bridget Jones and PC David Copperfield. She frets about her make-up, flirts with male officers and, occasionally, arrests some very naughty people.

She frets about her fucking makeup? FRETS ABOUT HER FUCKING MAKEUP?

Oh man, I’m totally booking my flight. I can travel again! It’ll be just like home!

One question, though: do y’all still have those wax paper squares in the bathroom? Cause that could be a problem.

Posted by Violet under Gender Issues, MRAs/FRAs, Rape on August 16, 2007, 3:09 pm EST

31 Comments »

Fuck off. Go away. Do not post here. If you do, your comment will be deleted.

The intertube is a big place and there are plenty of websites where you can indulge your fetid delusions about how the nigras/Jews/bitches have ruined the world and robbed you of your destiny. Not here.

FUCK OFF.

Posted by Violet under Reclusive Leftist, MRAs/FRAs on July 1, 2007, 8:56 pm EST

Comments Off

UPDATE: I wrote this post before seeing the “Update” to Jill’s, in which she reported the comments the AutoAdmit trolls made about her on their own board: “I want to brutally rape that Jill slut,” “I’m 98% sure that she should be raped (even if only in Internet Land),” “So seriously, I think we should start another war with this cunt. She clearly deserves anything XOXO might inflict on her.” Of course that just proves the point of my post, but I wouldn’t call these guys “funny.” No, funny’s not the word. Insane, maybe? Or maybe just normal privileged men chatting about doing what normal privileged men have always done to keep the underclass in line.

What’s it called when the thing that you’re doing disproves exactly what you’re saying?

Over at Feministe I’ve been following the Duke case thread, which has been infested by trolls from AutoAdmit (the home for misogynist racist law students on the web). By the way, I strongly recommend that post as an excellent statement on the case.

Anyway, one of the twit-trolls said a funny thing:

Friendly Intruder Says:
April 13th, 2007 at 5:32 pm

“they’re not rich, but you have to realize that being a white man from a middle class suburb IS privileged in American society. maybe you don’t realize that.”

Jesus. Are we still on about “white males”? Still?

Our generation has moved past sexism to a large degree. Fighting a fight that was pretty much won by the late 90s seems like a waste of effort.

Yeah, I know. I don’t get it. I dated a rather extreme feminist for quite awhile and I tried like hell to understand her position. But she went to Yale, so it was difficult for me to feel her discriminated pain.

Notice the nascent MRAism there? He’s jealous of the girlfriend’s success. Guarantee you in 15 years he’ll be a divorced member of Fathers for Justice or something and railing about how the fembots have turned this country into a matriarchy.

But what’s funny is the “our generation has moved past sexism” bit. Do you hear that? Sexism is over! It’s just so last-decade. Friendly Intruder’s generation is beyond it. Which Friendly Intruder has amply demonstrated by his comments throughout the thread:

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted by Violet under MRAs/FRAs, Rape on April 13, 2007, 8:03 pm EST

13 Comments »

I admire Trish Wilson’s fortitude. She’s been dealing with Fathers’ Rights Activists for years, exposing and refuting their lies, and I don’t know how she stands it. Every time I encounter the FRA slime machine I feel like I need a shower.

The latest news from Trish is actually very good: two influential legal publications have come out strongly against Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), a non-existent psychiatric disorder that was invented by a crank and is popular with abusive fathers who are trying to game the system. According to the proponents of PAS theory, when a child alleges abuse by her father, it’s evidence not of abuse but of “brainwashing” by the vindictive mother who has taught the child to hate her father and invent crazy stories of being molested. The correct response, according to PAS people, is to award custody to the father. You can see why abusive pedophilic fathers would be very fond of this theory.

Dr. Richard Gardner, the psychiatrist who invented PAS, believed that pedophilia was natural and that the real trauma came from hysterical overreaction by a court system that just didn’t understand a father’s need to boink his child. Here are a few quotes from his various ravings:

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted by Violet under MRAs/FRAs on July 18, 2006, 1:04 am EST

58 Comments »

A lot of the men who are drawn to the FRA/MRA movement are probably just garden-variety assholes who are happy to blame feminism for their problems. But then there are the actual monsters: rapists, child-abusers, and wife-beaters who find the FRA/MRA rhetoric a convenient cover for their crimes.

The rapists are aided by a number of MRA spokesmen who claim that most rape allegations are false. Rape hardly ever happens, they say; it’s just a lie told by conniving bitches out to destroy dewy-eyed innocent men who would never hurt a fly. The child-abusers and wife-beaters have Fathers’ Rights Activists who claim that most child abuse and domestic violence claims are false. Fathers don’t really sexually abuse their kids, much less hit their wives, they say; that’s just a bunch of lies told by vindictive and/or delusional divorced mothers.

One FRA particularly devoted to the latter form of propaganda is Dean Tong, who runs a website called the Abuse-Excuse. It’s heavy on speculation as to precisely which form of mental illness could possibly be motivating all those divorced women to make such outrageously false claims about their ex-husbands. But alas for Tong, it turns out that one of the “wrongly-accused” dads he’s been advising is Darren Mack, who stabbed his ex-wife to death and shot the judge in the case. Whoops! Apparently Darren didn’t get the memo about how all accused fathers are really innocent non-violent types who just want a chance to hug their kids.

You’d think Tong would be embarrassed, but he’s obviously decided to bluff it out. Here’s what he told CNN:

Well, she had made allegations of domestic violence, that he had hit her. I had him tested by one of my psychologists, and the results of those findings and conclusions were that he had no propensity to be the monster that she was pinging him to be. I met the man last July in a Las Vegas hotel. We had breakfast together, and he certainly didn’t appear to me to be a risk to his child or his wife. So I mean, this is totally beyond surreal for me.

Yeah, who would have thought? Because of course Charla Mack couldn’t have been telling the truth — she’s a woman, women lie, women who are getting divorced lie even more, and women getting divorced who have children lie so much that if you gave them a polygraph test the machine would explode. Right? And on top of that Tong’s cadre of top-flight psychologists (who clearly got their degrees from the very best mail-order diploma mills) said Darren was fine, and during breakfast he didn’t say jack about stabbing anybody to death, so who could have seen it coming?

I would love to be able to report that the CNN interviewer smacked Tong upside the head and screamed, “HE FUCKING STABBED HIS WIFE TO DEATH AND TRIED TO KILL THE FUCKING JUDGE, YOU STUPID ASSWIPE! DOESN’T THAT SUGGEST TO YOU THAT JUST MAYBE YOUR SO-CALLED PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS ARE PERHAPS A TEENSY WEENSY BIT INACCURATE? GIVEN THAT ANY THOUGHT, PINHEAD?”

But of course no such thing happened. Instead they went on to talk about what Charla and the judge did to piss Darren off so much. (Hint: Darren just wanted to be able to hug his daughter!)

Thanks to Trish Wilson, who connected the dots on the Tong-Mack business and has blogged about it thoroughly. Here’s Trish’s original post, with more from Red State Feminist and Amanda.

Darren Mack is the guy whose violence was being defended on the MRA/FRA message boards, as discussed in this post.

Posted by Violet under MRAs/FRAs on June 19, 2006, 6:27 pm EST

14 Comments »

Red State Feminist has compiled a bunch of comments from MRA/FRA boards about the shooting of a family court judge in Nevada who had angered the fathers’ rights crowd. (MRA=Men’s Rights Activists, FRA=Fathers’ Rights Activists.) The shooter is believed to be Darren Mack, a deranged MRA (is that redundant?) who is also wanted for murdering his ex-wife.

To use the nomenclature we’ve developed on this blog, what we have here are men deprived of their joo-joo and willing to kill to avenge their loss. This has nothing to do with “equal rights for men” (ha!) and certainly not the welfare of children in a divorce; it’s all about regaining male superiority and punishing women who have escaped their control.

I’ve excerpted some of the comments below; Red State Feminist has more. Nothing does a better job of showing how these guys really think (and spell!):

Unfortunately, this is the only way a victim of this the family court can get justice - by killing the judge.

Men have snapped over the system and have lossed everything and have gone to extreme ways of veangance.

Judges and attorneys should take note and watch their back…This is only the beginning…It takes this kind of extreme to deal with another extreme…And for those dirty judges and cock roach vampire attorneys who look upon men/fathers as only a paycheck, not people with “rights” hahaha/just mention rights and the law in a court and see how fast you are told to pay more…

Violence is sometimes a necessary evil when you are dealing with tyrants. This country was born through violent revolution. It shouldn’t be that hard for people to understand that violence is sometimes justified and necessary.

Sounds like the chickens are coming home to roost. How many times is this going to happen before the legislatures realize that they have unleashed abominations known as family courts upon the land? How many more people will be injured or die because the state stuck it’s nose into something it does belong and is violating the rights of a class of Americans, who, if pushed to the point of nothing left to loose, will strike back?

Do the right thing; refuse to cooperate with this “domestic enemy”, stop paying the unlawful extortion. (Note: “unlawful extortion” means child support. The “domestic enemy” is apparently women, or at least divorced mothers. — Violet.)

Many deaths are to come if we don’t have a serious dialog [and serious action] about sexual discrimination against men. We shouldn’t be so backed into the corner that violence seems the only option… But here we are backed into the corner….

Violence may be the only solution! Nothing else seems to work!

I applaud these kinds of actions. Men and Fathers are at war with their respective governments. If the “enemy” is to sit up and take notice, there must be casualties.

Repeating my favorite mantra here: “…Feminism made this happen. Feminism made this happen. Feminism made this happen. Feminism made this happen. Feminism made…..”

Posted by Violet under MRAs/FRAs on June 17, 2006, 2:17 am EST

17 Comments »