Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Presented by the Southern Poverty Law Center, well-known classifier of hate groups and the like.

The newest "hate group" - pick up artists and "mens rights" advocates (link might be NSFW due to language).

A few excerpts of these allgedly hate-filled sites:

MensActivism
This website tracks news and information about men’s issues from around the world, with a focus on activism — and outrage. Par for the course are lurid headlines like this one: “Pakistani wife kills, cooks husband for lusting over daughter.” The site also runs stories like the one it headlined “Australia: Girl, 13, charged after taxi knife attack” that involve no abuse accusations, but are merely meant to undermine what the site claims is “the myth that women are less violent than men.”

RooshV
Roosh Vörek is a Maryland-raised PUA (“pick up artist”) whose specialty is sex with foreign women; his blog is a sales vehicle for his books like Bang: The Pick Up Bible and Bang Iceland: How to Sleep With Icelandic Women in Iceland, which one Icelandic feminist group described as a “rape guide.” Vörek likes to talk about his many “notches” (seductions) and such things as “American who I want to hate *.” He adds: “I’ll be the first to admit that many of my bangs in the United States were hate . The masculine attitude and lack of care these women put into their style or hair irritated me, so I made it a point to them and never call again.”

A Voice for Men
A Voice for Men is essentially a mouthpiece for its editor, Paul Elam, who proposes to “expose misandry on all levels in our culture.” Elam tosses down the gauntlet in his mission statement: “AVfM regards feminists, [a derisive term for weak men], white knights and other agents of misandry as a social malignancy. We do not consider them well intentioned or honest agents for their purported goals and extend to them no more courtesy or consideration than we would clansmen, skinheads, neo Nazis or other purveyors of hate.” Register-Her.com, an affiliated website that vilifies women by name who have made supposedly false rape allegations (among other crimes against masculinity), is one of Elam’s signature “anti-hate” efforts. “Why are these women not in prison?” the site asks.

Now I won't dispute that some of these sites (more at the link, and many of them really are vile) aren't exactly "tame" or include well-reasoned arguments. But the idea that any opposition to feminism, or the idea that false allegations of rape should be punished**, means a group is engaged in hate speech, or is a "woman-hating site" is absurd.

I wonder if SPLC is hurting for money and they're trying to reach out to an untapped market for donations.

* No mention of the Playboy article headlined with this term, oddly enough.
** Seriously, does anyone believe false allegations of rape shouldn't be punished?

This doesn't surprise me really. Over the last decade I've seen a growing trend in some areas that are very anti-women, some going so far as to denying rape should be a crime, often using Ayn Rand to back up the argument, as well as general attitudes toward women. I was going to say that I was surprised there is enough people to get listed, but then most hate groups tend to be very small in number.

Given that feminism is defined as equality between genders (before the inevitable whining, yes, I know that some so-called "feminists" aren't by this definition), opposing feminism would by necessity mean promoting inequality.

With that logic, it's not hard at all to see how these sites are defined as hate sites.

Ahtman wrote:This doesn't surprise me really. Over the last decade I've seen a growing trend in some areas that are very anti-women, some going so far as to denying rape should be a crime, often using Ayn Rand to back up the argument, as well as general attitudes toward women. I was going to say that I was surprised there is enough people to get listed, but then most hate groups tend to be very small in number.

Yes, but really, RooshV (I have no idea who that is, just basing this on the blurb posted)? He's a pick-up artist, a pig, and a sleazebag, but is it necessarily "hateful" to sleep with women and then not call them?

What's next, the various "meme" websites for using the "get back in the kitchen" meme? Or Obama supporters for the "iron my shirt" gag in '08?

biccat wrote: Seriously, does anyone believe false allegations of rape shouldn't be punished?

It depends. Its possible to believe that you were raped without having the actual event fit the legal standard, or for there simply to be insufficient evidence to bring the case to trial. Are we going to punish people who claim they were raped if the defendant was found innocent, or couldn't be tried?

Considering that rape is already under-reported, that seems foolish.

Certainly someone who was falsely accused of rape could seek civil restitution under defamation law.

biccat wrote:

Ahtman wrote:This doesn't surprise me really. Over the last decade I've seen a growing trend in some areas that are very anti-women, some going so far as to denying rape should be a crime, often using Ayn Rand to back up the argument, as well as general attitudes toward women. I was going to say that I was surprised there is enough people to get listed, but then most hate groups tend to be very small in number.

Yes, but really, RooshV (I have no idea who that is, just basing this on the blurb posted)? He's a pick-up artist, a pig, and a sleazebag, but is it necessarily "hateful" to sleep with women and then not call them?

What's next, the various "meme" websites for using the "get back in the kitchen" meme? Or Obama supporters for the "iron my shirt" gag in '08?

umm... "pick up artists" practice and preach techniques that rely on manipulation. Psychological, environmental and otherwise. they indoctrinate to their students the idea that women are "statistics" rather than people. They de-humanize their prey

pretty much the same techniques that sexual predators use :p

so im not sure they fit the description of "hate-crimes" but its waaaaaaaaaay beyond sleeping with women and not calling them

Makes sense. The "Pick-up Artist" movement core tenant is basically that women are sex machines, those don't want to have sex with you are broken and you "Fix" them through emotional manipulation.

"Men's Rights" groups basically just white dudes clubs upset that people other than white dudes are starting to take relevant positions in society.

Bakerofish wrote:
umm... "pick up artists" practice and preach techniques that rely on manipulation. Psychological, environmental and otherwise. they indoctrinate to their students the idea that women are "statistics" rather than people. They de-humanize their prey

pretty much the same techniques that sexual predators use :p

.... or salesman.

Granted. I'm not a fan of the movement.

I also refer to the comment section of this article:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2012/03/daily-chart-6

You'll notice a lot of people who simply say that "women deserve it", or outright dismissing the problem because ther are a (much smaller) number of women who abuse their male spouses.

It is an unfortunate problem in our society, a hold-over from an inglorious past culture that we're still trying to get rid of.

A stain on America's pride.

@easy e

I've never had a salesman try to get me drunk before

I have had a salesman try to get in my skirt before ,but I think HE was drunk.

Bakerofish wrote:@easy e

I've never had a salesman try to get me drunk before

Then he wasn't selling you something expensive enough.

Bakerofish wrote:@easy e

I've never had a salesman try to get me drunk before

Now, there are laws against that. A contract signed by an intoxicated person is not valid.

I'm just saying, a lot of techniques from the sales world easily cross over to PUA territory.

Melissia wrote:I have had a salesman try to get in my skirt before ,but I think HE was drunk.

@easy e

i was about to ask if you guys had a law about that.

but yeah i guess the techniques and mindset are similar but with things like sexual and physical violence, drugs, alcohol and disease are in play, I think its a whole different animal

I will admit that I have studied PUA techniques in depth... theres actually a lot of science and psychology that goes into it, and it makes sense, and its really not that bad for the most part. It certainly helped me figure out what I was doing wrong, etc. and tuned my love life around. For the record, I have not slept with anyone without being in a committed relationship first, so don't preach to me about how what I did was wrong, etc. because it wasn't.

dogma wrote:It depends. Its possible to believe that you were raped without having the actual event fit the legal standard, or for there simply to be insufficient evidence to bring the case to trial. Are we going to punish people who claim they were raped if the defendant was found innocent, or couldn't be tried?

The key term is "false," as in provably-false statements. Where the victim alleges rape and then admits that the encounter was consentual.

dogma wrote:Certainly someone who was falsely accused of rape could seek civil restitution under defamation law.

And likely be unable to recover. Although I'll admit that is more a question of substance over form.

Easy E wrote:Now, there are laws against that. A contract signed by an intoxicated person is not valid.

The legal standard for intoxication is ridiculously high.

@chaos

as with any form of psychology, you can use it to improve a situation or make anything worse. a therapist can as easily heal or drive a person deeper into depression.

with the way the gentleman is described above, can you say that you and him had the same goals?

all im saying is that this is way beyond sleeping with women and not calling them in the morning.

He's basically just using them and throwing them aside.

Essentially, he's trash.

Surely the women involved bear some responsibility for consensual sex?

I'm not a fan of the whole "pick up artist" thing, at all, but portraying women as helpless victims to it seems as demeaning as anything else discussed in this thread.

Bakerofish wrote:@chaos

as with any form of psychology, you can use it to improve a situation or make anything worse. a therapist can as easily heal or drive a person deeper into depression.

with the way the gentleman is described above, can you say that you and him had the same goals?

No, we are very different in that regard, I'm just saying that this is beyond typical for PUA type stuff, I'm not saying I'm a fan of that community (I am disgusted by it in fact), but most of those types don't seem that malicious, really the only ones that ever get away with that sort of thing (one night hit and quits) are the pros/experts, the average guy is going to take a week or so to seal the deal so to speak, usually on a second date, and there most likely will be follow ups...

Melissia wrote:He's basically just using them and throwing them aside.

Essentially, he's trash.

That does not constitute a hate group though, just a bad trailer park.

biccat wrote:
The key term is "false," as in provably-false statements. Where the victim alleges rape and then admits that the encounter was consensual.

So, perjury.

I imagine it would be fairly difficult to secure conviction even in the event that the supposed rape victim admitted to lying.

Monster Rain wrote:Surely the women involved bear some responsibility for consensual sex?

More often than not, the woman is the one that has to bear the most responsibility for it in the first place.

Monster Rain wrote:Surely the women involved bear some responsibility for consensual sex?

I'm not a fan of the whole "pick up artist" thing, at all, but portraying women as helpless victims to it seems as demeaning as anything else discussed in this thread.

and women do bear the responsibility. they surely have a lot more incentive to do so. and i would argue thats why PUA techniques were created in the first place.

we arent even discussing the victims here so to speak. what we are discussing here are the victimizers...and whether or not what theyre doing is a hate crime

i personally still dont have a firm opinion about it

Monster Rain wrote:Surely the women involved bear some responsibility for consensual sex?

I'm not a fan of the whole "pick up artist" thing, at all, but portraying women as helpless victims to it seems as demeaning as anything else discussed in this thread.

I think the idea is less about consent, and more about the entire "pick up artist" thing being implicitly sexist and dehumanizing.

For example, if you look at groups like Stormfront, the corps of their belief systems is the inherent superiority, or implicit community, defined by one's whiteness. Its not necessarily about hating other races (and religions), though that often results, its about securing the independence of white people from other races; hate follows from that.

Pick up artists don't necessarily hate women, they simply think they're lesser being, both relatively and objectively, and therefore are willing to do whatever is necessary to make them behave the way they want.

That being said, putting pick up artists on the same plane as Stormfront is off base for clear reasons.

dogma wrote:

biccat wrote:The key term is "false," as in provably-false statements. Where the victim alleges rape and then admits that the encounter was consensual.

So, perjury.

I imagine it would be fairly difficult to secure conviction even in the event that the supposed rape victim admitted to lying.

No, not perjury. Perjury requires an oath. Simply lying to police.

Do you think that should be punished?

As a father of a 2 year old girl, subjectively this sort of thing naturally gets my back up. These are piece of gak guys.

But. Again subjectively, as a young guy who's spent 4 years with college-aged females, there's also a lot of piece of gak women that hide behind a facade of pro-feminism/liberated woman in order to justify being a piece of gak human being.

Objectively, I simply can't be made to care about what piece of gak people do at the margin, likely to other piece of gak people.

dogma wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:Surely the women involved bear some responsibility for consensual sex?

I'm not a fan of the whole "pick up artist" thing, at all, but portraying women as helpless victims to it seems as demeaning as anything else discussed in this thread.

I think the idea is less about consent, and more about the entire "pick up artist" thing being implicitly sexist and dehumanizing.

Just so, Blood of my Blood, but playing the victim in this case isn't particularly empowering stance for any women to be taking.

Especially on this forum. You know what we do with victims 'round these parts. This is known.

sourclams wrote:
Objectively, I simply can't be made to care about what piece of gak people do at the margin, likely to other piece of gak people.

heres the scary part about PUA... the techniques arent designed for those people that are easy to pick up in the first place. Being a smart, well rounded girl does not make you immune from manipulation. Heck it would even make you a target.