MRA Peter Nolan: “Killing women is the only path to justice for men now.”
Peter Andrew Nolan: At war with women
Men’s Rights Activists love to “warn” women that they may soon face a day of reckoning if they don’t shape up and start acting the way MRAs think they should. Don’t make men angry, they say; you wouldn’t like us when we’re angry!
Still, most MRAs making these “predictions” at least make a token effort to pretend to be horrified at the notion of men rising up to wreak vengeance upon uppity women. This isn’t what we want, they assure women; it’s just what will happen if you continue to “provoke” men with your bad behavior.
Other MRAs find it impossible to contain their glee; like doomsday preppers with well-stocked bunkers and enough ammo to kill every living thing within a 500 mile radius, they can’t wait for the end of the world.
Peter Andrew Nolan is one of these other MRAs. And he’s started to celebrate a little bit early.
In a series of recent blog posts and Tweets, Nolan has heralded a number of murders of women at the hands of their exes in his native Australia as portents of a new age of antifeminist retribution. (Click on screenshots below to see archived versions of these Tweets.)
I’m sure actress Denise Richards was delighted to find the above in her Twitter notifications, sent as a reply to a Tweet of hers wishing her father a happy Father’s Day.
Several feminists who ended up in a discussion with him on Twitter were treated to the following.
As Nolan sees it, the murder of women in Australia and Ireland is now perfectly legal, as he has officially declared war upon both countries.
Nolan thinks politicians and police officers are also legitimate targets in his “war.”
And he assures us this “war” will continue until he is properly compensated for whatever terrible injustices he thinks have been done to him.
Now, Nolan’s “legal” claims are of course ludicrous, and he is obviously in no position to “release” any murderers of women in either Ireland or Australia.
But as bizarre as his arguments are, Nolan is no troll; as longtime readers of this blog know all too well, he’s deadly serious about all of this.
The man who used to call himself Peter-Andrew: Nolan©, but who now prefers to call himself Joschua-Brandon: Boehm©, is a follower of the exceedingly strange and dangerous Sovereign Citizen movement. He thinks the odd punctuation he’s added to his various names actually means something important, and he does indeed believe that he is at war with Ireland and Australia, that murdering women is legal in both countries, and that he has the right to enforce these claims of his as best he can.
Happily, he is not actually in either of these countries — last I heard, he’s in Germany, and as I understand it, he is barred from entering Ireland and possibly Australia as well. At least according to the laws that the rest of the world follows.
This isn’t the first time Nolan has justified or indeed celebrated violence against women. His declarations of “war” are not new. He’s offered some (barely) qualified praise for far-right mass murderer Anders Breivik, and at one point he warned any women thinking of commenting on his laughable Facebook ripoff MAN-BOOK that he just might just kill them for it.
But these recent Tweets are pretty brazen, even by his standards. He is clearly a threat to women, as well as to politicians and government employees regardless of gender.
H/T — @TheFirstPaige
Posted on July 6, 2015, in a woman is always to blame, advocacy of violence, antifeminism, crackpottery, men who should not ever be with women ever, misogyny, MRA, Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c), threats, your time will come and tagged anti-feminism, antifeminism, australia, men's rights, misogyny, MRA, peter andrew nolan, threats. Bookmark the permalink. 93 Comments.
Yup. It’s called stochastic terrorism. Right-wing bloggers and media routinely push the idea of certain persons, or groups, as “dangerous”, “evil” and “must be stopped by any means possible”. Eventually, some so-called “lone wolf”* gets the idea into his head that he’s the man to do what no one else seems brave enough to — eg. Anders Breivik.
And then the fit hits the shan.
*Of course, there’s really no such thing as a lone wolf. They are pack animals. Just because you see one by himself doesn’t mean that he’s really all alone in the world.
I had to do this at my previous job. We even had to do a “simulation”. It was pretty traumatic. For some reason it was one of only two “mandatory professional development” events I actually went to at that job. Really wish I could have gone to the obnoxious “how different generations are different” talk instead of that one. This was after Illinois was ordered to draft a concealed carry law, and the police chief in that town was NOT happy about it. He told us to call 911 any time we noticed somebody was carrying, which probably says something about how busy the police were in that town.
So glad I now have a job where security actually screens to make sure people are obeying the no-carry zone (although the fact that I work in a place where that is necessary and get to go through a police screening every day on my way into work is less heartening).
@c.s. Strowbridge:
Nah, he’s a white. White men can’t ever be terrorists (unless somehow they’ve converted to Islam) no matter what they do!! All causes of white men are inherently worthy and right, didn’t you know???
@cassiopea
See, “I don’t believe in a dichotomy between pathology and choice” sounds like you’re saying at least one of a few different things.
a) That mental illness is a choice. (It certainly sounds like you’re saying this, but I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it was bad phrasing.)
b) That there’s no real difference between the ethics of forcibly treating a mentally ill person or a dangerous, violent MRA. (You’d actually be sorta right, because *neither one* is ethical. Forcing someone into an asylum is wrong no matter what.)
c) That both mental illness and bigotry result from tiny choices that are steps in the wrong direction. (Victim blame-y on one part, bigot-apology on the other.)
d) That you believe something can be both pathological and a choice… which sounds a lot like a to me, except with more loopholes for you to say “I didn’t mean the *good* ones” and jump through. People do not choose to be mentally ill.
d2) This could also be “I believe it’s a mental illness but not really, it’s a choice too, so it’s okay to force them into asylums.”
Being an awful person: not a mental illness, and not a reason to stick people in an asylum. If you don’t think they’re mentally ill, don’t advocate sticking them somewhere associated integrally with mental illness. In fact, don’t advocate sticking anyone there because FORCING SOMEONE INTO AN ASYLUM IS EXTREMELY UNETHICAL.
(I’m probably ninja’d by now, but I had to work on some stuff and come back to comment, so comment is late.)
No. A lot of MRA anger is, when you boil it down to its’ concentrate: “waaah women are not doing or being exactly what I want them to be!” Why else do they whine endlessly about problems that don’t actually exist (hypergamy, spermjacking, high false rape accusations), trivial shit that has nothing to do with them (women’s appearance and sexual choices) and not the actual problems that face men today?
You have a point but again, a lot of these guys’ grievances (the petty ones anyway) don’t have anything to do with economic inequality. And everything to do with women’s choices.
What? People ALWAYS have the option to make a morally good choice. Always.
@banned
@Bina
It’s pretty much a form of advertising. Marketing is a numbers game, and maybe people like Nolan are hoping to advertise their message to as many as possible until that one person, that one “lone wolf” (coughbullshitcough) takes it and acts on it. Meanwhile Colon Nolan gets off virtually scot free because apparently hate speech on the internet isn’t *real* hate speech.
Bleugh.
:) you beat me to the shoutout to Emperor Norton, who by all accounts was a lovely man and beneficent ruler–but I’ll share the plaque dedicated to him, formerly on a building I used to manage, at the base of the San Francisco Oakland Bay Bridge, known as the Emperor Norton Bridge because he first proposed it. The building’s since been demolished, no idea where the plaque is now.
His portrait is flanked by those of his two dogs, Bummer and Lazarus.
https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/87/238813806_58699e481a_z.jpg?zz=1
I can see how it MAY (and I do not know of any reputable studies that have proven it to be so) be that what feminism has achieved, and the many social changes it has strongly influenced have increased some aspects of violence against women – eg the 50s housewife pining, mentioned already, and lots and lots of other things, have resulted in some men feeling angry and resentful (to the extreme in this case and other notables)
BUT as I have said there is really no evidence around in the mainstream, and the ‘state of war’ he keeps cracking on about is presumably the same old ‘women get everything they want in the family courts/ the ‘pussy pass’/ lie about being raped/ men sacrifice while women are parasites’ etc etc ad nauseam’.
I agree with the idea of incitement. I have not looked at this man’s site, for obvious reasons, but from what I have seen here it really does look like he wants to act as provocateur, esp as he is going on about countries he does not appear to have particular links to.
I do not understand this ‘sovereign state’ stuff and would appreciate someone enlightening me.
I live in terror of the blockquote monster, but I’m responding to maistrechat regarding training on how to deal with a mass murderer in the office.
“I had to do this at my previous job. We even had to do a “simulation”. It was pretty traumatic.”
We had two simulations. The first was to go hide while a coworker tracked us down and shot us with a nerf gun. The second was at the end of the training, where we were expected to implement their advice, which could be boiled down to, “If you can’t escape or barricade yourself in really well, fight the bastard, because we cops aren’t going to get there in time to save you.”
Our building is supposed to be a gun-free zone, but that’s meaningless because there are no metal detectors. If someone can defeat the card-swipe system, they can get in with a weapon.
Nolan has a kindred spirit. I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if this guy turns out to be a misogynist or an MRA since a divorce seems to have set him off.
Guido Amsel charged in connection to Winnipeg law firm bombing
Letter bombs targeted three women; more people could be at risk: police
The police are running their tails off trying to track down these bombs before another person is hurt.
@Ellesar: follow the link David provided in his post. Basically, it’s people who think that, due to some legal wankery they’ve made up, they are no longer citizens of their respective country, but rather, well, sovereign, thus not beholden to pay taxes, obey the law or work with the government in any respect. The specifics vary from country to country, the idea is the same.
For an intro to some choice Sovereign/Freeman on the Land legal theories, I suggest Googling, “FDR sold your birth certificate.”
I’m not saying that Ireland doesn’t have issues, but I’m pretty sure we have no legal mechanisms to release convicted murders because of their gender and their victims gender – in the Republic or the North! I’m not some fancy lawyer but I’m quite sure about that.
I really hope this lad has no plans to take his holidays here.
Oh what, he thinks he’s at war with Ireland? Ugh, fine! Our Navy is busy rescuing migrants but we can send out some hurling players and a few angry Irish mams if he wants.
Reblogged this on The Militant Negro™.
Oh, the various and sundry supposed legal dodges are byzantine indeed, but it boils down to schoolyard games of “I am immune to your laws forever times infinity plus one!”
@davidgerard: EW! Gross! Yuck! I feel like I got a bit of nasty slime on me just reading that transcript. I mean, I’m not surprised in the least about what they said, but still–gah! That makes me want to hurl. Please tell me that these guys are not allowed anywhere near little girls (it’s bad enough they’re around women).
Peter Nolan is a dangerous man. Now he’s making threats of a “war on women.” Dude needs to be arrested. Like the rest of you, I got a bad feeling about him. A very bad feeling.
Actually, my mother works at a mental institution and she has plenty of anecdotes about residents offering her a million dollars and a ride on the spaceship or some such.
While it isn’t legal for men to murder women in Ireland, our track record when it comes to punishing people for rape is fairly pathetic. Only about 5% of rapes reported to the Gardai go forward for prosecution, and the sentences are usually in single digits. We’ve also had at least one case where a man out on bail for sexual assault raped and murdered a young woman. That’s why I have my own plan for what to do if the worst happens.
These guys incite young people who are so impressionable, insecure and are looking for someone to blame to violence. I fear that with the growing backlash against feminism (they say they are against feminism but it is REALLY women they are against) can only lead to a shooting massacre. Sadly, I see it heading that way. Canadians on here, if there are any might remember Marc Lepine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_L%C3%A9pine
See, this is what gets me so hopping furious. The Internet is as real a place of interaction as any other, even if people do often interact there under aliases. The interactions are real, even if the names are often not. Messages CAN be traced to their sources, if need be, and if enough experts in the process are on hand. The harm done by “swatters” and trolls is real, and affects a living person at the other end the same as a swarming on the schoolyard by bullies. It causes fear, anxiety and insecurity in real people. The cyberbullies KNOW this, and that’s why they do it. Therefore, hate speech on the Internet MUST count the same as hate speech in person. It needs to have real consequences, too, for those who do it.
Sadly, the idiots in parliament haven’t quite caught on to that yet, probably because no SWAT teams or massive stacks of pizza they didn’t order have shown up on THEIR doorsteps.
(Yet.)
I suspect the tweet about soldiers shooting politicians and police officers, even though it wasn’t a direct threat, is more likely to get him in trouble than the ones about killing women.
Anyway, he should be held accountable – at least fined, hopefully monitored. Twitter bans are pretty much nothing.
I’m kind of surprised that Nolan can make such explicit threats without any apparent consequences. He’s literally celebrating and encouraging the killing of women (as well as police officers and politicians). Wow. Just wow.