There has been a lot of criticism of MRAs speaking out about Thomas Ball from other MRAs and our supporters (such as this) because Mr. Ball isn’t the perfect victim of anti-family courts. Mr. Ball did slap his daughter and wrote things in his manifesto that could be used against MRAs. While all of that are good points, remember what Rumsfeld has said. You go to war with what you got, not what you want or would wish to have later. The reaction to Mr. Ball has given us several unique opportunities to strike back at feminists despite all the negatives so we must use them. We can ask questions like, why does Wikipedia not want to talk about him if he’s just an abusive man? We can point out how feminists like Amanda Marcotte are saying crazy things like male suicide is abuse of women. Remember she didn’t say it just applied to Mr. Ball. It applied to men committing suicide in general. We can also point out how feminists like Amanda Marcotte casually throw out the word, “terrorist”, to describe men who commit suicide, not just Mr. Ball.
Bigger than all of that is the potential for MRM exposure. Many conservatives hate Amanda Marcotte with a passion so they have run with what we had to say about Mr. Ball and given a platform for exposing the misandry of feminists. We could not have left that opportunity on the table because Mr. Ball wasn’t perfect. As Rumsfeld said, sometimes you have to go to war with what you got and not what you wish you had. This was one of those times.