Paul Elam Talks At Matt Binder Like a Child and Can’t Tell the Difference Between an Elliot Rodger Quote and a Stefan Molyneux Quote

Paul Elam and Matt Binder debate. Notice you can’t really ask Paul for clarifications in the rules. Paul couldn’t tell the difference between an Elliot Rodger quote and a Stefan Molyneux quote. Scary stuff. Paul almost exploded in his chair at that zinger from Binder.

Here’s the video by Binder that made Paul do his contortionist act.

Advertisements

38 thoughts on “Paul Elam Talks At Matt Binder Like a Child and Can’t Tell the Difference Between an Elliot Rodger Quote and a Stefan Molyneux Quote

  1. I think that Matt Binder was by far the better debater because he debated, where Paul Elam just lectured. When Binder drew Elam into some questions about Elliot Rodger, Binder laid a simple trap which I thought was masterful, switching up some quotes and making Elam answer based on his true reactions. When Elam fell for the trap, Binder very strongly followed up with his point. It was devastating and revealing. This is what will be remembered about this debate.

    The other memorable part for me was that Elam read off the names of the women in his group, saying that with all these women AVFM must not be anti-woman. But who can think anything but, There are so few women involved with AVFM, you can read off each one’s name, and be finished in ten seconds?

    • Yes, if this had been a boxing match, I’d say Elam was K.O.ed in the first round. He couldn’t even answer the question, he was so stunned.

      What is wrong with Esmay? He looked seriously stoned, was talking with his eyes half closed and was rocking back and fort at the end of the debate like he was having some kind of episode. I’ve, also, never seen a video with Esmay and Elam where they don’t have all kinds of hilarious technical issues.

    • Judgybitch is so delusional. According to her most recent blog post, featuring this video, Paulie kicked ass & cleaned Binder’s clock. O-o

      Guess she’s been hittin’ the sauce again.

    • Seeing as this blog is dedicated to misquoting – I was actually reading a few posts on this blog from last year – what Paul, Tara, and the Men’s Rights Movement in general says, it’s critical to prepare your statements in way that leaves little room for misquoting or misunderstandings.

      Matt actually made a very poor starting argument.

      First, the two quotes lacked context. Rodger’s view of what it meant to hold women “accountable” was to punish them, whereas Stephan was attacking the premise that men teach their boys to hate women. In short, from what I understood, what he argued was that women take part in raising their children, therefore women should be included, as much as men, in any discussion about how children grow up in relation to how they treat women in the future, since a child’s life influences his adult life. Whether or not you agree with that argument is irrelevant here, since the point is that Matt is being disingenuous and saying that Stephan wanted to keep women accountable in the same way Rodger wanted to – that is, to punish them.

      Second, feminists often complain that they are being strawmanned by non-feminists and anti-feminists by attributing the quotes of radical feminists to mainstream feminist, yet that’s exactly what’s being attempted here. Even if Stephan’s is guilty of wanting to punish women (which he isn’t), attributing his quotes to the MRM is dishonest and hypocritical.

      Finally, this is a pure equivocation fallacy. Here is Matt’s logic:

      a. Rodgers killed women to keep them accountable for not having sex with him.
      b. Stephan, an MRA, believes in keeping women accountable.
      c. Rodgers represents the MRA movement, since he shared the idea of keeping women responsible with an MRA.

      Let’s apply this logic to anything else – say, Obama.

      a. Hitler wanted to restore his country’s greatness.
      b. Obama wants to restore America’s greatness.
      c. Obama is Hitler.

      Terrible logic, right?

      • Uh no.

        1) Rodger was a misogynist who hated women for not dating nice guys like himself and who wanted to control women’s reproduction in concentration camps.
        2) Molyneux is a misogynist who blames women for not dating nice guys and adds that the world would be fixed in one generation if women didn’t spread their legs for ‘bad guys’.
        3) Therefore they have a similar ideology and are both misogynists for it.
        4) You can’t tell them apart because of that and it’s because you can’t tell them apart it means that the ideology in the MRM is SIMILAR to Rodger’s.

        Hope that helps.

        • Binder: “We were talking about Hitler, so I’d like to read a quote to you, ‘All the adversity I’ve had in my life, all my troubles and obstacles, have strengthened me… You may not realize it when it happens, but a kick in the teeth may be the best thing in the world for you.’ does that not sound like something a representative of the Disney corporation would say?”
          Disney rep: “What you’re taking there is a quote from a fascist that could be said by just about anyone.”
          Binder: “Yes, Hitler was a fascist, but does that not sound to you like something a member of the Disney Corporation would say”
          Disney rep: “Fascists buy ice cream, that doesn’t mean that anyone who buys ice cream is a fascist. The idea is absurd.”
          Binder: “Yes it is absurd and I am an idiot, but nevertheless answer me, yes or no, does that sound a bit Disneyish to you.”
          Disney rep: “Well…”
          Binder: “Yes or no!!!!”
          Disney rep: “No”
          Binder: “Ha ha ha ha. Walt Disney said that quote.”
          Disney rep: “Okay, so?”
          Binder: “You thought it was Hitler!”
          Disney rep: “Is that your argument?”
          Binder: “you couldn’t tell the difference between Walt Disney and Hitler. Hitler said ‘Mankind has grown strong in eternal struggles’ and ‘I do not see why man should not be as cruel as nature’ that is clearly of the same ideology as ‘a kick in the teeth may be the best thing in the world for you.’ and therefore The Disney Corporation is a fascist organisation and intent on a second holocaust.”

          It’s a juvenile trick and poor debating.

          • To clarify : The two groups I used in that example are no reflection on my opinion of either the Disney Corporation or the Mens Rights Movement; just a demonstration that the logic could be used to make equally absurd conclusions.

          • No matter how much you try to weasel around it, the facts are, the SUBSTANCE of the quote by Molyneux is similar to Rodger. They both hate women. They both wanted to control who women had sex with in order to ‘make the world better for them. The quote you’re using in your example are generic. These quotes were specific in what they meant. Paul was asked first to comment on the quote and say whether or not that sounds like something the MRM would say, he said No and called it psychopathic. Turns out, it was an MRA quote and so your example about a generic quote about ice cream is inaccurate.

          • …and you can’t figure out why normal men think AVfM’s are nuts?
            As Matt mentioned, men have some legitimate issues… Quit making all MRA’s look like demented fools

          • I think there’s a distinction between MRA’s and what others know of as the Men’s Movement which started alongside feminism in the 80’s which is feminist friendly. I make that distinction. I know not everyone does.

          • Shouting people down when it’s their time to talk, accusing your opponent of being a liar, and characterizing them as a fascist is piss poor debating too. Elam could give symposiums on poor debating…if there was any kind of market for that kind of thing outside the MRM. Poor debating or not, what Binder did was funny as hell and if Elam would have seen it coming a mile away if he actually knew anything about what his supposed allies are saying.Not knowing ‘stop-and’-frisk’? That’s even more hilarious. I live in western Canada and I’ve known about it for several years now. But I guess when you can’t pin the issue on a woman and it affects mostly black men, who cares right?

        • I couldn’t reply to your comment below about the two different forms of the MRM, so I’m doing it here.

          My first introduction to the MRM was through online harassment by MRAs of whatever kind – AVfM or whatever.

          My life is utter wreckage because of male violence and the ongoing threat thereof. So, while there may well be some benevolent MRM organization somewhere, I don’t give a damn. I’m really not in much of a position to care about men or their issues at this point. This is a situation they have created with their own dicks; it has arisen from their own collective violence and hatred of women and of me, as a woman.

          If any such thing as a benevolent MRM exists, they really should be trying to do something about these really bad ones. Yet, I’ve never seen any allegedly benevolent MRM organization do anything to reclaim their good name, if they ever had one, or to stop the constant harassment of women online.

  2. Esmay always speaks with his eyes half closed. I do wish pauly would loan him the money to get his tooth fixed. Elam had prepared speeches, and wanted to stick to his agenda. Not an effective debater

      • This is a really good article because the author just told the truth.

        Elam talks about how Rodger didn’t have the words “Men’s rights” in his speech, but MRAs are everywhere, even if they haven’t declared themselves as such.

        This is an example and it deserves a big TRIGGER WARNING because I’ve been upset ever since I heard about it. These are MRAs when they’re not behind they keyboard, when they’re your neighbor or some random guys who just see you out somewhere and decide they’re going to do something to you because you’re a woman:

        Late Friday night and into Saturday a.m. in Houston, a woman was raped by two unknown men and dumped almost entirely naked and shoeless on a backstreet near the home and business of someone I know. He’s a misogynist, too, by the way – and he knows what the cops do there because he’s the one who warned me about how they regularly rape motorists and never to call them. Still, he found this woman out in the street after she’d been attacked by men unknown to her. He asked her if she wanted him to call the cops. She wisely refused. Then, he and another man (the only one I still talk to on the phone) asked if they could help her. But, she seemed really scared of them – because, of course, they are men. There had been some women there a couple hours before who would surely have been willing and more able to help her, but they were gone by that time because, of course, you have to be in at night after work ASAP where you’re as safe as possible, if you’re a woman. Terrified, she refused their assistance and took off walking and went under a bridge into one of the scariest parts of the City – without shoes, without a cellphone, without most of her clothes, including her top.

        The first time I was raped by someone I’d just met – I was attacked from behind and restrained by a huge man – I couldn’t sleep for three days. It’s been about three days and I keep thinking about that woman. i wonder if she made it back home alive.

        These are MRAs when they’re not jockeying behind their keyboards, masturbating to porn, making videos about how much they hate and want to hurt women or holding conferences to discuss how oppressed they, as men, are oppressed by women.

        And, whether men like it or not, this is what a lot of men – maybe most men – do to women whenever they think they can get away with it. And, they almost always do get away with it. And, there’s no motive besides hatred of women, in general. The particular woman did nothing to warrant being attacked and left for dead somewhere. They really, really hate us and they really want us dead. It isn’t just the self-declared MRAs.

        • Correction: I don’t know why I said “two” – I think there was more than one man involved in the rape, but I don’t know how many.

          Usually when they abduct a woman, it seems like there’s a driver and a passenger who take turns raping the woman. So, I think there had to be, at least, two, but there may have been more.

    • Why not just link the videos of the conference? It seems like you hate the MRM movement because you hear from them from other biased news sources, or you just watch a few minutes of their videos.

  3. Has anyone else noticed that when MRA’s talk, whether live like we just saw or in comment sections of articles, they just spew long paragraphs of words strung together with no actual meaning? It was seriously hard to even tell what Paul was actually trying to say in most of his responses.

  4. Instead of debating without a net, Paulie reads from a fucking pre-scripted paper that Esmay probably wiped his fat ass on beforehand. HA! What a world class loser.

    • Feminists – and most certainly radical feminists, whom the MRM hate most, and to whom this same woman addressed her terroristic threats at the end of the con – are not pushing women to engage in casual sex with men.

      So, that is not a feminist lie – that’s a janetbloomfield lie, apparently.

      • Men control the “cultural narrative”.

        Feminists help women disillusion themselves from male-benefiting destructive cultural narratives.

        Women’s attributing the prevalence of rape to men is correct.

        Mrs. Bloomfield is absolutely correct in only one way, when she says that women are angry.

  5. Mrs. Bloomfield is so reckless and needlessly profane I too must question whether she posts in a sober state.

  6. That same vid as above is up at Sam Seder’s Channel (it’s at: /watch?v=3wlfBIIzjMs ) – thought I’d mention it since, Elam’s channel doesn’t need any more hits.

    The comments are interesting, though. Elam reading off a sheet of paper didn’t impress some of his minions, either.

    My favorite is how Matt (or the rest of us, for that matter) don’t know what Men’s Rights are all about. Of course, the problem is we know all too well what it’s about – men’s self-perceived right to abuse, harass, beat, rape, stalk and kill women. I think they’re demonstrating what Men’s Rights are all about very, very clearly. And, historically, this has been Men’s Rights.

  7. It should be said that “men’s rights” is a pseudo-ideology that is not well defined, with many promoters on tiny obscure websites.

    “A Voice for Men”, it is now clear, is a blog owned and managed 100% by one person, an ex-alcohol counselor (not a doctor of anything, by the way) from Houston, Texas. It is a sole proprietorship. There are no partners, employees, associates, or anything else. The site requests donations for Mr. Elam on a very regular basis. A Voice for Men is not a group or organization of any kind.

    Mr. Elam, the only authorized voice of A Voice for Men, has garnered much attention in the past few years with his cyberstalking and attacks on feminists and women in general. The harm he has caused is now coming back to haunt him.

    Mr Elam has done nothing for men. The First Irrational Men’s Conference, Mr. Elam’s puppet event, had few attendees, substandard speakers, and was condemned by the media. Whenever Mr. Elam takes on anyone with any resources, as with Matt Binder of Majority Report, his loathsome tactics and money-grubbing are put on display.

    Mr. Elam should close his site. Perhaps then men’s legitimate grievances could be heard and addressed.

    • I thought Elam himself border lined it a couple times. Men who started out defending him are turning on him now.

      Best part is Elam’s (dwindling) minions are calling Matt a ‘bully’ for winning… for knowing his facts apparently ;-p

Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s