Let's Feed Jezebel to the Dogs!

I attempted to post the following at Jezebel.com, but evil computer glitches made this impossible. Happily, I saved a copy. I share it here because I believe that some will find it instructive:

It is interesting how you speak of this nebulous group you call "MRAs", yet never make precisely clear who you mean by that.

Well the plain truth is, that for you, "MRA" is nothing but a one-size-fits-all smear word. If somebody claims to be an "MRA", then you will brand that person as every bad thing your imagination might conjure, regardless of who the person actually is.

And if somebody never claims to be an "MRA", but voices a strong pro-male rhetoric, then you will call her an "MRA" regardless of what she calls herself -- hence smearing her with all of those imaginary, unspecified ne'er-do-wells.

The bottom line is, that strong pro-male rhetoric will cause anybody at all to be branded and smeared as a social reptile. 

And so Jezebel's moral stance, as shown in the present article, is anti-male. The posters proclaimed that "Men's Rights are Human Rights". That was the message.  No more and no less. And please correct me if I'm wrong, but it's not a message that any reasonable, liberally-minded person ought to argue with. You can smear the messengers all you like, but the message itself will shine through eternally and uncorruptibly. You cannot damage it, but only damage yourself if you attack it.

All right. You have made a sneak attack here, and it was clever, but you can't fool all the people all the time. For in the end the fact shines through, plain as day,  that you don't like the idea of men having human rights. That idea sticks in your craw. And when you duck the issue by smearing the messenger, you are concocting a cover story to give yourself an easy "out". But again, you can't fool all the people all the time.

What's that you say? I'm  full of shit? All right, then put your money where your mouth is. How about posting the message on the banner of Jezebel? Wouldn't it look nice up there? Picture it: "Men's Rights are Human Rights." Go on, post that slogan on the banner of Jezebel.com, and show some solidarity. Prove to all the world that you are decent people who do not hate and fear men!

But you guys will never do that because you don't like the long-term implications of such a statement. You see, it is a moral tar-baby. By acknowledging it, you would bind yourself to it, and so bind yourself to the endlessly expanding moral ramifications down the road. Wouldn't you??

Also, it would be a moral victory for those mythical "MRA" people. If you complied, you would lose face. Wouldn't you? And if you didn't comply, you would also lose face. Wouldn't you? Sounds like a lose-lose proposition for you. Doesn't it?

Yes, I've got the moral high ground here, and you don't. So don't even dream of coming back at me, because there is no way you can do it. 

On a parting note, can you possibly prove that those postered statistics are wrong, instead of just claiming that they are wrong? Are you all bluff and no bite? Give it a go, champs! ;-)

As a courtesy to my readers, I will provide context for the above. Go here:

jezebel.com/5941876/mens-rights-activists-shocked-that-their-misogynistic-posters-are-being-torn-down?post=52595026#

I find it both interesting, and damnably revealing, that they call the posters "misogynistic" -- that is, woman-hating. Yet they offer not a crumb of evidence, or even cogent argument, to support this claim.  And so we are left to scratch our heads, and rely on the resources of our own imaginations, to understand why in God's Name it is woman-hating to equate men's rights with human rights.