WHTM trolls often try to play “Gotcha!” with David, threatening to expose him in some way that will cause feminists to disown him, attack him, and feast on his liver. (Because feminists are naturally violent, of course!)
The MRA intellectual heavyweight Jason Gregory (@FunkyMunkyLuv) tried doing this on twitter, tweeting a blog post by some MRA dude who had found a smoking gun–in the form of a 1996 book review David wrote about Sharon Lamb’s The Trouble with Blame.
The way this anonymous MRA spun the review was, “When David Futrelle Claimed that Female Abuse Victims Should Take Responsibility for their Abuse.”
Wow, that doesn’t really sound like the David we know. Could it be true?
Myoo investigates and brutally eviscerates David, as feminists are wont to do:
there are quotes from David from an article he wrote in a magazine in 1966, in which he reviews a book called The Trouble With Blame.
The damning stuff appears to be David quoting the book or paraphrasing the book’s arguments and “theantifeminist” assuming that means he agrees with it.
There is some stuff in the article I don’t really like, but I hardly think it’s anti-feminist. Plus, from everything David’s wrote here, his views seem to have changed since then. You can read it and judge for yourself:
What a violent thrashing! Clearly at this point David has no alternative but to change his name, get a lawyer, delete his Facebook, and flee the country like a MRA trying to escape paying child support!
Oh wait, now that I’ve read it, Myoo’s not actually that hard on David at all. Just mildly critical.
But the Argenti Aertheri arrives, and now I know it’s going to be a bloodbath–like stepping on LEGOs or something!
Back on topic, that article? 18 years old. And for 18 years ago? Not that bad. Compared to the two he’s being compared to? *dies laughing*
Fuck, 18 years ago I was 10, so let’s go for 10 years ago, when I was just coming off my rabidly pro-life Christian shit, back when I was proud of refusing to study evolution. Yeah, I think I can give the shift in David’s view a pass. Not like he tried to kill his girlfriend and then wrote about it as a comparison to endangering a dog through idiocy.
Damn it! I was told that feminists just love turning on male interlopers for the smallest of crimes (like, as Argenti alludes to, Hugo Schwyzer trying to kill his girlfriend). Why aren’t we being more brutal? Is it possible we’re just toying with David, hoping to entrap him into making more incriminating statements, before we swoop in and false accuse him & railroad him into our feminazi-controlled prison system?
That must be it!
On that old article of mine, obviously theanitifeminist is misrepresenting it, like everything else of mine he’s dug up. That said, there are real issues with that particular piece, specifically the sometimes glib language and the the fact that I went along with some of the victim-blaming logic of the book I was reviewing. Obviously I wouldn’t write that article today. It was 18 years ago, and my beliefs have very definitely changed. I didn’t realize back then the extent and the absolute perniciousness of victim-blaming narratives.
The two points I was trying to make in that piece that I still think are worth making: 1) It’s important to be aware of the tendency of abusers to present themselves as victims. 2) Demanding that all victims be perfect human beings in every way in order to be considered true innocent victims — particularly if this means that they have to fit some arbitrary “moral code” — is itself a form of victim blaming. As we can see every time a rape survivor is attacked as a “slut.”
Now we’ve got him just where we want him. And just like clockwork (well-lubricated with the tears of betrayed male feminists), the Feminist High Council convenes a Star Chamber to try David in absentia.
I almost can’t bring myself to look at the aftermath of that! But let’s just read it, shall we?
The Feminist High Council held an emergency Star Chamber session after learning about your potentially problematic review of the book “The Trouble With Blame” by Sharon Lamb. We were concerned that you may have failed to uphold all Radical Feminist Protocol and Language Requirements as per your Male Feminist Blog agreement with the FHC. As you know, failing to fulfill those requirements would force us to either censure, shut down and/or think bad thoughts about the FHC-approved website currently known as “We Hunted The Mammoth”.
We have studied the article in question and considered your explanation. In light of the article’s age and your outstanding service in our secret war for female supremacy and global male gendercide, we have decided to let you off with a warning and not suspend WHTM at this time.
However, you yourself have admitted that the article fails to take into account “the extent and the absolute perniciousness of victim-blaming narratives”. In light of this breech in protocol we, after much debate, have decided on a suitable punishment. We now personally scold you with a hearty “tsk-tsk” and order your cats to think poorly of you for a period lasting between 48-72 hours, depending on their feeding schedule and availability of desired snacks. We and your cats encourage you to about what you have done and what you can do better in service of radical feminism.
Yours In Sisterhood,
The Feminist High Council
A Secret Bunker, CA USA
Well, that was brutal. David is properly chastened.
I am relieved to hear the verdict of the High Council.
Has the cat thing started yet? I can’t tell.
This is a cat (with a little mouse masseuse) who is thinking poorly of you: