JohnTheOther (In His Own Words)

Mirror of the original video by JtO:

[Updated to include John’s latest video (below) explaining the one said to have been created 5 years ago.]

That’s JohnTheOther, a.k.a. John Hembling, Editor in Chief at A Voice For Men.

Here’s the  article on Raw Story (Oct. 21, 2013) that discusses a bit more on John Hembling.


Update July 21, 2014: John Hembling continues to assert that he still, really and truly, doesn’t “give a fuck” about actual rape victims:

Frickin’ depressing…

To be honest, I’m glad to hear that John Hembling has since distanced himself from the organization AVFM.

Tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

23 Responses to JohnTheOther (In His Own Words)

  1. reyeko says:

    Byenia please. He did a follow up since people keep using that explaining the situation surrounding it and why he originally took it down from his channel. In short it’s intentionally hyperbolic and insensitive(hence the god damn Beethoven or whoever playing in the back ground) due to being frustrated with feminists refusing to discuss any issue and just throwing around ad hominems and shit. In long watch the video:
    I mean I don’t want to seem like I’ll defend anything any MRA ever says but when you wanna throw reason to the wayside and take a video which is so obvious hyperbole with classical music for dramatic effect and maniacal laughing just to drive the point home and take it entirely serious I just have to say something.

    • Byenia says:

      Dude, if you people wish to be taken seriously, then stop with the stupid runaround. Why put this shit out in the world if you don’t mean it? Just because he wanted to piss off feminists? Well, damn, and that’s doing what exactly for promoting men’s rights and interests? Absolutely nothing.

      If ya’ll don’t want to confuse members of the public, then think about what messages ya’ll are putting out there. Not all of us are up in your little networks or can comprehend all the snarkiness and sarcasm. I tend to take things at face value, it is true.

      I’ll check out the link you sent though. Thanks for filling me in on this ridiculous nonsense.

      • reyeko says:

        Face Value?
        how about a long as fuck page outlining some facts:
        is that face value?
        How about a mission statement:
        Face value?
        No apparently a 5 year old video which was taken down shortly after being put up and is an emotional venting of frustration, that’s face value right there. The five years of content after that, the five years of experience and knowledge gained, fuck that shit, this one video is ALL you need to know. That’s face value right there.
        Out of context quotes and 5 year old hyperbolic emotional rants are face value, who gives a fuck about all the rest of everything! I like how you come across this 5 year old video which isn’t even on his channel and call it ‘face value’ but everything else everywhere is irrelevant.

  2. Byenia says:

    Reyeko: You act as though I don’t care about any of that. But. you. are. wrong.

    I’ve been reading about AVFM’s stated mission, and it is your group’s strategies embraced that I am taking issue with.

    For god’s sake, I am an individual on the internet reacting to what I see and read and hear, and his video was mirrored (I saw it months back but then stumbled across it again this week), so it remains online. You folks are not celebrities in the minds of everyone, so we have no way of knowing what all drama was going on behind the scenes. As I’ve stated before, it would take literally YEARS of following ya’ll’s shit online to know who all said what to whom and wrote what and claimed what and recanted this or that. No, there are a lot of people in this “manosphere” to listen to, and I looked at what I was able since summer of 2012, devoting quite a lot of time into making sense out of what I’m seeing, hearing, and reading amongst all of you. You give me no fucking credit as just a schmoe who happened across this part of the internet and stuck around to find out what’s up.

    Perhaps you do not care about us random members out here in the public or the impressions any of us might take away, to which I can only wonder who you all’s message is intended to be directed AT. But I’ve taken time with it the best I could, and you folks are putting out some contradictory, inflammatory, snarky, divisive shit, much of which in no way truly advances the interests of boys and men or helps heal the wounds already existing. And that frankly is depressing and confusing, for me at least.

    Your group does not speak for all men out here in society, regardless if some happen to be represented within the statistics ya’ll bandy about, and I’m going on record to state that for my loved ones who don’t use the internet but have been learning along with me a bit over the last year in finding out more about those claiming affiliation with the MRM. It’s been a new concept for the handful of us, and it hasn’t won over our hearts or minds.

    Actual men’s interests, however, do matter to me and those closest to me. And I personally hate to see it all raked over the coals by assholes and idiots on the internet. The men in my life seem to care less about any of this, probably because they figure no effective change will come in their lifetimes and what’s affecting them most has more to do with economic and health concerns.

    Since you and I are strangers and we haven’t had the opportunity to get acquainted, and this is my personal space, I’ll tell you something about me. While men’s rights matter, human rights spanning both sexes matter more. Helping create a saner society (or societies) where people can exercise more of their potential matters to me, and that ambition apparently runs counter to your socially-divisive, hostility-inducing, sex-blaming, feminist-obsessed, Orwellian gender war game on the internet. I don’t say that as your enemy, but ya’ll have effectively weirded me out about now.

    I took his message in his video at face value, and why wouldn’t I? Just as I do with anyone else’s video placed out there. Context does matter, but we’re all not privy to it. This is one hell of a rant though, just venting or not, and does say something about his character. Five years isn’t a long time. I understand the shit I put out doesn’t speak the best of my character probably, but I grasp that. He undoubtedly did too. Anything put on the internet stays on the internet, so people love to remind us. We all have our dirt, but damn.

    Listening currently to the link you sent of his follow-up (posted up 8 days ago), and it’s so far just a bunch of talking around the issue. His first video wasn’t mere hyperbole, no, it did not come across that way at all. It came across as an upset man talking about how he wouldn’t help an innocent victim of a crime if he happened to witness such a thing (again) because he’s angry at internet feminists. And I don’t care how mad we get at one another, that’s a level of depravity I can’t comprehend. Won’t even help a victim of a violent assault? Just gonna walk away, huh? Dude, that was fucked up. Just gonna keep walking because he’s retreating into apathy? Damn. That’s hell on earth, that’s what that will create. Most definitely. Just gonna walk on by, so callously, and do nothing.

    To even threaten such a thing is to show oneself in a very dark space. But here’s what gets me: that woman being attacked he’d had no way of knowing if she was some internet feminist, and he’s basically saying he wouldn’t care. Because for some reason he sees all women in some group in his mind, like we’re all on a team. And that woman down there is somebody’s loved one, and she’s a human being. It would be no different if my lover, or my best friend, or my Papa were being hurt by somebody and a woman or a man walked by and did nothing, feeling justified because of their sexist ideology — I’d hate that cold-hearted bitch for the rest of my life. And it’s that emotional space in my heart that John’s video tapped into as well. How cold. If it was a threat, it went way below the belt. Because those words are no joke. He was talking complete apathy, and that’s somewhere someone with a developed conscience can’t go. All will suffer from such a strategy; pain pays forward. Even threatening shit like that does hurt, and it affects anyone who watches, his disclaimer doesn’t soften the blow.

    He said he wouldn’t help, he’d refuse to participate to help another human being, specifically a woman. Because he’s angry at feminists, like that has a fuck lot to do with everybody out here. It’s not about being a man being expected to intervene, it’s about being a human being expected to intervene to protect another human being however able. Because we do that for one another, because other people do matter, and because we’re not just cowards afraid of getting hurt. This does make me cry, to be honest. This just broke my heart, including his reply video. Because just thinking about my lover being hurt by anybody and anybody else just casually walking by because their ideology gets in the way of their conscience—cold-blooded, straight-up. We do what we are able because we actually want better for humanity. To help men is to help women, and to help women is to help men, though we need to heed a balance because neither sex automatically trumps the other. Most of us have loved ones and we don’t wish to see society spin off into utter reckless chaos where violence is everywhere and few give a damn.

    It’s this sort of shit that makes me grateful to be a mere mortal, because I don’t wish to live a long life if this is what we have in store for one another. It is THIS that must be resisted, not merely members of this group or that. It is this mentality and the conditions that help create it.

    • reyeko says:

      I act as if you don’t care about any of that because you don’t acknowledge any of that, you take individual bad examples and disregard the context that you know full well of what they advocate in their articles and other videos and radio show and the rally.
      I expect intellectual rigor from all people, that includes not pigeon holing a person into a single video or article they have written but looking at the larger context of what they actually believe, the impressions of people who can’t or won’t do that do not matter to me.
      Not helping a victim of violent crime? I won’t either, not because I’m depraved or because I don’t care about the person but because I know what it is to truly fight and I will walk away and call the cops before ever getting involved myself. It’s not about being angry at feminists, it’s about self preservation.
      “you folks are putting out some contradictory, inflammatory, snarky, divisive shit, much of which in no way truly advances the interests of boys and men” -- go to jail and have everything taken from you, friends, family, job, home, everything. Then come talk to me about being snarky and inflammatory.

      • Byenia says:

        Individual bad examples? Thanks for considering the people I know or met as bad examples. We get off to a great start when you go there.

        Let me respond to your comment first. Now wait. You said there you would go call the police. Well, that’s different than what John is describing. You’d do at least something, right? Not just walk on by as if you saw nothing? I hope. For anybody’s sake. But that’s not what he said there, and his follow-up basically lashed out against people who are “so sensitive” as to take to heart what he said. It was fucked up. To walk away and nothing more? For ANYONE being violently assaulted that we PERSONALLY witness that would be fucked up. That I do not comprehend.

        Self preservation. Plain and simple, huh? Well, when we neglect one another and live in an increasingly stressful, information-overloaded, confusing society, hostility is generated. And when people play into the “every man for him/herself” philosophy, they help perpetuate and exacerbate it. Just a thought. Seriously though.

        Your last bit was pure hyperbole, to be frank, and I don’t know how to respond. It assumes that I, by grace of being born female, am somehow immune to going to jail and losing everything. I’m self-employed, buddy. I could lose my business if I went to jail (say, even for a DUI, thankfully never caught one, or something less savory according to public opinion) or prison, so let’s not act like men are the only ones who run risks with the criminal justice system and could then wind up judged by society. Lots of examples out there (though not me personally since I’ve never been busted for anything beyond speeding violations — I do aim to be careful). Furthermore, real friends don’t back out on someone just because they go to jail or prison. That shit happens, and it just depends on the crime(s) committed. Not all crimes were creating equal.

        Getting back to John’s videos, while I appreciate the notion of and support human rights, meaning both sexes, and am not opposed to supporting one sex or the other where they are especially affected, that needn’t involve a blatantly sexist mindset. The harshness of his threat was over the top. (I don’t know where the feminists barely are anymore, haven’t tracked them in years, but if anyone out there knows of examples of videos some of them in recent years have created that could rival this—besides Femitheist, already seen her stuff—please do share links. I’d be curious to look at those too.)

        I watched now over a dozen of John’s videos before reaching this conclusion, and as explained already at least a couple times now, I watched LOTS of other peoples’ videos as well over this bit of time since learning about the MRM/”manosphere.” Since basically June 2012. A DOZEN though. Have you even watched a dozen of my videos yet? I haven’t watched a dozen of yours if you have any. There are a LOT of people out here on the internet, a shit TON, and plenty saying all kinds of interesting things, many of which have nothing to do directly with men’s rights issues. You’ll have to excuse me for not being up on everything your corner of the internet has been doing over the last several years. My derriere has paid dearly enough.

        Ya’ll are gonna have to learn to deal with random members of the public wandering across your shit and reacting to it. Such is the internet. You’re no longer speaking only to feminists now on the vlogosphere who you spar off with and try to frame it in the terms you spell out. Consider this one wake-up call among many I’m sure will come, especially if that 20/20 episode ever airs.

        Lots of different people out there in the world…*free thought warning* I wonder what one or two objectives or principles we might be able to whittle down and agree on. I’m talking over 90% of us in agreement, not some simple majority. Just to start there. Principles. Ethics. Morals. Whatever. Because I want to know what ties us into the game besides our competitions. What more do we humans share and why should we support one another? But opposing taken to extremes is where we’re headed now, and it’s looking like the wrong way.

  3. reyeko says:

    I was half asleep when I wrote that last comment the jail things I left out based on a false accusation. It changes things a little when you’ve done nothing wrong and suddenly everyone in your life thinks you’re a pervert.

    The Amazing Atheist shoved a banana up his ass. Does that invalidate anything else he has ever said?

    If we all lived a self preservation life style we would all leave each other alone. That’s just my antisocial tendencies talking though. Also you use too many words.

    “The harshness of his threat was over the top.” -- yes it was hence the classical music for dramatic effect and maniacal laughing. There’s some truth to what he said in terms of self preservation and being numbed to rape victims because everywhere you look is just “RAPERAPERAPE” and the expansion of the definition now includes any drunken sex. Those basic ideas were presented in a hyperbolic fashion and it’s fairly obvious it’s hyperbolic in it’s extremity.

    “Ya’ll are gonna have to learn to deal with random members of the public wandering across your shit and reacting to it.” -- yes which is exactly why JtO did a follow up video talking about that video, because dishonest assholes will use it to invalidate everything he has ever said and even deny his humanity: and *gasp* still do it when they are familiar with his other work apparently, how horrible!

    • Byenia says:

      No, Reyeko, that was no act, and that’s apparent. Being upset with feminists or laws doesn’t make a difference here. His own words did. The follow-up video of his was mostly lashing out at people who dare to take offense with his first video, and that doesn’t improve my own view of JTO either. Basically he’s showing himself to not really give a fuck, even now.

      I didn’t call the man inhuman, just exactly what I said. I can’t claim to see him as possessing empathy or real sensitivity to dangers others may face. No. Taking this in with what else I’ve watched and seen from him, he’s not someone I’m interested in affiliating with. There are lines, and he’s mostly angry at the public for noticing where he overstepped one with his threat to provide no help to a victim whatsoever. That’s a serious threat coming from anyone out here, whether male or female, and regardless of their rationale. It’s not always about works and accomplishments — what’s in our hearts and psyches matters as much, if not more. Because that’s where the real war is waged today, the political arena just being one reflection of the clash. Character does matter, especially when others are beckoned to follow and associate with them.

  4. reyeko says:

    You keep calling it a threat which is absurd. saying “i will not kill you” is not a threat, just as saying “I will not save you” is not a threat.
    I’m curious as to why you refuse to acknowledge the music and maniacal laughing, given both those things even outside of all of this are used commonly to increase ‘dramatic effect; for the purpose of hyperbole a.k.a. exaggeration. You see that fact he was using hyperbole(exaggeration) changes the meaning of his words a little, because if you know he’s being hyperbolic then you know he’s bringing things to an unreasonable extreme. If he said he took a shit the size of an elephant you would know he’s exaggerating and know he didn’t actually take a shit the size of an elephant but in this case you refuse to acknowledge the exaggeration, you refuse to acknowledge the fact that he used multiple methods to express that exaggeration and you refuse to acknowledge that his “lashing out at people who took offense” was mostly because you should be able to notice the absurdity with the music and the maniacal laughing that it was hyperbole(exaggeration). The movie 12 angry men touches on this topic, the movie is about jurors and the defendant was heard saying “I’ll kill you” to the victim shortly before the victim died and one juror taunts another juror into saying “I’ll kill you” to prove that everyone uses such exaggeration and it’s not actual evidence of the individuals intent or actions. Your refusal to acknowledge the exaggeration(hyperbole) is the same as feminists refusal to recognize parody or satire. Character matters and if a character is going to take every single word literally then they can go fuck themselves because that’s pure nonsense and is a simple attempt to paint someone you’re predetermined to not like as a bad person.

    • Byenia says:

      It is a threat, even if it’s not going on the offense. Threatening to take away something is still a threat. In this case, threatening to remove care and consideration for female fellows witnessed being attacked and refusing to act at all, withdrawing any and all protective action including running for help or to call the police. The threat is: you’re all on your own, even when under physical attack.

      The maniacal laughing was his. He laughed through his eyes as well, it wasn’t merely for show or theatrics. It was intended to bolster the message he was aiming to convey, that seems quite apparent. Music playing in the background doesn’t detract from that estimate either. Just made it all the more eerie, IMO.

      I don’t see that as going for merely dramatic effect or intended as pure hyperbole. That is not how his message came across, not even after watching it once again last night, this time with his and your claims to the contrary in mind. I know a threat when I see one. His message was intended to be haunting, antagonistic, and hurtful, that seems apparent. The context here appears very serious, not joking or flippant at all.

      I keep hearing people excuse words spoken by select people in your movement as “satire,” and it makes me wonder if you guys understand really what satire is. This isn’t it.

      Predetermined? I reached my conclusions through watching his own videos and hearing what he himself had to say. I had never heard of JTO or the MRM prior to last summer and did not come in with any attitudes toward him or any of you beforehand, aside from not being a fan of movements personally.

      You can feel about him however you wish though. I remain disturbed by his stated positions.

  5. reyeko says:

    “I remain disturbed by his stated positions.”
    Name some.
    other than this video which you refuse to acknowledge the hyperbole of and want to ‘take at face value’ even after he explained the situation surrounding it. The point that some random coming along and seeing this video and only this video will leave them unimpressed at best is valid but you’ve seen the video explaining the situation surrounding it and you still cling to the position of ‘taking it at face value’
    Well I’m going to take your comment on this video at ‘face value’, ignore everything surrounding it and say you deny the humanity of all men everywhere and you’re a despicable human being.

    • Byenia says:

      One that immediately leaps to mind that I discussed in another video back several months ago (not my best attempt, but it still stands, and the comment section got interesting) is his advocating men claiming the right to abandon pregnancies and live children as their own basic equivalent to a woman’s right to an abortion. It’s a sticky topic, for certain, no easy answers, but his stance there struck me as not only very shallow and self-serving, but also completely unconcerned with the consequences to children created and brought into existence and raised knowing they were abandoned. My own view may strike others as sappy, and so be it, but his take is very harsh and destined to aid in generating the next generation of male-detached, single-mother-raised and thereby largely government-dependent Americans. There are a lot of levels to the problem in this one, but his treatment of the subject shared only his own narrow view. The abortion issue and as it relates to men’s input and involvement is a huge subject that calls for more than tit-for-tat strategy games. That approach doesn’t address much, and yes, whether people care to hear it or not, children’s needs and interests can’t help but factor into this equation.

      People are going to take it at face value. I’m simply telling what’s bound to happen. Most folks are going to see this and probably walk away and not feel the need to watch anything further from him, I’m willing to bet. And even if they do journey into more of his videos, this isn’t the only ‘unflattering’ one he’s got out there. But whatever. He can say and share whatever he wishes. Just understand people are going to react, because it’s out here now, and he put it out there originally.

      You will do as you wish.

  6. reyeko says:

    “the needs of the children” trope, eh?
    So do you speak out against the National Organization for Women who advocate for default mother custody rather than equal shared parenting when both parents are fit and willing? Remember JtO is advocating legal parental surrender as a way to make men’s reproductive rights more equal to women’s reproductive rights and you’re speaking out against him, NOW is advocating default mother mother as a way to deny fathers the ability to see or have an influence in their children’s lives as anything more than a paycheck and you’re not far as I can tell very concerned about that.
    Women have abortion. adoption, safe havens, and multiple birth control methods. Men have condoms.
    The laws says women can use abortion, adoption, safe haven to abdicate responsibility for pregnancy or their children, the law also says men need to pay up or go to jail if she decides to not use one of those and keep the child. Do you speak out against women using those methods due to it not being in the best interest of the child? OR do you only speak against it when MRAs talk about a way to make it more fair, in a system that essentially enslaves them to pay child support or face being locked in a cage and given a criminal record even if the reason they didn’t pay was because they couldn’t pay?

    • Byenia says:

      You’re presuming me biased because I have yet to speak up so far as you are aware about NOW, an organization I haven’t kept up with in about a decade? I deal with information as it comes across my radar. Like I said, I’m not too interested in any of this bullshit we have going on today. You’ll eventually figure out how far in outfield I am.

      You’re setting up a false dichotomy here: you’re either for this MRA stuff or you default over to being sided with feminist measures. Neither. I’ve discussed that topic already so many times…there are disparities between the sexes, always have been, pendulums swing back and forth across societies and millennia. We work with what we have and/or we work toward creating something else. You seem most interested in the legal battles, and we differ there. I’m no longer interested in keeping this system or trying to make it more fair. It’s too big, too outside of citizens’ control at this point, too entrenched with Big Business and its global economic imperatives. And it’s the bigger problem we’re all facing right now. Do we really need to be bringing in more kids right about now? Seems to me we’re all better off avoiding having kids so we can deal with everything unfolding around us. But that may just be me.

  7. reyeko says:

    …jesus christ….
    “Like I said, I’m not too interested in any of this bullshit we have going on today. You’ll eventually figure out how far in outfield I am.” -- except you keep talking about it, this is a deflection to distract from the point.
    “You’re setting up a false dichotomy here: you’re either for this MRA stuff or you default over to being sided with feminist measures.”- Straw man, I clearly used question marks asking if you were against or spoke out against the feminist measures which benefit women. The use of a straw man is for the purposes of deflection
    “I’ve discussed that topic already so many times…there are disparities between the sexes, always have been, pendulums swing back and forth across societies and millennia.” -- delfection
    “We work with what we have and/or we work toward creating something else. You seem most interested in the legal battles, and we differ there. I’m no longer interested in keeping this system or trying to make it more fair.” -- except you know all that talk about how Paul Elam is trying to corrupt the system and how you care enough to complain about every little thing you disagree with in MGTOW and the MRM but apparently you don’t care at all!
    “Do we really need to be bringing in more kids right about now? Seems to me we’re all better off avoiding having kids so we can deal with everything unfolding around us. But that may just be me.” -- strawman given I didn’t talk about bringing in more kids, and JtO talks about not having children all the time. Deflection.
    You keep speaking against people in the ‘manosphere’ but apparently you don’t care? You take issue with legal parental surrender but you deal with information as you come across it, well NOW has been advocating default maternal custody for over 40 years, women have had reproductive rights for longer than 40 years while men have had none, there is no conceivable way for this information to not have crossed your path sometime in the past 4 decades especially given you claim to have kept up with NOW only a decade ago. Awful lot of deflection there, maybe it’s there cause you like those benefits women have?

    • Byenia says:

      I’m trying to stay on this page, but we have very different focuses. Feels like we’re talking over one another’s shoulders at this point.

      I AM NOT AN ACTIVIST. Trying to make that as clear to you as possible. So why would I be actively seeking out shit to take issue with? I wasn’t. I stumbled across the “manosphere” and am reacting to it. You think I should now head over to the feminist end of the internet and bark at them some? lol

      Acknowledging how life goes is not a deflection. It’s grasping that the last several decades or even the last century isn’t the big picture all unto itself. A lot has been happening throughout this period in history, and it’s shifted EVERYTHING. All of which factors in. This isn’t merely a gendered concern, though you keep wanting to frame it that way. It’s not a deflection, I honestly am not able to meet you where you’re at.

      Yes, I think MRAs are an odd bunch, and I’m reacting to that. Gonna take me time to lay some of this out. Feel free to ignore me in the interim.But it’s not about ya’ll specifically, you’re just another movement out here trying to affect people and drive society into deeper waters. I get that. I abandoned feminism for the same reason. It’s not entirely personal. There are principles I feel that do matter if any society is to function, and yet we humans seem incapable of appreciating that and devolve into using the government in our game of oneupmanship. But what that really serves to do, as history has shown so far, is put greater restrictions and expectations on all of us, particularly financial. It’s a rigged game that cannot be “won” by competing in the courts, because the bigger aim is the centralization of power, so we’re all losing ground more and more over time. It does turn into a quibble over which sex has it rougher when we seriously consider where we as a society are headed.

      I take much less issue with MGTOW. Just didn’t care for some individuals therein’s attitudes. But the notion itself has a lot of great potential, if people don’t turn to hating one another.

      How much do I care now? I wish we weren’t creating hell on earth. That’s what I care about — how can we avoid doing that? Our justice system is corrupt, our country’s off its chain, big businesses rule society, we’re turning against one another, technologies are further complicating our lives, many feel trapped and anxious, we’re being stripped of power. This sounds like a human problem, not only a men’s rights issue, and I’m over here. But that means I can’t have any opinions on what ya’ll are doing? What a strange assumption.

      I am aware of the reproductive topic shit. lol You’re completely missing me here. We still have to work with what we have. If we avoid marrying and having kids, that alone will go a long way in freeing us up to focus on everything else. I wish more of you would avoid that trap, and we have enough people here already. The more we bring in, the more power each of us individually wind up losing in this system because each person comes to matter less due to being that much more disposable and replaceable.

      I like the “benefit” of abortion? It’s my right. I’d have one if needed regardless of what your laws have to say. But yes, that should be available, because population control is a monumental concern right about now.

    • Byenia says:

      Ok, Reyeko. You had an impact. Talked a guyfriend into watching JTO’s videos with me tonight to gauge his reaction, him having never seen JTO before today and not being someone who hangs out online and doesn’t know all that much about the men’s rights stuff other than what I get him to occasionally watch. He had a somewhat different reaction, which he’s giving me permission to paraphrase.

      Basically, he sees John upset about all the ‘rabble rabble rabble’ the internet feminists were up to, though he stuck around 3 years listening to it. And he can see John blowing his lid there and threatening to take it out on womankind because of his frustration with these internet feminists. His take on it is that there’s all kinds of people out here in the world, spanning across males and females, and they deserve to be judged on a scale. He said there are lots of idiots and extremists on all sides, both male and female as well, and a person has to learn to see them for what they are and to not take them too seriously, because they don’t represent anybody else. They’re just idiots rabbling. But he thinks MRAs are extremists as well and chooses not to affiliate with them, from what he’s figured out about them thus far — holds no appeal. Just idiots rabbling in general to him, me included. He does not comprehend my interest in learning about all of this. lol

      But he also touched on an interesting point when we were talking about what if it were a man being raped by another man. He said he’d be more uncomfortable about interfering there because he sees gay men as being pretty extravagant to where he wouldn’t want to guess if it was indeed rape or consensual sex. But he said he’d at least call the cops if it looked questionable. Said the only way he’d approach in a situation like that where he thought an actual rape was occurring between men is if he had a pipe or weapon, and his main concern would be to not accidentally kill the guy, but the reason he’d be especially hesitant is if the sex turned out to be consensual because he’d then look like he’d committed a “hate crime” on homosexuals. So in that way he can relate to men being nervous about intervening in any situation where it wasn’t clearly rape, and he recommends that victims in such a situation scream the words “rape” and “help me” to remove doubts in a possible passerby. There’s ambiguity since we live in such a sexually freaky society to where people don’t fully know what to believe is going on and don’t want to wind up in trouble for just trying to help.

      So that was interesting to hear about. And because of that conversation, I’ll remove my comment up above in the post from under JTO’s video, will add the second part you shared in its place, and will just leave it at that for others to consider for themselves without further input from me on here.

      While we don’t agree with the man’s message or the idea of not helping people in general based on being angry at a few within one group, John still does have the freedom to express himself as he wishes. It’s inflammatory and begging to get a strong reaction, but I’ll accept that he hopefully doesn’t really mean in real-life he’d take that stance, because that’s just not consistent with claiming to care about human rights.

      Take care.

  8. reyeko says:

    The only problem I have with any of that is that ‘extremist’ isn’t a descriptor. an extreme cupcake is still just a cupcake, saying it’s an extreme cupcake doesn’t relate any actual information.

    • Byenia says:

      He means extreme ends of the spectrum, extreme political viewpoints as compared against other people out in society. He’s a guy who works in the sort of job only men do surrounded by a bunch of men everyday, and he says they don’t share those kind of attitudes usually. So to him the MRM message sounds very extreme.

      He did say that while he thinks it’s true that men are raised up being told they should lay their lives on the line in helping people and taking necessary risks, he doesn’t mind that but doesn’t think men should have to also defend women mentally, meaning we can stand up for ourselves in verbal disagreements and whatnot. He felt the need to relay that, so I’m repeating it.

      And lastly, he said he honestly doesn’t feel like he has it rough as a man. I asked how that can be when he works in a very dangerous job for not a lot of money, and he still says he doesn’t see it as a competition. It was the field of work he chose to pursue right out of high school, so he says he can’t fault anyone for that decision but himself. But in terms of how women have treated him, he doesn’t feel resentment there. But then again, he avoids those he considers extreme, which cuts down on unnecessary drama.

  9. Conformation bias…I’d like to sit down and discuss this via Skype. I think you have gone on attack mode here an even though you give lip service to the peoples (mens)concerns you are simply justifying your position. [Skype handle removed].

    • Byenia says:

      I don’t do Skype, sorry. It’s writing or videos for me. I’m not purely in attack mode here, I’m pointing to what bugs the shit out of me after perusing you folks’ “movement.” Not sure why you even care since I’m a pretty small voice out here in the wilderness.

      Justifying my position? What position do you figure that is? The main position I take is I’d really like us not to create hell on earth. Turning completely apathetic, for me, represents hell on earth. Seems reasonable if that’s my view that I’d pipe up and say something when I see examples encouraging us to head down a darker path.

  10. [Skype handle], skype sorry.

    • Byenia says:

      Okay. Now that I know how to Skype you can call me out on my confirmation bias (though my companion’s attitudes were just shared to provide one man’s stated perspective, not necessarily to confirm my own views on this — he and I disagree on these sort of things regularly). But perhaps there I was glad to have someone else help illuminate my position since what I was saying myself seemed to be dismissed over and over again. How can I communicate with Reyeko to where my own position makes any sense? I can’t address the issue from where he stands because we see things so differently.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.