Prominent MRA group parodies charity for profit.

[Dakini]

The White Ribbon Campaign is a charitable organization that works to end violence against women. It was started following the École Polytechnique massacre in Montreal in which a man shot 28 people, killing 14 women and wounding 10 women and 4 men while claiming this act was to "fight feminism".

Two years later, the White Ribbon Campaign began, encouraging men to wear white ribbons to signify their opposition to violence against women and to speak out against this violence. This has become one of the largest anti-violence campaigns in the world, spreading to 57 countries.

It owns a number of "whiteribbon" urls, such as http://www.whiteribbon.ca/, http://www.whiteribboncampaign.co.uk/, http://www.whiteribbon.org.au/, http://whiteribbon.org.nz/, http://www.whiteribbon.ie/.... etc. Unfortunately, it does not own the plain .org version, which has been coopted by the MRA group AVFM which has parodied the Canadian version of the website and is accepting donations to line their own pockets.

As reported by We Hunted The Mammoth:

And so the little schemers at A Voice for Men have grabbed the WhiteRibbon.org URL for themselves and set up a site of their own that seems intended to, as the lawyers say, cause confusion in the marketplace and take advantage of the White Ribbon campaign’s good name for its own purpose. As least that’s how it looks to my non-lawyer eyes — and to the eyes of one lawyer I contacted.

...

A Voice for Men may pretend that their sites are an attempt to fight domestic violence “against everyone.” But evidence of AVFM’s bad faith is everywhere, and overwhelming.

On its faux White Ribbon site, for example, AVFM declares that it is the REAL White Ribbon campaign and that the real campaign … is a fake.

In a post with the title Caution: Please beware of false White Ribbon initiatives, Claire Bissett – identified as the “administrative manager of whiteribbon.org” – writes:

There is only one whiteribbon.org

First, allow me to welcome all of you to whiteribbon.org. White Ribbon is a worldwide initiative to bring awareness of the problem of intimate partner and other forms of family violence to the population at large. …

It is … my sad duty to caution you that there are numerous attempts by other entities to corrupt the message of the White Ribbon Initiative by inserting dishonest and sexist messages into this movement. …

[W]e urge you in the strongest possible terms to consider what you are actually seeing when you encounter groups going by the name “White Ribbon” whose message is gendered, as in “Stop Domestic Violence Against Women.” …

These people are much more interested in raising money than in raising awareness. …

There is only one White Ribbon Initiative that seeks evidence based, scientific and realistic ways to help reduce the problem of violence in the home. You are at the source of that initiative right now. Please help us out by donating and by passing this website on at social media sites and your own blogs.

Yep, they’re asking for money. The donation button is at the top of the page, with the perhaps deliberately ambiguous message:

WhiteRibborn.org is owned and operated by A Voice for Men. All donations for our White Ribbon effort will be used to maintain and enhance this website.

It’s not clear to me whether “this website” refers to WhiteRibbon.org or A Voice for Men. In any case, if you click on the PayPal button, it takes you to an A Voice for Men donation page, and it’s up to you to specify the purpose of your donation. There are no assurances on the page that donations intended to support WhiteRibbon.org will be kept in a separate account or even spent on that website.

It also appears that the comments on the topic at AVFM (note: linking to AVFM is against the rules on NS due to their encouragement of violence against women among other issues) range from gloating about how money will be funneled out of an actual charity into their "organization" (aka the pockets of the guy who runs AVFM) and several of the posters dream of what sorts of violence they would inflict on women and the men who oppose violence against women. Seriously.

The real White Ribbon website issued a statement warning people about the copycat website, which you can read in full here, but begins:

Today, White Ribbon (www.whiteribbon.ca ) became aware that a “so-called” men’s rights group has launched a copycat campaign articulating their archaic views and denials about the realities of gender-based violence.

Their vile sentiments – which include disparaging comments about women’s shelters and victim blaming survivors of rape – are completely incongruent with our values at White Ribbon.

Their misguided attempts to discredit others only make clear the extent to which they see the success of our equality-driven, evidence-based, ally-focussed work on gender justice as a real threat to their ill-informed, isolated views on this issue. This latest example is clear evidence of their insincerity and lack of commitment to developing compassionate solutions for the issues they claim to care about. It also showcases their real focus: attacking, harassing and directing anger towards others.

But what do you think, NSG?

Personally, I agree with Todd Minerson, who wrote the excellent take-down of this fraud on the actual White Ribbon website. I also hope that the winnings from the inevitable lawsuit against AVFM raises even more money for the White Ribbon campaign.

[Central Slavia]

What a way to act.

In all honesty, it's partially things like this why I consider MRAs to be full of shit.

[Dejanic]

It's becoming more and more apparent over time that "MRA" activists simply hate women and want to go back to the "good old days" of pure male dominance.

[Nazi Flower Power]

That is incredibly sleazy and dishonest. If people want money for a men's rights movement, they should campaign for it honestly and not impersonate other organizations.

[Dakini]

I definitely agree. If they wanted to raise money for men's shelters or to raise awareness of violence against men committed by women and started their own thing, that would be one thing. That's definitely not what they've done and moreover, they can't even lay off joking about hurting women long enough to pretend that they think violence against everyone is a bad thing.

[Murkwood]

First off, I'm not really a MRA anymore. Sure, I read the subreddit, but that's really it. I believe in some of the message, but I'm not really active about it.

Second, what's wrong with linking to AVFM? As far as I can tell, they don't support violence, so linking to it would be allowed.

Third, this seems like a joke.

[Central Slavia]

First off, I'm not really a MRA anymore. Sure, I read the subreddit, but that's really it. I believe in some of the message, but I'm not really active about it.

Second, what's wrong with linking to AVFM? As far as I can tell, they don't support violence, so linking to it would be allowed.

Third, this seems like a joke.

Given what I read in the thread where it was banned, they actively encourage doxxing.
By doing which, they sort of dropped to the level of worst SJW scum tumblr has, and perhaps below.

[Murkwood]

First off, I'm not really a MRA anymore. Sure, I read the subreddit, but that's really it. I believe in some of the message, but I'm not really active about it.

Second, what's wrong with linking to AVFM? As far as I can tell, they don't support violence, so linking to it would be allowed.

Third, this seems like a joke.

Given what I read in the thread where it was banned, they actively encourage doxxing.
By doing which, they sort of dropped to the level of worst SJW scum tumblr has, and perhaps below.

Then are sites like Jeezbel and Gawker banned too?

[Hanchu]

Given what I read in the thread where it was banned, they actively encourage doxxing.
By doing which, they sort of dropped to the level of worst SJW scum tumblr has, and perhaps below.

Then are sites like Jeezbel and Gawker banned too?

What about tumblr where doxxing is an almost daily event?

[Mostrov]

‎

[Kanaria]

Seems like a bunch of jackasses did this. Hopefully one day these fraudsters will get what they deserve.

[Central Slavia]

Then are sites like Jeezbel and Gawker banned too?

What about tumblr where doxxing is an almost daily event?

While this is true, tumblr is at least nominally against doxxing. I don't think it's responsible for its users actions ,in the same way 8chan isn't.
Especially since most of them have not doxxed anyone.

[Arumdaum]

Dirty, cheap, and disgusting.

[Susurruses]

Look, I won't pretend to be especially clever about the whole affair; and it does seem inappropriate that they are doing so; although I can't offer anything aside from denuciation - if they are as nasty as you say I doubt much can be done without effort.
However, I do wonder whether the École Polytechnique massacre was an 'anti-feminist' attack as opposed to a crazed individual; in the same way we do not attribute the recent attack in Canada as indicative of Islam; although it does make a good example of something that can be used as an example to promote violence against women.

Of course this is an emotional issue, but are all these MRAs bad? It just seems as though its part of partisan 'internet wars' respectively; which the whole issue is being painted with a broad brush from both sides.

Of course I may be wrong in hoping for some sort of neutral diplomatic arbitration in this, but why exactly are these people so aggrieved that they do this? And how can it be changed? Terms such as 'misogynist' and 'bad person' seem to suggest that there is something innately wrong with these people; which they're can't be - they are after all malleable. Oh, if only to solve all the worlds problems.

Of course I do hope that this promotes a somewhat civil discussion rather than anything too accusatory.

"Neutrality" in instances of aggression/oppression is pretty much equivalent to siding with the proverbial 'bad guys'.
Someone engaging in [x]ist behaviour is... [x]ist.
I would say there is something innately wrong with anyone that thinks that other people are lesser simply for the way they are born or that reacts with vitriol in response to those striving for fairer treatment of fellow people.

Also, saying "crazed individual" sounds like ableism.
Any evidence whatsoever that a perpetrator was mentally ill?
Statistically, those with mental illnesses are far less likely to engage in criminal acts than the so-called 'sane'.

And yes, all of those MRAs are bad.
It's a horrific and toxic environment with palpable bitterness and vile ideology.
It seems any claimed attempt at actually addressing sexism by 'Men's Rights' groups without hypocritically being misogynistic has been lost for decades.
(There was a time when emerging MR groups and feminist groups united to try and take down 'the draft' in the U.S.A. on the grounds that it was unfairly discriminatory.)

When you have groups like AVFM supporting and condoning these harmful attitudes and the general culture that seems to treat sexual violence and domestic violence and the like as 'something that happens' without considering why that is and which sociocultural values are responsible, I don't think one gets to disown allegedly isolated instances of men engaging in violence towards women.
Although typical masculinity itself may even be an issue there given the massive skewing in statistics of violent crime in general; men are overwhelmingly more likely to engage in aggressive and risky behaviour like that, & a large part of it is related to the gender role supporting those patterns.

I understand you're trying to be "fair" but sometimes that risks coming off like the kind of person advocating for Creationism being taught in science classes or.. any segment of (especially Fox) news where they "balance out" some rational person with a fringe group or other contrary representative.

In this case, that sort of deliberate misrepresentation and malignant behaviour towards a group trying to achieve positive outcomes is just disgustingly reprehensible.
There is no excuse for it; none at all.
Frankly I hope they're sued for every cent they seem to be intent on stealing.

[Dakini]

Given what I read in the thread where it was banned, they actively encourage doxxing.
By doing which, they sort of dropped to the level of worst SJW scum tumblr has, and perhaps below.

Then are sites like Jeezbel and Gawker banned too?

They don't support doxxing.

Also, as you can see from the screencaps on We Hunted the Mammoth, the posters on AVFM definitely support committing violent acts against women.

Look, I won't pretend to be especially clever about the whole affair; and it does seem inappropriate that they are doing so; although I can't offer anything aside from denuciation - if they are as nasty as you say I doubt much can be done without effort.
However, I do wonder whether the École Polytechnique massacre was an 'anti-feminist' attack as opposed to a crazed individual; in the same way we do not attribute the recent attack in Canada as indicative of Islam; although it does make a good example of something that can be used as an example to promote action against violence against women.

I'm not sure why you don't think "crazed individuals" are incapable of committing anti-feminist attacks. However, I would refer you to the wikipedia article I linked in the OP which describes the suicide note Lepine left behind, or, if you don't feel like scrolling to that part here is the translation of his suicide note in English (the wiki article also links the French version, but I'm not going to assume that you know French).

If you don't feel like clicking any links at all, here's how the note begins:

Would you note that if I commit suicide today 89-12-06 it is not for economic reasons (for I have waited until I exhausted all my financial means, even refusing jobs) but for political reasons. Because I have decided to send the feminists, who have always ruined my life, to their Maker. For seven years life has brought me no joy and being totally blasé, I have decided to put an end to those viragos.

His stated mission was to kill feminists. He doesn't even get through one paragraph before stating this and then he goes on to say how feminists ruined his life and deserve to die.

He might have been mentally ill (or maybe not, we don't know), but his attack was definitely against women and feminists in particular.

I'm not sure why you want to turn this into a general discussion about MRAs and whether or not they're bad. Here, we're presented with an example of a group of MRAs (who are a major group of MRAs, not some extremist fringe) doing something that is super despicable and a bit illegal (impersonating a charity isn't exactly something you're allowed to do).

[Greed and Death]

Grammar error in the title.
Prominent can not be a modifier of MRA unless you are writing fantasy pieces for MRAs.

[Murkwood]

Then are sites like Jeezbel and Gawker banned too?

They don't support doxxing.

Also, as you can see from the screencaps on We Hunted the Mammoth, the posters on AVFM definitely support committing violent acts against women.

Look, I won't pretend to be especially clever about the whole affair; and it does seem inappropriate that they are doing so; although I can't offer anything aside from denuciation - if they are as nasty as you say I doubt much can be done without effort.
However, I do wonder whether the École Polytechnique massacre was an 'anti-feminist' attack as opposed to a crazed individual; in the same way we do not attribute the recent attack in Canada as indicative of Islam; although it does make a good example of something that can be used as an example to promote action against violence against women.

I'm not sure why you don't think "crazed individuals" are incapable of committing anti-feminist attacks. However, I would refer you to the wikipedia article I linked in the OP which describes the suicide note Lepine left behind, or, if you don't feel like scrolling to that part here is the translation of his suicide note in English (the wiki article also links the French version, but I'm not going to assume that you know French).

If you don't feel like clicking any links at all, here's how the note begins:

Would you note that if I commit suicide today 89-12-06 it is not for economic reasons (for I have waited until I exhausted all my financial means, even refusing jobs) but for political reasons. Because I have decided to send the feminists, who have always ruined my life, to their Maker. For seven years life has brought me no joy and being totally blasé, I have decided to put an end to those viragos.

His stated mission was to kill feminists. He doesn't even get through one paragraph before stating this and then he goes on to say how feminists ruined his life and deserve to die.

He might have been unhinged, but his attack was definitely against women and feminists in particular.

I'm not sure why you want to turn this into a general discussion about MRAs and whether or not they're bad. Here, we're presented with an example of a group of MRAs (who are a major group of MRAs, not some extremist fringe) doing something that is super despicable and a bit illegal (impersonating a charity isn't exactly something you're allowed to do).

They might not "support" doxxing, yet they still do it.

[Dakini]

Grammar error in the title.
Prominent can not be a modifier of MRA unless you are writing fantasy pieces for MRAs.

It's a prominent group among MRAs and people who end up dealing with their bullshit. You are correct in that the MRA "movement" is not generally prominent though (fortunately).

[Dakini]

They don't support doxxing.

Also, as you can see from the screencaps on We Hunted the Mammoth, the posters on AVFM definitely support committing violent acts against women.


I'm not sure why you don't think "crazed individuals" are incapable of committing anti-feminist attacks. However, I would refer you to the wikipedia article I linked in the OP which describes the suicide note Lepine left behind, or, if you don't feel like scrolling to that part here is the translation of his suicide note in English (the wiki article also links the French version, but I'm not going to assume that you know French).

If you don't feel like clicking any links at all, here's how the note begins:



His stated mission was to kill feminists. He doesn't even get through one paragraph before stating this and then he goes on to say how feminists ruined his life and deserve to die.

He might have been unhinged, but his attack was definitely against women and feminists in particular.

I'm not sure why you want to turn this into a general discussion about MRAs and whether or not they're bad. Here, we're presented with an example of a group of MRAs (who are a major group of MRAs, not some extremist fringe) doing something that is super despicable and a bit illegal (impersonating a charity isn't exactly something you're allowed to do).

They might not "support" doxxing, yet they still do it.

Evidence for Gawker and Jezebel doxxing innocent people?

Running a single article about someone who ran a subreddit on jailbait porn accumulated without the permission of the people whose photos were used for porn doesn't count as "doxxing innocent people".

edit to add: Also, there's a distinct difference between "we found this guy and interviewed him" compared with "here is a list of people we don't like with all of their contact information and home addresses where possible". The first is journalism. The second is doxxing.

[Central Slavia]

Also, saying "crazed individual" sounds like ableism.
Any evidence whatsoever that a perpetrator was mentally ill?
Statistically, those with mental illnesses are far less likely to engage in criminal acts than the so-called 'sane'.

I'll jump in here, because, yeah no.
The mentioned statistic might be true, but it is thoroughly irrelevant. First, it bulks all of the disparate spectrum of mental ilnesses together ... which in this case makes about as much sense as arguing against the assertion that someone having clap is likely a womanizer by claiming that sick people are less likely to be promiscuous than healthy ones.

Secondly, you are also bulking together "criminal acts" which is anything from murder, through rape, through embezzlement through robbery through DUI. Once again, this is broadening the scope far over into irrelevance.

The issue as hand is whether certain mental illnesses (say, sociopathy) make it more likely for individuals afflicted to commit certain types of crimes (mass killing, specifically). And for that, evidence is here https://publicintelligence.net/mass-sho ... l-illness/ for example

[Glorious Freedonia]

It's becoming more and more apparent over time that "MRA" activists simply hate women and want to go back to the "good old days" of pure male dominance.

Comments like this make me so mad. What in the world makes you think that patriarchy means men hate women? We may hate feminism but most of us are heterosexual and therefore love women. I bet you that a higher portion of homosexual men are feministy than heterosexual men.

[Arumdaum]

It's becoming more and more apparent over time that "MRA" activists simply hate women and want to go back to the "good old days" of pure male dominance.

Comments like this make me so mad. What in the world makes you think that patriarchy means men hate women? We may hate feminism but most of us are heterosexual and therefore love women. I bet you that a higher portion of homosexual men are feministy than heterosexual men.

Whether or not you're sexually attracted to women doesn't matter much.

Homosexual men are better able to understand the position of women as homosexual men are generally feminized through stereotypes (although the experience is still pretty different), and since both face forms of systematic oppression.

[Dakini]

It's becoming more and more apparent over time that "MRA" activists simply hate women and want to go back to the "good old days" of pure male dominance.

Comments like this make me so mad. What in the world makes you think that patriarchy means men hate women? We may hate feminism but most of us are heterosexual and therefore love women. I bet you that a higher portion of homosexual men are feministy than heterosexual men.

Lots of people who hate women are attracted to them. Hell, some people who hate women are women.

[Indira]

Sleazy and I would say criminal at a guess.

[Mostrov]

‎