A Voice for Men fans have appropriated logos of real anti-violence organizations for new “Don’t Be That Girl” postering campaign
From @im_adam_barrett on Twitter
Here we go again. Like small children who have just discovered the power of the tantrum, the terrible people at A Voice for Men seem to have realized that the only reliable way for them to get the attention of the world is to act like complete assholes in public. And so some fans of AVFM have decided to bring back the “Don’t Be That Girl” campaign — you know, the witless and misogynistic “parody” of the successful Canadian “Don’t Be That Guy” rape awareness campaign. Now they’re postering in Halifax.
But there’s one difference: this time they’ve put the logos of the real sponsors of the real “Don’t Be That Guy” rape awareness project on their phony posters. (You can see the whole list by downloading one of the pdfs of the real posters on this page.)
So far, two of the organizations listed on their phony posters – the Bryony House shelter for victims of domestic violence and the Halifax Police Department – have made very clear that their logos are being used without permission.
We are in no way affiliated with the slanderous campaign being distributed around Halifax and we have not given consent to use our logo.—
Bryony House (@BryonyHouse) March 24, 2014
@Allisomething Tk u for reporting. We're not a sponsor of this campaign and find it deeply troubling. We'll be looking into this further HT—
Halifax_Police (@HfxRegPolice) March 24, 2014
It’s a pretty safe bet that the other organizations whose logos were appropriated feel similarly.
I’d like to encourage anyone who can afford it to follow up on a suggestion from Cloudiah in the comments and donate to Bryony House so that some good can come out of all this.
Now, I’m no expert on Canadian law, but it seems rather unlikely to me that it’s legal to simply stick some organization’s logo on something and pretend that they have endorsed it. Especially when that organization is the police.
Apparently some MRAs disagree with me on that:
@BryonyHouse @eastcoastkto @im_adam_barrett @HfxRegPolice
Your consent is not required for these posters.—
Paul Elam (@AVoiceForMen) March 24, 2014
“Your consent is not required” seems to be the operating assumption of a lot of those drawn to the Men’s Rights movement.
In later tweets, Elam claims that using the logos is legal because of “fair use,” which is not actually a term used in Canadian law, and promises that the “[p]osters will continue, cupcake.”
I guess we will see. Here are several more photos of the posters. There’s more discussion of this in the AgainstMensRights subreddit.
Lots of real comedians around town apparently… http://t.co/P92KmW3I41—
Adam Barrett (@im_adam_barrett) March 24, 2014
and one more before I vomit everywhere http://t.co/jEJTXSSHXG—
Adam Barrett (@im_adam_barrett) March 24, 2014
EDITED TO ADD: Elam has now responded to the critics, and promises to bankroll any legal challenges against the posterers. It’s pretty clear that he doesn’t understand why the logos are a problem.
EDIT/CORRECTION: It’s not completely clear that this postering campaign originated with AVFM. It’s pretty clear, though, that it’s supported by AVFM, and that those involved in it are supporters of AVFM. I’ve made a few changes to the headline and first graf to reflect this.
Posted on March 25, 2014, in a voice for men, a woman is always to blame, antifeminism, are these guys 12 years old?, artistry, attention seeking, cupcake, evil sexy ladies, evil single moms, evil women, men who should not ever be with women ever, misogyny, MRA, paul elam, the poster revolution has begun and tagged a voice for men, anti-feminism, antifeminism, don't be that girl, don't be that guy, halifax, men's rights, misogyny, MRA. Bookmark the permalink. 303 Comments.
There’s an X D emoticon!?! I am excited about these things all over again!
I keep thinking what a gleeful moment it must have been for Paul, getting to tell a woman that her consent was not required. I’d even venture to suggest he may have gotten off on it.
Especially given that so many sex workers are either trafficked, being exploited, or have turned to it as a last resort. Whereas it’s hard to imagine a circumstance in which the person paying for sex isn’t participating voluntarity. Even when they’re hiring a sex worker who’s doing it freely and loves the job, the transaction wouldn’t happen without a patron, so…
MRAs are lousy at economics. Don’t they know that demand drives everything? And that without demand, the supply would just dry up? Sheesh.
Yup, it’s a meme. I saw it on my own timeline, and oh, how sorely tempted I was to…DISCIPLINE the offending reposter.
OK, Doad wants to call the tabby Skiffle and the gray one Glitch, but we are still undecided about the black one.
“Your consent is not required”
Well then, thank you for confirming the righteousness of my purchase of a revolver for self defense. Also, don’t ever fucking touch me.
Reblogged this on brittanyjacqueline and commented:
Here we go again, MRA’s make me rage so hard sometimes!
How about Speck, Iota, or Mote for the wee little black kitty? I’m glad Skiffle made the grade. XD
@footnotegirl: Welcome to the comments!
What was this person’s point? Who did they think was doing the other 62% of sexual abuse of children in daycares? What was their solution? Or were they just trying to gotcha?
Let me join in the brain bleach.
I can’t hope to compete with Katz’s kittens, though.
Falconer: They were supposedly going after this stereotype that men are *much* more likely than women to abuse children. Well, no shit.
@Arctic Ape: Roughly 3:2 isn’t *much* more likely?
OT - Falconer, you were so right about Moose County and the dangers of having even a nodding acquaintance with Qwilleran. The place really is giving Midsomer a run for its money.
I had to laugh at a “Moose county isn’t used to murders” comment in one of the books. Hello, multiple murders every few months since Qwill moved in, they should be used to it by now!
The BABIES are getting so big! And cute! (Well, they’ve always been cute.)
It is when you consider that almost all daycare workers are women. This was explained upthread.
RE: spanking
I am immensely glad that I have never really been put in a situation where I’ve felt at all tempted to raise my hand to a kid. The kids in this system were all ten and up, so you know, different level. And no matter what, I just don’t feel good about smacking someone that much smaller and weaker than me who has absolutely no recourse if I decide to take advantage of that power.
RE: wordsp1nner
Abuse, on the other hand, can be conducted by one caretaker acting alone.
I know that the convo moved on ages ago, but this is a personal thing with me, so… it’s a LITTLE more complicated than that.
In the case of a single parent family, sure, a single abuser is a thing. But often, if there’re two parents and an abusive situation, there’s this thing called the Drama Triangle. Basically, each corner is a person playing a role, and the three roles are Victim, Perpetrator, and Bystander. (Or Rescuer, depending on the tradition.) These roles are very fluid and interchangeable — a victim can finally get sick of it and become a perpetrator, the perp and bystander might switch roles off and on for double the fucked-up points, etc.
What I mean is, while it’s not impossible that one parent is abusive and hides it from the other… I personally am of the belief that there’s a degree of looking the other way. There’s a bajillion reasons — fear of retribution, not wanting to rock the boat, self-guessing, not believing it constitutes ‘real abuse’ — but I haven’t really run into many folks where one parent was abusive and the other didn’t know SOMETHING.
My situation was unusual in that I was in a family of Bystanders, with the Perps always being outside of the nuclear family. And my parents were at least somewhat aware of what’s going on — my mom said she suspected I was getting raped, but didn’t want to do anything for fear of “making it worse” — that or they were spectacularly non-observant. (Such as the time I came inside for dinner bloody and crying and they just didn’t appear to notice I existed.)
What I mean to say is, I suspect there’s usually an element of willful blindness.
We seem to have got to cross-purposes here. I wasn’t trying to argue with you, sorry.
Sorry on my part too; I started to explain this thing, but then was too lazy to type at length, so it came off as short and condescending.
Lbt:
“RE: spanking
I am immensely glad that I have never really been put in a situation where I’ve felt at all tempted to raise my hand to a kid. The kids in this system were all ten and up, so you know, different level. And no matter what, I just don’t feel good about smacking someone that much smaller and weaker than me who has absolutely no recourse if I decide to take advantage of that power.”
I just look at it this way: I wouldn’t hit an adult I was having a problem with, so hitting a child is just downright assinine. Not to mention, I certainly don’t want to teach my children it’s ok to solve problems using violence. So by modeling violence against them, my “no hitting” rule would be rendered hypocritical and illogical. :)
RE: Nitram
True facts. I guess I just have this irrational belief that one day, if I have kids, I’ll someday be FORCED into this situation where the kid won’t learn something of drastic importance any other way. But now that I think of it, that’s a pretty irrational thing to think; I haven’t met anyone who can learn a lesson just ONE way.
I remember Paul Elam saying ‘fuck you’ to people who opposed the Occidental spamming. He’s gone militant about these issues and is ready to tough it out with the police…from a safe distance via twitter on his rich American congo. Yah?
I may be wrong here, but I don’t see him personally leading the charge like a confederate general of a calvary division, backed by a horde of faithful anti-fems. I see him saying “You do it. You get arrested. I’ll send you a greeting card with a ‘Thank you, dumbass’ on it.”
Though I think I would pay good money just to see Elam arrested, personally.
Thanks for posting this, David. Good stuff :)
You are not alone!
Lbt
Exactly. Spanking kids is just an adult having a tantrum. I have swatted my son and it only served to aggravate the situation. I always felt terrible after and then it struck me as completely absurd to tell a child “no hit” and then hit him. It’s almost embarrassing.