When feminists resort to insults and personal attacks, I rarely actually get annoyed. My response is generally that of aggravation and occasionally frustration. These responses occur without much thought and usually pass once the situation itself is removed. On the other hand, annoyance requires continuous thought, and I dislike giving anyone inclined to insult others the time of day. However, there are occasions when I need to.
It is hardly unknown that feminists in general severely dislike any aspect of the men’s movement. The response varies, but usually it is a combination of misrepresentation and flat-out lies. And then there is this trite written by someone named Jeff Fecke. Apparently, he has a penchant for weaving asinine diatribes about the men’s movement. That also seems to extend to making some fairly outlandish claims about the “truth” of the men’s movement. In his latest foray into intellectual dishonesty Fecke discusses–with himself–the movement as he sees it. He writes:
Is that like the “National Association for the Advancement of White People” or the folks who think the Christian Right is oppressed?
Yes, the Men’s Rights Movement is the same kind of animal. All of these groups share a common worldview, that the traditionally oppressed groups, be they women, minorities, or non-Christians, have somehow seized control of the country and are systematically denying the straight, white, Christian men their rights.
Well, yes, but don’t ignore the reason for the pushback: men’s traditional privileges really are under attack. It’s just that these rights, like the right to beat and rape your wife with impunity, are anathema to a truly free and equitable society.
So they agitate for the right to rape and assault?
Not in so many words. But the MRAs do certainly seem preoccupied by the loss of that privilege. Look at the Glenn Sacks/Helen Smith interview we talked about early this week. It was all about how the Violence Against Women Act is a debacle for men, because, they say, men get sent to jail unfairly in domestic disputes. VAWA is a traditional hobby-horse for the MRA set.
I greatly avoid directly calling anyone a name. That has less to do with actually valuing that person on any level and more to do with my own personal sense of integrity. Fecke’s comments push that restraint to its edge. To claim that any men’s advocate wants to be beat and rape women sinks so below abject stupidity that one genuinely must worry about anyone in this man’s presence because the level of psychosis necessary to think something like that is such that he could be a very real risk to others’ safety.
I generally do not take such insults personally, either. However, to have someone frame all my efforts and the efforts of my friends who have tried their best to aid male victims as as an attempt “agitate for the right to rape and assault” demonstrates the intensity of Fecke’s misandry.
And the most pathetically sad part aspect of Fecke’s mentality is that he would never have the honesty or courage to apologize for making that kind of statement. In much the same way Bill O’Reilly holds himself a moral authority and yet refuses to even acknowledge what he said, so too will be Fecke’s response. The difference is that Fecke will stand by his statement despite what anyone puts in front of him.