Mar 162013

Picard Double FacepalmIt’s been a while since I handed out any Capt. Picard Double Facepalm Awards so it’s with great irony that I give a Capt. Picard Double Facepalm Award to Capt. Picard himself, Patrick Stewart.  Patrick Stewart earned this award through pounding his fist nine times on a podium because that’s supposedly how many seconds there are between instances of a woman getting beaten in the U.S.  Stewart did not talk about men ever being the victims of violence calling on one million men to “do something” (whatever this something is not defined) about this supposed epidemic.

What Stewart was doing was part of an international effort, so we must wonder why he is only focusing on the U.S. as a source of assaults and violence on women as opposed to his home country, the U.K., or anywhere else.  Perhaps what Stewart was doing has more to do with anti-Americanism than anything else.

It’s for these reasons that Capt. Picard gets a double facepalm award from himself.  For good measure, I’m also going to thrown in a Godzilla facepalm for him.


  9 Responses to “Capt. Picard Double Facepalm Award For Capt. Picard”

  1. Ironically women love getting beaten, especially simulating rape … ie 50 shades of gay …

    • There’s a vast difference between BDSM and IPV. If you’d actually experienced IPV (which I have and the hands of an abusive ex-girlfriend btw), you’d understand that.

  2. I’m in two minds about this one. The problem with this blog post is that in being critical of Patrick Stewart’s lack of compassion for men who are domestic violence victims and survivors, it has ironically acted in a manner which is devoid of compassion for a male survivor of domestic violence – Patrick Stewart.

    I’m only aware of this because of a PSA he did a while back where it came out that his parents were in a uni-directional male-on-female abusive relationship and the response of police attending was “it takes two to start a fight”.

    Stewart’s reactions aren’t those of a gender ideologue- they’re those of a man who was traumatised as a child by witnessing domestic violence. Certainly I agree as a male survivor of domestic violence that his argument needs to be criticised, however I’d also argue that we need to show some compassion for the childhood trauma he experienced which is driving this. I could be off base here, but I imagine a fear he might have would be “if we acknowledge male survivors, will we go back to the days of ‘it takes 2 to start a fight’?”

    It’s a question that really does need to get asked. The fact is that while I and other male survivors of IPV are barely on society’s radar, no one appears to have given much thought to how we deal with domestic violence. With the right presence of mind, it is entirely possible to deal with. What it requires is isolating both ‘streams’ of abuse and dealing with them separately and with equal validity. However there is certainly a danger there that the bureaucratic response would be to take the easy way out, which would bring absolutely no healing to the situation nor a genuine end to the abuse.

    Again, I disagree with his approach, however the likely underlying concern is one which does have merit and requires addressing (such as via the approaches which S.A.V.E. would advocate for).

    However that said, I intend to see if I can get in touch with Patrick Stewart via email to discuss the matter with him, because things proceeding as they are is utter madness – where those of us who are male survivors of domestic violence merely get thrown under a bus as a result of it.

  3. And how old in Mr. Stewart? Exactly. That he experienced a tragic example of DV as a child does not excuse his apparent inability to deal with the subject properly at his now advanced age.

    • Sondjata, have you personally experienced Domestic Violence or systematic child abuse? I have and I can tell you that it doesn’t matter how old you are- the scars stay with you, and no, it’s not a matter of “manning up” (which btw is the reason that so many reporting barriers exist for battered men and male rape victims, why underage child rape victims get ordered to pay child support and why there is an epidemic of male suicide in the Western World).

      Should he get a free pass to continue to subject myself and other male survivors and victims of domestic violence? Of course not. However in the process of rebutting his arguments, surely it makes sense to recognise where he is coming from and approach counter-arguments in a manner which addresses his concerns whilst debunking the Duluth model at the same time. It’s called compassion for men- you know, that thing which both tradcons and feminists are radically opposed to.

      The irony of this, that I [as a male survivor of 26 years of psychological abuse from female family members, a teenage sexual assault which my female year coordinator intimidated me into silence over and an 18 month long abusive relationship which included sexual violence] of all people with my life experiences have to point out that the response too Mr Stewart needs to be carefully measured, is not lost on me and shouldn’t be lost on anyone here.

      • Andrew, donning the mantle of perpetual victimhood — and worse, censuring and attempting to browbeat those who disagree with you — is craven, unmanly, and ultimately counterproductive to your own healing process.

        Why do I say this? Because I understand where you are coming from: I have experienced everything you have.

        Yet I refuse to identify as a “victim;” I am not a “survivor.” My abuse experience doesn’t magically endow me with a special, unassailable insight into injustice. It does not give me license to bully those with different viewpoints. And it certainly does not free me from criticism for inconsistencies in my arguments. Patrick Stewart is not entitled to a pass on this, and neither are we.

        • I’d be alot harder on your post – if I honestly didn’t feel compassionate pity for you as a product of male disposability; so deeply entrenched in blue pill thinking, that you cannot see the state of dogmatic emasculation you have been reduced to. The fact that a fellow survivor would engage in such chauvinistic misandry that actually perpetuates male disposability, is nothing short of tragic.

          Sadly I’ve come to expect this sort of behaviour from so many who claim to be MRAs, but who are in fact are trad-cons; too busy fighting feminism to notice that they are operating from the same base gender paradigm as feminists and are therefore not only part of the problem, but ultimately feminist enablers at the paradigm level.

          There is so much that’s wrong with your post and so much of it that is indicative of the hypocritical elephant in the room with much of the MRM that this will be a long response. In fact it will be interesting to see who dismisses it as TL;DNR because it gets uncomfortably close to the truth.

          First off, let’s deal with the issue at hand, Patrick Stewart’s stance on domestic violence.

          What I actually said was that while Patrick Stewart should never be given a free pass, it was crucial from a Men’s rights perspective to temper our criticisms with compassion and validation of what he has endured as a male survivor of abuse. I can grab quotes if need be, but there’s a paragraph in there which blatantly states it.

          However as you seem confused about what a measured, compassionate response is; here’s an example pertaining to this case – addressed to him, but easily adaptable to a more generalised and indirect approach:

          “Mr Stewart, first off I want to say that you should be commended for sharing your experiences and in doing so not only helping people to feel like they’re not alone, but to highlight the trauma of domestic violence on children. You should never have had to have put yourself between your abusive father and your abused mother and you should never have had what you endured dismissed by police as ‘it takes 2 to start a fight’.

          However what about the boys over the age of 12 and in some cases the age of 9, who are putting themselves between abusive fathers and abused mothers, only to be turned away by the shelters taking in their mothers- with very few options, including to stay with their abusive fathers? Don’t they deserve the very same compassion you deserved yet were denied as a child?

          What about the children putting themselves between their abusive mothers and abused fathers? These children are put through the trauma under “primary aggressor laws” of watching their innocent fathers getting dragged off to jail while they are left in the ‘care’ [and I use that term extremely loosely] of their abusive mothers. Some of the lucky ones do have their abusive mothers arrested, but only after pleading with police in tears that it’s their mother and not their father who is the abuser.

          Think about what lesson these children are taught- that the police are on their abusive mother’s side, which can only harm them in terms of disclosure of abuse – as if a parent is abusing their spouse then there’s a good chance they’re also abusing the children (even witnessing DV is arguably a form of child abuse). Don’t these children deserve the very same compassion and support you should have been given as a child?

          Furthermore what about men battered by their girlfriends and wives? Don’t they deserve the same compassion and validation that your mother deserved and other battered women deserve?

          Even if we ignore the overwhelming body of evidence which shows that

          Yet by arguing in the context you have (regardless of your intentions), of organisations which perpetuate the vile lie that DV is only something done to women by men and that DV is ONLY upto men to stop; you are contributing to a culture which in the vast majority, indiscriminately dismisses, alienates male victims, uses rhetoric which effectively engages in victim blaming when the victim is male, gives female abusers a free pass and completely throws not only battered men, but their children, under a bus where compassion validation and dare I even say validation is concerned.

          Surely working with organisations such as S.A.V.E. which seek to end ALL IPV, rather than perpetuating a chauvinistic myth, would allow you to continue doinng what you do, but in a manner which benefits all victims of DV. I’m sure having witnessed it yourself at such a young age that you would agree that noone should be forced to endure it, regardless of age, rage, creed or gender.

          If you are truly passionate about ending IPV, then I put it to you that you need to give what I have said strong consideration.”

          Nowhere in there am I letting him off the hook. However I am stating my case in a manner which completely contextualises my response in terms of his experiences and in a way which completely validates them from the getgo. Furthermore contrary to your claims, there is nothing “craven” about such an approach, as I have challenged his approach and put him between a rock and a hard place in terms of his response, so to speak.

          A classic example in warfare would be the fact that the reason the Allies won in WW2 was arguably due to the efforts of the Norwegian underground who stopped Hitler from being the first to develop nuclear weapons. The trick is to fight smarter, not harder- even Sun Tsu, the famous author of “The Art of War” would agree with that.

          As for claims of my stance being counter-productive to the healing process, that is a complete prima facie. The fact is that I have been seeking treatment and making great bounds with it. In fact it is because of that that I am able to take such a compassionate stance with you, rather than what my initial response was going to be.

          However let’s deal with the smoking gun – the claim that my post is “unmanly”. That post might work with someone who is stuck in blue pill thinking and is vulnerable to the traditionalist, social policing of men by other men. However I recognise it for what it is, so your response discredits you far more than it does me. In fact I’d be ripping you a new butthole right now if the context of your response wasn’t so utterly tragic.

          In fact your response is indicative of the very culturally ingrained, repressive, social policing of men which is the reason men face so many reporting barriers in cases such as rape and domestic violence and why there is such a high epidemic of male suicide in the Western World.

          What you have done is to emasculate someone who fails to adhere to the social norm of the stoic and disposable man who only values himself in terms of his utility and who denies his humanity, by attacking their very gender. “Man up”, “harden up” and “grow a pair” are all prime examples of this.

          However the biggest example is the term “mangina”. Sure it’s a convenient shaming tactic, but like all things convenient, it comes at a cost. Not only does it merely perpetuate the socialised disposability of me, but it gives feminists a mountain of ammo.

          What’s highly telling here, is that the system of repressive socialised policing, is so insidiously effective that even an abuse survivor who is anti-feminist, has not only been repressed into line by it, but now actively perpetuates it himself.

          However your response is far from unique. Let’s look at a prime example of this in recent weeks – the James Landrith story being reprinted on AVfM (

          Countless people, including Paul Elam, were all too willing upon reading the story to dismiss and trivialise this story and find ways to blame him.

          Later on when Paul Elam had some kind of epiphany where he realised the guy was drugged and recanted his statements, on those grounds, however even that was a hollow gesture.

          Even if the guy had had too much to drink, the fact remains that she had enough presence of mind to suggest a hotel room nearby so they weren’t driving, and he had enough presence of mind to accept. Furthermore in that presence of mind, they’d both agreed they weren’t having sex in that presence of mind, yet she’s woken up to him jumping her bones, and emotionally blackmailing him into refusing consent – as if having a “morning wood” equates to perpetual consent. Even Angry Harry was one of the most vocal of people engaging in victim blaming.

          The irony of this is that for being the about the only man on there to show a male rape victim genuine compassion and for daring to call Angry Harry out as a chauvinistic pig for engaging in victim blaming against a male rape survivor; my account on AVfM, was suspended, according to Dean Esmay over Skype “indefinitely”.

          In that time frame, 2 other events, occured which are telling. Firstly I had my abuse experience personally mocked by Paul Elam (along with a chorus of others on the AVfM facebook page) and because I refused to stop calling out Paul Elam on it until he apologised for his behaviour, I was banned from the AVfM facebook page. Secondly and before this ironically, I was largely praised, even by Paul Elam himself, for the open letter to the the journalists on the Varstiy in their comments page, in response to their handling of the abhorrent actions of the UoT protestors. In both cases I was arguing from a position of society treating men with dignity, compassion and humanity just as they would a woman. The only difference was in one instance I found myself against feminists and in the other instance, against so-called “MRAs” (anyone who opposes compassion, dignity and humanisation for men is at best, a MRA in name only).

          Now to be clear, that hasn’t left me bitter- it’s just left me with no illusions that many in the MRM fail to grasp that there is a difference between being simply anti-feminist and genuinely genuinely a MRA (namely being as equally anti-traditionalist as anti-feminist). As such, if I’m genuinely to fight for men being treated as human beings, then it will simply mean that in many cases, I’m one of a group of lone voices in the wilderness (even in the manosphere) until the rest of the manosphere and society at large catch up, and this ideological cancer is at long last cut out.

          This leads me to the point of your rejecting the fact that you’re a survivor and conditionally rejecting being a victim (you wouldn’t be interested in this issue if you didn’t at least see yourself as a victim/survivor of the system to some degree). If you wish to deny you are a survivor, then that is your choice. However when a man does recognise they are initially a victim and then a survivor, that in no way dictates a refusal to heal (heck the notion of “survivor” embraces healing) or dehumanises them – regardless of what society, driven by feminists and traditionalists says.

          Until you and others come to recognise this, then you will be a part of the problem, rather than part of the solution.

Leave a Comment. (Remember the comment policy is in force.)

Cheap Jerseys Wholesale Jerseys Cheap Jerseys Wholesale Jerseys Cheap Jerseys Cheap NFL Jerseys Wholesale Jerseys Wholesale Football Jerseys Wholesale Jerseys Wholesale NFL Jerseys Cheap NFL Jerseys Wholesale NFL Jerseys Cheap NHL Jerseys Wholesale NHL Jerseys Cheap NBA Jerseys Wholesale NBA Jerseys Cheap MLB Jerseys Wholesale MLB Jerseys Cheap College Jerseys Cheap NCAA Jerseys Wholesale College Jerseys Wholesale NCAA Jerseys Cheap Soccer Jerseys Wholesale Soccer Jerseys Cheap Soccer Jerseys Wholesale Soccer Jerseys
Translate »
%d bloggers like this: