Yesterday, the cabal of escaped circus pinheads in charge of the SPLC decided to lump several men’s rights websites in with those charming folks from the Westboro Baptist Church and the KKK.

While the SPLC article stopped short of stating outright that these sites are hate groups, the implication is there — after all, why would an organization famous for calling out hate groups call you out if they weren’t trying to imply that you are a hate group?

I will ignore the Ringmaster at the top of the ladder, a chap by the name of Morris Dees, who has been accused — by the right-wingers at least — of being little more than a con-man, and focus instead on the sheer dumbassery of the article in which the manosphere is attacked.

Referring to the “hundreds” of misogynist sites, the writer tells us..

“Although some of the sites make an attempt at civility and try to back their arguments with facts, they are almost all thick with misogynistic attacks that can be astounding for the guttural hatred they express.”

Note the “almost all.” That’s “almost all” of “hundreds”, so we must be on the verge of being regaled with quite a long list of offenders. Apparently not…

“What follows are brief descriptions of a dozen of these sites.”

I see. In a supposed sea of misogyny they are choosing to focus on a dozen drops, so I guess these must be really, really evil sites — you know, like the MRM’s equivalent of Stormfront? We shall see. As an aside as to the intellectual credibility of the writer, here is what he recommends as a source of information…
“Another resource is the Man Boobz website (manboobz.com), a humorous pro-feminist blog (its tagline is “Misogyny: I Mock It”) that keeps a close eye on these and many other woman-hating sites.”

Not much I can say about that, except that this is the first time I have seen Dirtbag Dave’s work described as humor, and that the site’s tag should instead be “Misogyny : I Search For the Exception Then Portray It As The Rule.” But back to the dirty dozen. Partly because I don’t want to bore myself to death pointing out the same fallacies over and over and partly because a couple of the sites they list are — unless the SPLC is lying to me, and surely they wouldn’t do that, would they? — rather offensive, I will home in on three examples of what they unjustly consider “misogynist” sites, and the “evidence” they present to justify their judgments.

First up in front of the firing squad is The CounterFeminist…

”Its tagline probably won’t be set to music any time soon, but it does capturethe flavor of the site: “The female-supremacist hate movement called ‘feminism’ must be opened to the disinfecting sunlight of the world’s gaze and held to a stern accounting for its grievous transgressions.” Recent headlines, like December’s“More Proof That Feminism is a Social Cancer,” reflect the same sensibility. “Fidelbogen,” the otherwise unidentified Washington state man who operates the blog, also runs the False Rape Task Force and Women Doing Lousy Things blogs and is heavily involved in the Counter-Feminist YouTube Channel.”

Yes, that’s it. That’s all they have on Fidelbogen — he thinks feminism is a social cancer. Where, I ask these Kentucky fried charlatans, is the evidence of misogyny? There is evidence of anti-feminism, but clearly women and feminism are not the same thing, so ultimately there is no evidence presented to support the conclusion.

Next up we have the False Rape Society, the inclusion of which I find especially offensive due to the last reason given…

“The False Rape Society is an Internet news aggregator, subtitled “Community of the Falsely Accused,” that features stories about allegedly false rape accusations and “feminist”-crafted “anti-male” legislation. While the site focuses heavily on news stories about false rape allegations, it frequently veers into such posts as the New Year’s Day item attacking a female supporter of then-presidential aspirant Michelle Bachmann for telling a reporter, “It takes a woman to get things done.”

Let that last one sink in. The SPLC, a group claiming to fight prejudice and bigotry, has just justified FRS’s inclusion partly by pointing out that it objects to prejudiced and bigoted statements implying female superiority! That is what it has come to, it is now “misogynist” to refute claims of female superiority. Needless to say, you won’t find a feminist site branded this way for criticizing a statement like “It takes a man to get things done.”

Here is the one that really got me pissed off, regular reader and commenter that I am — the Men’s Rights Reddit…

”A “subreddit” of the user-generated news site Reddit, this forum describes itself as a “place for people who feel that men are currently being disadvantaged by society.” While it presents itself as a home for men seeking equality, it is notable for the anger it shows toward any program designed to help women. It also trafficks in various conspiracy theories. “Kloo2yoo,” identified as a site moderator, writes that there is “undeniable proof” of an international feminist conspiracy involving the United Nations, the Obama Administration and others, aimed at demonizing men.”

Again, notice the complete lack of evidence for inclusion in this list. Apparently being “angry” at women getting all the gravy in an Anglosphere where it is men and boys most in need of help makes us misogynists. By this measure, a feminist complaining that it would be wrong to focus on helping male victims of rape in a world where most victims of said crime are female would also be a “hater.” That of course is not a claim that is going to be made by the SPLC, as it clearly has one set of standards for its fellow travelers, and another for its enemies. The second pile of cowdung in this entry is that Kloo2yoo’s conspiracy theories are — whether true or not — simply irrelevant to the claim of misogyny. Think of it this way — feminists are a subset of women, so even if he had stated that he hated feminists, that does not equate to a hatred of women any more than a white supremacist’s hatred of black people adds up to a hatred of the entire human race.

Given the lack of evidence, then, one  must ask, if the standards for being tarred and feathered by this once respectable organization are so low why are certain feminist websites not attacked in a similar way? Here is what the SPLC claims makes a hate group…

“All hate groups have beliefs or practices that attack or malign an entire class of people,
typically for their immutable characteristics.”

By this definition dozens, if not hundreds, of feminist websites would qualify as hate groups, yet a search on the site yields no articles with titles such as “Misandry ; The Websites.” Clearly, anyone who is honest in seeking out hate groups would be out there researching not only men’s rights sites but also women’s rights sites, it is after all hard to think of one without thinking of the other — but as we can see from their “evidence,” honesty isn’t
exactly the SPLC’s strong suit.

The slanderous article is here.