Andybob’s Corner: 20/20 Foresight

One of my favorite (and our most strongly upvoted) commenters at AVfM is a mysterious fellow named “Andy Bob” (or sometimes “AndyBob”). Funny, bitingly insightful, a joy to read – it is always worthwhile to slow down and read his thoughts carefully – and more than once.

Every now and then we like to round up some of Andy’s work for your enjoyment, and ours.

AndyBob has been on something of a tear of late, particularly concerning the ABC show 20/20’s episode about Paul Elam/AVfM that was postponed for reasons that are not entirely clear.

Here follow some of AndyBob’s comments about the matter. Enjoy! – A.L.

From the-Spearhead blog, in response to a post about Paul’s 20/20 adventures.

Did you get a load of 20/20 presenter, Elizabeth Vargas? She all but blew a gasket at the very idea of a man having the audacity to discuss the rights and welfare of men and boys.

Nothing could illustrate the sneering dismissal of men’s humanity more powerfully than the hostility emanating from Ms Vargas’ every pore. Of course, feminists are going to lap it up – but not everyone’s a feminist. Many of these non-feminists will see it as the dishonest hatchet job it is, and will want to know more about AVfM and the so-called MHRM.

Those still able to exercise their capacity for logical thinking will realize that expressing concern over issues such as male suicide rates does not make a person a rape supporter/enabler/apologist. These are the people Paul Elam was reaching out to and connecting with.

This had nothing to do with the cliché that all publicity is good publicity. It was about getting a foot in the door and establishing a presence – a door which can never be closed, regardless of how shrill feminists scream at us to get out. It was foolish of them to invite us in, and even more foolish to flout their lies, shaming tactics and bigotry so shamelessly on prime-time TV.

I’m stunned that so many people who claim to care about men’s issues are so scared of media attention – or was it the disapproval of scowling feminists and their enablers? Lucky there are men like Paul Elam who never expected to be welcomed and adored by the feminist-led MSM (Mainstream Media).

Surely no-one is actually suggesting that he should have waited until feminists stopped hating our guts before venturing forth to promote men’s issues through the MSM. They’re probably the same people who whine about us never making progress.

Paul Elam took that step and faced the misandric bigots alone. He got the hatchet job he expected all along – a hatchet job that proved more about the reality of feminist hate-mongering than anything any of us could ever say or do.

That is a victory that deserves more than the vitriol he is receiving in this thread. When men put their petty resentments and fragile egos ahead of our common good, it explains a great deal about why feminism has wrought so much devastation in our lives.

I expected a hit job from 20/20, but not from a fellow traveler. Disappointing.

From AVfM, regarding the (now delayed) episode of 20/20 about the Men’s Human Rights Movement.

Of course, it will be a hatchet job.

Like Dr Elam, my first preference would be for the 20/20 piece to be an objectively honest presentation of the issues confronting men and boys, and the role that organizations, like AVfM, are playing to draw attention to them. However, I would be slightly more gob-smacked if this happened than if Dr Elam were to be crowned the new Miss Texas. I am sure Dr Elam would be too.

My second preference is that 20/20 cobble together the most dishonest and hostile hatchet job in the history of current affairs television – complete with outrageous examples of feminist lies, shaming tactics and invocations of threat narratives. The parade of misandry will validate every point we have ever made about how men’s issues are aggressively marginalized and ignored, and reveal the methods used by those most responsible for it. The sneering mug of Elizabeth Vargas will illustrate society’s contemptuous dismissal of men’s humanity more accurately than anything I could ever write.

This is one of the moments that Dr Elam has worked so hard for: vast numbers of curiosity seekers who have learnt long ago to distrust the MSM, and its interpretation of issues that affect them, and have decided to Google the site. It is why he publicly distanced himself from the PUA industry; emphasized how imperative it was for AVfM to remain above partisan politics; welcomed and respected such an unprecedented diversity of contributors and supporters; and, wielded the ban-hammer wisely (much to the ire of those who simply didn’t ‘get it’). Accepting 20/20′s offer will prove to be his smartest move ever.

‘A Voice for Men’ has nothing to fear from a hatchet job because we have nothing to hide. The same cannot be said for the Radfemhub, whose generous donations to the SPLC bought a hate-group label that stuck for about 24 hours. Nor can it be said of Anita Sarkeesian, that chirpy cyber-bully ‘survivor’, whose ordeal left her drowning in funds, but otherwise, miraculously unscathed. It says a great deal about the integrity of 20/20′s reportage that they had to haul out this cast of shady and corrupt bigots to help sell its agenda. After all, they couldn’t have hung the whole segment on Jaclyn Friedmans’s clit – though I’m sure she wouldn’t have objected.

It is very fortunate for us that perky researchers, Ms Pry and Ms Valiente, are blissfully ignorant of the old edict that you can’t fool all of the people all of the time. The fact that the MHRM is being discussed at all on a popular MSM programme is a disaster for feminists, but they’re too busy salivating over the anticipated hatchet job to realize it. David Futrelle’s Boobettes have all but wet themselves with excitement. Dr Elam’s artful positioning of AVfM into the MSM means that the days of ignoring us are now officially over, and that the battle has moved into the public arena. David Beckham couldn’t have bent it better.

If feminists sincerely believe that a hatchet job by 20/20 will silence AVfM, and make the MHRM disappear, they are in for the shock of their subsidized lives. In fact, feminists, and their enablers, are about to be made rudely aware of just how many people have been hurt and alienated by their cruel and vindictive abuses. Once the finger is out of the dike, there will be no stopping the deluge of anger and resentment that will eventually overwhelm them.

Paul Elam has bravely put himself on the line to defend the rights and protect the welfare of men and boys everywhere. He has got the balls rolling, as it were – his. He has my everlasting respect and admiration.


From AVfM, a couple of posts in response to a White Knight who claimed that JudgyBitch Janet Bloomfield shouldn’t have revealed details of a pair of women writers:

Big guns?

Invoking a threat narrative on behalf of a pair of twits is not what I call bringing out the big guns. It is what I call donning white knight garb to defend two people who failed in their responsibility to provide honest research about AVfM’s fight for the rights and welfare for men and boys. Instead, they believed that it was more important to promote their ideology by presenting dishonest information about Paul Elam, AVfM, and the MHRM.

If you genuinely believe that the glaring inaccuracies of their ‘research’ are a result of mere incompetence, then you are as disingenuous as they would like you to think they are.

I have no doubt whatsoever that the only consequences of highlighting Ms Pry and Ms Valiente’s lack of scruples will be offers of executive positions at NOW. Rest assured, they will remain as safely unscathed as every other damsel who has been disgraced on the pages of AVfM.

Ms Bloomfield’s obsession with the truth does not make her ‘like feminists’. It makes her exactly the opposite: a MHRA – one of the very best. I doubt she has either the time, nor the patience for this kind of pearl-clutching nonsense. Jezebel’s that-a-way. Don’t trip on your jousting utensils on the way out.

One of the glaring differences between the capable reporters of yore and the botoxed talking heads of today is that those capable reporters actually did most of their own research. Surely no-one actually believes that Elizabeth Vargas does any of her own her research – she doesn’t even do her own nails.

The researchers responsible for feeding La Vargas the misinformation that had her fuming in righteous indignation (and almost succeed in furrowing her brow) are Ms Pye and Ms Valiente. Therefore, it is entirely appropriate and justified for us to find out exactly who they are and what they’re about.

They have actively participated in derailing an opportunity to promote issues concerning the rights and welfare of men and boys. So, no, I will not issue them passes for their irresponsibility just because they are young, relatively cute, and juggle their research duties with fetching Ms Vargas’ morning latte and picking up her dry cleaning.

It is imperative that AVfM continues to disabuse the likes of these women from their assumptions that no-one will ever call them on pulling this kind of crap. The University of Toronto protesters proudly boasted of their violent criminality, until the AVfM spotlight sent them scurrying chaotically for cover. Even an abrasively clueless pinhead, like Chanty Binx, managed to rub enough brain cells together to realize that reprising her tuneless celebration of male suicide was probably inadvisable. AVfM helped her reach that epiphany, without charging her a dime – and she never even sent a thank you card.

The only damage Ms Bloomfield’s post will do to these women will be to the cover which has hitherto protected them from getting busted for ‘creative research’ – otherwise known as ‘making shit up’. That cover has been blasted to kingdom come, as indeed it should be. I wonder if some commenters would be quite so concerned if Ms Bloomfield had taken male researchers to task. I doubt it.

Really guys, you have to stop this chivalry crap. It’s one of the reasons we are in this mess in the first place.

Recommended Content