One young woman, who got in a heated argument with a men’s rights activist at a protest in Canada, was subsequently dubbed as “little red frothing fornication mouth” by AVFM and had all of her private contact information published by MRAs. She received hundreds of elaborate threats of violence. One anonymous commenter invited her to “enjoy being anally defiled.” Another gloated: “I would actually cum cutting that bitch’s throat.” Another outspoken feminist told me personally that she had to get the FBI and the state police involved when AVFM targeted her. Authorities found the threats she received so credible that they advised her to leave home for two weeks, taking her husband and young child with her. Increasingly, men’s rights activists target women offline as well. Last month, members of the organization Men’s Rights Edmonton hung large “wanted”-style posters of a professor all over the University of Alberta campus, calling her a bigot. Her crime? She was involved in the university’s anti-rape campaign.
Some examples of how “men’s rights activists” are threatening and intimidating feminists. There is absolutely no justification for this kind of behavior, and I urge all anti-feminist men (and anti-feminist others) to at the very least not stoop to the level of threatening atrocities or publishing someone’s personal information. I may not agree with your points of contention when it comes to the feminist movement, but that will never cause me to harm you or your family. AVFM and similar MRA groups need to be stopped, for the safety of society as a whole.
From “A Good Men’s Rights Movement is Hard to Find” by Jaclyn Friedman
I couldn’t find sources to some of the above claims (and some are flat-out wrong or misrepresented) so they should be taken with a grain of salt, but the overall point is still valid: it is not right for anyone, regardless of gender or affiliation, to threaten another person with physical harm (or publish information which might bring that person harm). Just like there are shitty Feminists, there are also shitty MRAs.
I’ve never heard of The Spearhead before, so I skimmed through the past two months of material on the website. 99% of it is literally just babble which serves no educational or philosophical merit, so I’d personally recommend ignoring The Spearhead since it doesn’t have much value. AVFM at least has facts and information at times.
The above quote is written from a sensationalist (not informative) viewpoint, which is ironic. Feminists say “MRAs hate women” and MRAs say “feminists hate men”… so which is it? This whole thing has devolved into some stupid “he said, she said” argument instead of civilized debate around a middle ground. There are too many assholes on both sides; there is literally no logical reason to align oneself with Feminists or the MRAs.
Here’s an awesome little piece of history:
Archaeologists in the Burnt City have discovered what appears to be an ancient prosthetic eye. What makes this discovery exceptionally awesome is the striking description of how the owner and her false eye would have appeared while she was still alive and blinking:
[The eye] has a hemispherical form and a diameter of just over 2.5 cm (1 inch). It consists of very light material, probably bitumen paste. The surface of the artificial eye is covered with a thin layer of gold, engraved with a central circle (representing the iris) and gold lines patterned like sun rays. The female remains found with the artificial eye was 1.82 m tall (6 feet), much taller than ordinary women of her time. On both sides of the eye are drilled tiny holes, through which a golden thread could hold the eyeball in place. Since microscopic research has shown that the eye socket showed clear imprints of the golden thread, the eyeball must have been worn during her lifetime. The woman’s skeleton has been dated to between 2900 and 2800 BCE.
So she was an extraordinarily tall woman walking around wearing an engraved golden eye patterned with rays like a tiny sun. What an awesome sight that must have been.
SOMEONE DRAW HER PLEASE
CAN WE TALK ABOUT HOW AN ANCIENT CRAFTSMAN WAS PRESENTED WITH PEOPLE LOOKING FOR HELP TO NORMALIZE THEIR DISABILITY. AND THEN SAID ‘NAH FUCK THIS WE’RE GOING TO MAKE YOU LOOK BADASS.’
Is it okay that I love everything about this? Because I do and that can’t be changed now!
Honest curious question (I swear I'm not trolling, just ignorant) why do we need ability words AND keywords? Couldn't they just be under one big umbrella ?
They serve different purposes. Keywords are used to summarize large amounts of rules text, and sometimes multiple abilities, into a single word. It saves space, chunks a relatively large amount of functionality into a unified headspace, and provides an opportunity to use flavor to enhance understanding. As a simple example, consider trample. It’s a reasonably complex ability, but players can look at that single word and grok the meaning. “Oh, it’s big, and it runs over things in its path. Check.” Reminder text fills in enough gaps to cover most play situations, and off you go.
Ability words, on the other hand, aren’t rules constructs. They’re essentially flavor text, used to tie together abilities that share a common theme but are executed in different ways from a rules perspective. Consider metalcraft. Sometimes it’s a restriction of an activated ability. Sometimes it’s a cost-reduction ability. Sometimes it’s a self-replacement ability found on instants. Sure, they all have something to do with controlling three artifacts, but the rules see them as wildly different. Whereas flying always means the same thing on different cards, metlacraft does not.
Both keywords and ability words serve to encapsulate major features of a set into something players can grasp onto and talk about. Players have demonstrated that they love seeing new mechanics, but they prefer those mechanics to be “labeled,” be they keywords, ability words, or keyword actions, depending on execution.
Snow Show by John Westrock
I can’t wait until tumblr automatically sends you hate mail telling you to kill yourself when you have an extremely unpopular opinion. Just automate the whole social justice harrassment process, it’s predictable enough already.
Tumblrite: You can’t be racist against white people because white people are the majority.
Sane Person: What?
Tumblrite: You also can’t be sexist against women because men are the majority.
Sane Person: No they aren’t. Women are the majority, however thin, in virtually every nation.
Tumblrite: Sorry, I meant the majority in power!
Sane Person: Except women are the majority of voters in virtually every nation, so wouldn’t that mean they ultimately hold the political power? Or at least the majority of it?
Tumblrite: No, because more men are in power.
Sane Person: Because women put them there. So doesn’t that mean you can only be sexist against men? According to your metric?
Sane Person: But you just said…
Tumblrite: MISOGYNISTIC RAPE APOLOGIST!!!!
Sane Person: Wait, what?
Tumblrite: You just hate women.
Sane Person: I AM a woman.
Tumblrite: Internalized Misogyny!
Sane Person: You just made that up… *eye twitch*
Tumblrite: You’re just a gender traitor piece of *gurgle*gurgle*gleh*.
No Longer Sane Person: *continues choking the ever living shit out of Tumblrite*
I am not in the mood to get into anything here, but oh my god there is just…so much wrong with this. Yes of course women have the most political power on earth. That’s why men are routinely stoned and beaten and oppressed when they are raped or assaulted and their voices silenced. And the actual definition of racism makes it impossible to be racist against white people. That does not mean whites cannot be unfairly attacked, but no, the majority in power cannot experience racism by definition.
Y’all thought I was fucking around, didn’t you? Notice how in the end the Tumblrite twists themselves in order to make it stick.
For example… this person uses the ENTIRE PLANET when saying you can’t be sexist against men…
and then… uses a SPECIFIC region or locality when saying you can’t be racist against white people.
Neat trick, huh?
Here in America *women* are the majority of voters and every politician knows it… but Tumblrite can’t really hand that so then goes into a buncha feels talk about the worst women endure on the entire planet (and conveniently ignoring what men endure)… and then says the ACTUAL DEFINITION OF RACISM… which they *completely fucking made up out of whole cloth* makes it impossible to be racist against white people.
Even though there are plenty of places in the world where white people are not only not the majority… but are actually on fucking genocide watch’s list of people at risk for genocide. But we’ll conveniently forget about them because it doesn’t fit your fucked up ideology.
"And the actual definition of racism makes it impossible to be racist against white people” hold the fuck up, are you talking about the stupid “power + prejudice/oppression” definition? Because no one outside of Tumblr uses it. It’s the wrong definition.
People on Tumblr always mix up racism, discrimination, and prejudice. While there are similarities between all three, these are all clearly different things and should not be mixed up with each other. Racism is a belief that races are different and some races are better than others. Discrimination is unfair treatment of someone based on certain qualities (not necessarily race/ethnicity). Prejudice is an opinion formed without prior knowledge of the subject - a first impression of someone or something.
Racism has two sub-categories, institutional and individual.
"Institutional racism" refers to laws and regulations promoting racism, and is race-based discrimination written into law by whomever is in power. "Individual racism" is when one person displays discrimination or prejudice toward a person due to physical characteristics that reflect race or ethnicity.