Men's Rights Movement

[LeftyBastard]

The emerging Men's Rights Movement has many people from conservative/libertarian views. I wanted to see what people thougth about men's rights from a left-wing view. For example, men deciding they do not want to have children or get married. There are 2.5 million men in prison in this country and men are more likely to commit suicide than women by 6x.
I mean this in a way that is not combatting feminism but is about men moving out of the protector/provider role.

[o well this is ok I guess]

The MRA around here has a reputation of trolling feminist demos.
So, yeah, fuck em, or at least the one here.

[Ostrinski]

Except that there is plenty of room within feminism for men to struggle against the protector/provider paradigm, as feminism is nothing if not the movement toward the end of gender roles. Given that we exist in a globally patriarchal society, I certainly don't see why men are deserving of their own movement in this regard.

[Goblin]

The whole "masculinist" movement is fucking stupid. Feminists fight for gender equality. They want whats best for both genders.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

"Men's rights" is a ridiculous concept in a male-dominated society, like "white rights" in a white-dominated society. It's advocated by reactionaries.

[o well this is ok I guess]

To be fair there's a lot of things that could be better about being a male. But these problems originate from patriarchy, so it'd be wrong to frame them as a "men's rights" issue.

[#FF0000]

A bunch of people complaining on the internet doesn't really constitute a movement, imo.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Well it seems to me (based on the limited knowledge I have on this subject) that the men's right thing is more about lamenting some sort of turn for the worse in society, a turn for the worse for men. Which is not what they should be doing, what they should be doing is thinking about how society's ideas regarding gender and gender roles impedes individuals...that can explain why young men are often murdered, why men get sent to war , why unjust decisions sometimes happen in family court, etc. These issues aren't something that most men get confronted with on a regular basis, though, I don't think.

[Sentinel]

The emerging Men's Rights Movement has many people from conservative/libertarian views. I wanted to see what people thougth about men's rights from a left-wing view.


It completely lacks justification for it's existence no matter if it calls itself left or right. Feminism is a reaction to a real phenomenon, patriarchal oppression - but men are not oppressed by women.


For example, men deciding they do not want to have children or get married.

Because women don't feel pressured to do these things, you mean? Are you joking..? :unsure:


There are 2.5 million men in prison in this country and men are more likely to commit suicide than women by 6x.

I'm fairly sure they aren't in jail, or commit suicide, due to oppression by women. Are you starting to catch my point?

There is no need for a mens rights movement as long as we live in a patriarchal society.


I agree with the movement. They combat feminism too, which is good as well!

Why is it good?

[Jason]

The emerging Men's Rights Movement has many people from conservative/libertarian views. I wanted to see what people thougth about men's rights from a left-wing view. For example, men deciding they do not want to have children or get married. There are 2.5 million men in prison in this country and men are more likely to commit suicide than women by 6x.
I mean this in a way that is not combatting feminism but is about men moving out of the protector/provider role.

The prison thing is a racial issue, not gender. Ironically, more than likely these "libertarians" might stick up for men, but not other races.

[DancingEmma]

I'm glad to see the Men's Rights Movement is being roundly rejected here. Self-identified Men's Rights Activists (MRAs) are almost without exception (as far as I can tell) huge reactionaries, misogynists, and douchebags. They are just pissed off because they want the right to be complete sexist assholes and still have every woman they meet worship the ground they walk on. Unfortunately for them, though, it's not the 1950s anymore, and this will never happen. MRAs will occasionally quote statistics about men in prison or men who commit suicide to bolster their case. Weirdly enough, though, they are almost exclusively straight, white men who have never been in prison or contemplated suicide themselves. And the sorts of men who ARE disproportionately likely to have dealt with these issues, like men of color or gay men, well, MRAs often don't seem particularly fond of THEM.

The only type of male hardship that MRAs REALLY care about is the imaginary hardships that straight, white MRAs face due to all the big mean feminists telling them to stop being douchebags. Boo-hoo! Women give me dirty looks when I tell sexist jokes! Boo-hoo! I bought this chick a drink at the bar and then she didn't ever have sex with me! Boo-hoo! I beat my wife and then she divorced me, and now I have to pay the ***** child support!

Yup. Poor, poor MRAs.

[#FF0000]

I dunno if they can even be called "MRAs" considering the "A" stands for activists. They don't do anything about any of the issues that they talk about and are apparently unaware of organizations that exist that deal with them, e.g. any prison reform group that tries to deal with the issue of sexual assault in prisons

[DancingEmma]

I dunno if they can even be called "MRAs" considering the "A" stands for activists. They don't do anything about any of the issues that they talk about and are apparently unaware of organizations that exist that deal with them, e.g. any prison reform group that tries to deal with the issue of sexual assault in prisons

Actually, that's a good point. I mean even I, who am a evil stuck-up feminazi **** dyke *****, do way way more for men in prison and suicidal men and men who are sent to die in wars than any MRA ever has.

[LOLseph Stalin]

A men's right movement probably isn't necessary for most things, but there's is a few areas where men do lack rights: child custody being one.

[Quail]

A men's right movement probably isn't necessary for most things, but there's is a few areas where men do lack rights: child custody being one.
Why do you think that is though? Women are still expected to be the primary caregiver and so are more likely to have spent more time with the child. Even if this is not the case, the woman is likely to be favoured due to traditional gender roles. The traditional gender roles which feminists want to abolish.

Edit: @DancingEmma: Use of the word "****" isn't normally allowed on this forum, although I appreciate the context you're using it in.

[LOLseph Stalin]

Why do you think that is though? Women are still expected to be the primary caregiver and so are more likely to have spent more time with the child. Even if this is not the case, the woman is likely to be favoured due to traditional gender roles. The traditional gender roles which feminists want to abolish.

Since feminists are working to abolish gender roles anyway that's another reason a men's rights movement wouldn't be needed. Most of the rights they lack are because of traditional gender roles anyway.

[DancingEmma]

Edit: @DancingEmma: Use of the word "****" isn't normally allowed on this forum, although I appreciate the context you're using it in.

Thanks for the heads up, Quail, and I think it's actually for the best that the word is not allowed here. I suppose I figured it was fair game because just yesterday I was called that word by one of our fine male fellow revolutionaries in the chat room. On reflection, I realize the chat room is not the same thing as the forums. But I think that's why the word was on my mind. Normally, I believe it's so toxic that I don't even try to use it in the reclaimed sense or in a tongue-in-cheek sort of way.

[RedAtheist]

The MRA is not doing anything to help men that hasn't all ready been done by some other movement which is isn't bashing feminism. They whine about men being conscripted into the army, ignoring the fact that 1) Conscription is in no way that fault of feminism and supporters of conscription tend to hate feminism and 2) we already have anti-war movements fighting against conscription and they seem to actually care about the issue. Besides the MRA has rather cowardly reasons for opposing conscription. They think men in a military are 'oppressed' when really they are tools for carrying out oppression against people of other countries. Opposition to conscription should be motivated by people not wanting to be forced to kill others in a war, not by pure self-interest.

There are negative consequences to being part of the dominant group. When Hitler ruled Germany he put a lot of effort in telling white Germans (both men and women) that they needed to be tough and ruthless, instructions which are similar to those given to men in our culture. This no doubt would have damaged their psyches (not to mention the fact that some of them wound up being jailed or executed after WW2), but no one would argue that white Germans were the oppressed race in Nazi Germany.

Expectations and "pressures", even those which are enforced through cruel bullying and state propaganda, are not necessarily oppression. In the case of the expectations placed on men, they are designed to put men on top and make them the powerful group in society. The expectations placed on women (e.g. that they be quiet, gentle, soft, never concerned about their own well being) are designed to keep women in a weaker position in society. Why am I not surprised that a group identifying as 'libertarian' does not understand this and thinks all 'expectations' are equally oppressive?

[LeftyBastard]

MRAs are imperfect but I don't think radical feminism is any better. Radicals feminists stretched sexism to the point where everyday activities are seen as sexist. They restrict freedom and really have little to do with Marxism or anarchy. Honestly a lot of movements have been destroyed and friends have been turned against one another due to the exploits of radical feminism.

[Quail]

Since feminists are working to abolish gender roles anyway that's another reason a men's rights movement wouldn't be needed. Most of the rights they lack are because of traditional gender roles anyway.
That was my point.


Thanks for the heads up, Quail, and I think it's actually for the best that the word is not allowed here. I suppose I figured it was fair game because just yesterday I was called that word by one of our fine male fellow revolutionaries in the chat room. On reflection, I realize the chat room is not the same thing as the forums. But I think that's why the word was on my mind. Normally, I believe it's so toxic that I don't even try to use it in the reclaimed sense or in a tongue-in-cheek sort of way.
I don't think you're meant to use it in chat either, but I don't know if chat is moderated that much.

[l'Enfermé]

I'm glad to see the Men's Rights Movement is being roundly rejected here. Self-identified Men's Rights Activists (MRAs) are almost without exception (as far as I can tell) huge reactionaries, misogynists, and douchebags. They are just pissed off because they want the right to be complete sexist assholes and still have every woman they meet worship the ground they walk on. Unfortunately for them, though, it's not the 1950s anymore, and this will never happen. MRAs will occasionally quote statistics about men in prison or men who commit suicide to bolster their case. Weirdly enough, though, they are almost exclusively straight, white men who have never been in prison or contemplated suicide themselves. And the sorts of men who ARE disproportionately likely to have dealt with these issues, like men of color or gay men, well, MRAs often don't seem particularly fond of THEM.

The only type of male hardship that MRAs REALLY care about is the imaginary hardships that straight, white MRAs face due to all the big mean feminists telling them to stop being douchebags. Boo-hoo! Women give me dirty looks when I tell sexist jokes! Boo-hoo! I bought this chick a drink at the bar and then she didn't ever have sex with me! Boo-hoo! I beat my wife and then she divorced me, and now I have to pay the ***** child support!

Yup. Poor, poor MRAs.
Suicides in the US are predominantly straight white men though.

[o well this is ok I guess]

MRAs are imperfect but I don't think radical feminism is any better. Radicals feminists stretched sexism to the point where everyday activities are seen as sexist. They restrict freedom and really have little to do with Marxism or anarchy. Honestly a lot of movements have been destroyed and friends have been turned against one another due to the exploits of radical feminism. Radical feminism is just as irrelevant as insurrectionism. I don't see how someone could interpret the most obscure of feminists sects as threatening.

[#FF0000]

MRAs are imperfect but I don't think radical feminism is any better. Radicals feminists stretched sexism to the point where everyday activities are seen as sexist.

Such as?


Suicides in the US are predominantly straight white men though.

That has more to do with the preferred method of suicide than anything else though. Men are more likely to use things like guns while women who commit or attempt suicide tend to use pills.


A men's right movement probably isn't necessary for most things, but there's is a few areas where men do lack rights: child custody being one.

I used to think this too but I don't think this is even true. First of all, in the US, it's really depends on state. Secondly, the courts aren't even involved in most of the cases in which women gain custody -- it's something that is often decided outside of the courts between the two parties.

[Decolonize The Left]

The emerging Men's Rights Movement has many people from conservative/libertarian views. I wanted to see what people thougth about men's rights from a left-wing view. For example, men deciding they do not want to have children or get married. There are 2.5 million men in prison in this country and men are more likely to commit suicide than women by 6x.
I mean this in a way that is not combatting feminism but is about men moving out of the protector/provider role.

Women will move themselves out of their current roles as second class citizens. We, as men, will welcome this movement as it benefits us greatly and will do our best to support it as possible.

You see the difference between what I said and what you said?

[Lobotomy]

There are some situations and areas of life in which men face unique problems, and these problems are worthy of discussion. (Eg, why are crime rates so much higher in the male population? Etc) but I've never met a person who identified themselves with the "men's rights movement" who was not a raving misogynist just underneath the surface.

[DancingEmma]

Suicides in the US are predominantly straight white men though.

My point was that individual gay and bissexual men are way, way more likely to commit suicide than individual straight men. The only reason more straight men than queer men commit suicide in total is because 90% of all men are straight. But any given straight man is far less likely to commit suicide.

[LeftyBastard]

I am in solidarity with Emma about the free usage of the word ****.

[Crux]

I am in solidarity with Emma about the free usage of the word ****.
Then you obviously didn't read what she said.

I feel the same about the "Men's Right Movement" as I feel about people who talk about "reverse racism". Conservatism in a new dress-up. In as far as it exists IRL they must be fought, demasked and pushed back.

[#FF0000]

In as far as it exists IRL they must be fought, demasked and pushed back.

welp our work on that front is done

[GerrardWinstanley]

I can understand the MRA's bad reputation and why people who care about women's rights would have serious reservations about it, especially in North America where you get a lot of the more extreme groups (see the Southern Poverty Law Centre's excellent blacklist (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2012/spring/misogyny-the-sites)). There are lot of scumbags that fall under the MRA rubric, but I don't think it's fair to write off men's activism entirely as the self-righteous face of misogyny.

Good Men Project (some bad apples aside) and ManKind are mostly good people (the latter even provides services to men affected by domestic violence and CSA that recipients of government funding like Refuge and Women's Aid fail to), who I don't think deserve to be lumped with disgusting misogynists like a Voice for Men and the False Rape Society. I'd also recommend Ally Fogg's humorously titled blog (http://hetpat.wordpress.com/) that I think makes a great attempt at constructive dialogue with the women's movement.

[Crux]

I can understand the MRA's bad reputation and why people who care about women's rights would have serious reservations about it, especially in North America where you get a lot of the more extreme groups (see the Southern Poverty Law Centre's excellent blacklist (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2012/spring/misogyny-the-sites)). There are lot of scumbags that fall under the MRA rubric, but I don't think it's fair to write off men's activism entirely as the self-righteous face of misogyny.

Good Men Project (some bad apples aside) and ManKind are mostly good people (the latter even provides services to men affected by domestic violence and CSA that recipients of government funding like Refuge and Women's Aid fail to), who I don't think deserve to be lumped with disgusting misogynists like a Voice for Men and the False Rape Society. I'd also recommend Ally Fogg's humorously titled blog (http://hetpat.wordpress.com/) that I think makes a great attempt at constructive dialogue with the women's movement.
No the "Good Men Project" (http://jezebel.com/good-men-project/) are anything but. I don't know enough about Mankind to say anything about it, but in my experience, sadly, even well intentioned projects about men's rights tend to attract a bad crowd. Which is why I agree very much with this. (http://jezebel.com/5967923/fuck-you-mras) This (http://manboobz.com/) is also a useful (and humorous) source.

[LeftyBastard]

Here are some references to check out
1. Camille Paglia
2. Erin Pizzey
3. Christina Hoff Sommers
4. E Belfort Bax (socialist)

There are men of color in the men's movement.

[Monkeyboy]

Well, I'm not informed about this.

However, here (somewhere in Europe, top secret) females are out performing males in school. I think it's good that females get more educated, but males getting less educated is a bit of a problem. Here some women will have trouble to find a mate with the same education, if they want that, I'm no know-it-all.

Here there's also the issue that most teachers are female. Theirs a demand for males.

Some here are advocating for seperated classes. That sounds like going backwards, but psychology wise it makes sense. Boys for example are better at folk physics while girls are better at folk psychology.

That's just what I've heard. Of course they should be treated as much equal as possible, but we should also not ignore differences in psychology.

[Quail]

Well, I'm not informed about this.

However, here (somewhere in Europe, top secret) females are out performing males in school. I think it's good that females get more educated, but males getting less educated is a bit of a problem. Here some women will have trouble to find a mate with the same education, if they want that, I'm no know-it-all.

Here there's also the issue that most teachers are female. Theirs a demand for males.

Some here are advocating for seperated classes. That sounds like going backwards, but psychology wise it makes sense. Boys for example are better at folk physics while girls are better at folk psychology.

That's just what I've heard. Of course they should be treated as much equal as possible, but we should also not ignore differences in psychology.
You might find this (http://www.revleft.com/vb/truth-pink-and-t177177/index.html) thread interesting.

I'm not really sure what you mean by "folk physics" and "folk psychology" but there is evidence that the teacher's expectations of students often turn out to be a elf-fulfilling prophecy. So, if teachers think that boys are better at physics than girls, that prejudice will lead to the boys that teacher teaches doing better and the girls doing worse. It's difficult for women to get into the sciences because they're not taken as seriously as their male counterparts.

Also, there are gender imbalances in a variety of jobs. There are usually more women than men in jobs which are traditionally "feminine" such as childcare, nursing, etc. - "nurturing" jobs, in other words. This makes sense given that we are socialised to think that women are best at being nurturing, while men are more logical; however there is no real basis for these stereotypes, and women make just as competent engineers (for example) as men and men make equally competent nurses as women.

[DancingEmma]

I am in solidarity with Emma about the free usage of the word ****.

Fuck off, idiot.


3. Christina Hoff Sommers

Christina Hoff Sommers? Are you fucking kidding me? You're clearly an MRA yourself. Who will you cite next? Phyllis Schafly? Rush Limbaugh? Also, Camille Paglia is right-wing and has in the past characterized herself as a "libertarian" and a "Clinton Democrat." She says she also voted for John Kerry and for Barack Obama. You need to be restricted here on RevLeft.

[LeftyBastard]

Nothing like an anarchist to call for restrictions.
Actually one of the leading MRAs on youtube is named barbarosssaaa, he is a young black male.

[Quail]

Can you keep the discussion civil, please.

LeftyBastard, could you please try to post more constructive comments? So instead of posting a list of people to look up, you could include some arguments and add to the discussion.

[#FF0000]

4. E Belfort Bax (socialist)

Yeah I'm definitely down with anyone who declares themselves a socialist, even ones who supported the British in WW1 and called Feminism an anti-man crusade in the 19th century.

But yeah there's really nothing of value in the MRA thing. At best they fuck up people who are legitimately trying to deal with the issues they whine about.

[GerrardWinstanley]

No the "Good Men Project" (http://jezebel.com/good-men-project/) are anything but. I don't know enough about Mankind to say anything about it, but in my experience, sadly, even well intentioned projects about men's rights tend to attract a bad crowd. Which is why I agree very much with this. (http://jezebel.com/5967923/fuck-you-mras) This (http://manboobz.com/) is also a useful (and humorous) source.I agree, there have been two indefensible outbursts from GMP lately in particular. One an article by the friend of a rapist that attempted to pin the part of the blame on the victim in which the author proposes without irony that 'Nice Guys Commit Rape Too' (http://goodmenproject.com/ethics-values/nice-guys-commit-rape-too/) and later an article by an admitted rapist who said he would sooner do it again than 'stop partying' (now taken offline). This is why I qualified my statement, although I probably should have gone further given how knee-deep the editors were in the scandal (no apology, openly defended the Royse - the author of the first blog).

I think it's fair to point out that many, including Ally Fogg (who blogged for the website) strongly distanced themselves from these decisions and also attacked them on their behaviour (http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/why-did-the-good-men-project-publish-a-blog-by-an-unrepentant-and-unconvicted-rapist-8406311.html) in the Independent newspaper's blog. This is more the sort of MRA I think is worth defending from blanket dismissal.

You are are right though that the majority of the men's rights internet presence does itself no favours, including the top brass of GMP. They need to accept they have lost the argument about rape with feminists completely.

[LeftyBastard]

Initially the Black Panthers didn't support feminism. There was a big debate about this at the SDS convention that led to the forming of the Weather Underground. I think they were right about that.

[Let's Get Free]

I wouldn't worry too much about this. Out in the real world, the men's rights movement is somewhat less popular than horse porn

[#FF0000]

Initially the Black Panthers didn't support feminism. There was a big debate about this at the SDS convention that led to the forming of the Weather Underground. I think they were right about that.

the big question that must be asked here is

so what

[Crux]

Initially the Black Panthers didn't support feminism. There was a big debate about this at the SDS convention that led to the forming of the Weather Underground. I think they were right about that.

Fascinating, bro. Ever heard of Angela Davis? Also why would you want to emulate the shortcomings of the early panthers? Frankly I think you seem pretty sketchy.

[Jason]

Men who need rights are wusses :lol:

[Luís Henrique]

Some years - indeed I think some decades, I'm getting old - ago there was a piece called Manifesto Masculinista that circulated in Brazil, but it didn't have any in common with this MRA thing. It was a cute thing, addressing things like freedom to cry without being considered weak, or the need to spend more quality time with children. I also don't think it was related to any kind of real life movement.


But yeah there's really nothing of value in the MRA thing. At best they fuck up people who are legitimately trying to deal with the issues they whine about.

Quite that.

The only legitimate things they seem to address are miscarriages of justice regarding rape and custody issues. But wrongful convictions regarding rape are only a part of the much wider issue of wrongful convictions in general, which are dealt with much more adequately by organisations like Innocence Project (http://www.innocenceproject.org/), and are indeed much more linked to racism and discrimination against Blacks than to anything related to biological sex. Men are much more likely to be convicted, rightly or wrongly, than women, and probably also much more likely to commit crimes, due to their traditional sexual roles; but the one area where women are more often arrested and convicted than men in the United States - prostitution - clearly shows the bias: most prostitutes are White, but most arrests for prostitution are of Black women.

And regarding custody issues, they are the direct result of traditional sexual roles, not of any supposed oppression of men.

As for other things that rub them the wrong way, for instance the fact that men are disproportionately represented in the military - and consequently in war casualties - not only it is a direct result of traditional sexual roles, but it is something where feminism should be their best ally; it certainly isn't feminists that are keeping up a huge military and deciding that only men should join it.


radical feminists

Just be careful to avoid a conflation here. There are people who are feminists and radical, and even radical in their feminism. And there is a movement called "Radical Feminism", whose credentials both as "radical" and as "feminist" are somewhat dubious. Please don't confuse these things.


Initially the Black Panthers didn't support feminism.

Yeah... the Black Panthers also murdered bookkeepers, should we make the murder of bookkeepers a sacred duty of revolutionaries?

As most radical movement of the late sixties and early seventies, the Black Panthers were very much tainted by the general sexism of the times, and would have been struggling against this loaded heritage.

But what is your problem with feminism? How exactly does it oppress you? Or where do you think they go theoretically wrong?

Most of us are sincerely convinced that feminism is a good thing, even indeed an integral part of our liberatory exploits. If you wish to change that, you will have to put up real intellectual work explaining why it isn't. Random quips and references to names of people or organisations won't sway anyone here.

Luís Henrique

[Monkeyboy]

You might find thread interesting.

I'm not really sure what you mean by "folk physics" and "folk psychology" but there is evidence that the teacher's expectations of students often turn out to be a elf-fulfilling prophecy. So, if teachers think that boys are better at physics than girls, that prejudice will lead to the boys that teacher teaches doing better and the girls doing worse. It's difficult for women to get into the sciences because they're not taken as seriously as their male counterparts.

Also, there are gender imbalances in a variety of jobs. There are usually more women than men in jobs which are traditionally "feminine" such as childcare, nursing, etc. - "nurturing" jobs, in other words. This makes sense given that we are socialised to think that women are best at being nurturing, while men are more logical; however there is no real basis for these stereotypes, and women make just as competent engineers (for example) as men and men make equally competent nurses as women.

I'm always willing to learn! Unless I find it too hard to read.

Folk physics; basic knowledge how things work
Folk psychology; basic knowledge how people minds work
(Folk biology: basic knowledge of how living things work)

Both folk physics and folk psychology (and folk biology) are not always true. It's our nature's knowledge so to speak; it's unlearned.

Yes, we humans have a lot of biases, teachers are no different. I'm aware of this, however if I remember correctly the folk psychology and folk physics were done in a study not because of what teachers think. But of course! That doesn't mean it applies to all girls and boys! There's also the stereotype (I have never heard of scientific evidence, I'll take a look on Google later) that girls are better at languages and boys better at math. Guess what, I was better at language than math (though I have become worse at grammar, and better at math, I blame this on my education).

I agree that both males and females can be just as good. But I do think we are a bit different psychology wise, however that doesn't mean we can't be just as good! I believe we are both capable of the same "things" but one sex might need a bit extra or different training than the other, and that also depends on the person. So in that way I agree with the class separation, and I haven't said I agreed with it, I just said I read about it; I'm otherwise neutral.

Education has a lot of flaws in my opinion, what you said is right about teachers being biased. I'm quite a quiet guy, and teachers kind of ignored me, I believe I could have done much better if I was better motivated by teachers. I had a very high score at the test that would determine which level of education I did, yet I did quite poorly after that. I can understand that females might even be worse off. (Would a teacher being male or female make a difference?)

[DancingEmma]

Just be careful to avoid a conflation here. There are people who are feminists and radical, and even radical in their feminism. And there is a movement called "Radical Feminism", whose credentials both as "radical" and as "feminist" are somewhat dubious. Please don't confuse these things.

Yeah. I was waiting for LeftyBastard to call me a radical feminist. That would have been pretty rich, given the discussion I just got out of in that other thread.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

Initially the Black Panthers didn't support feminism. I think they were right about that.

I don't know about you guys, but this level of elaboration has blown me away. The Black Panthers didn't support Feminism, thus my baseless attack on Feminism is justified by a political sympathy turned authority so that I don't have to reveal how incredibly misogynistic I am!

The Black Panthers were also down with ethnic segregation. Honestly, what a fucking dumb excuse to dislike an emancipatory movement.

[Luís Henrique]

Yeah. I was waiting for LeftyBastard to call me a radical feminist. That would have been pretty rich, given the discussion I just got out of in that other thread.

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

OK, sorry. I couldn't imagine I was going to spoil your pleasure by posting that. :(

But now, though I don't think he knows the difference, he at least know there is a difference. Perhaps this helps him reorganise his ideas in a better way.

Luís Henrique

[Luís Henrique]

The only legitimate things they seem to address are miscarriages of justice regarding rape and custody issues. But wrongful convictions regarding rape are only a part of the much wider issue of wrongful convictions in general, which are dealt with much more adequately by organisations like Innocence Project (http://www.innocenceproject.org/),

And, oh, what I was really trying to say is that the fact that MRAs mess up with wrongful convictions of rape makes things more difficult for those who are wrongfully convicted or accused. Having a bigot in your side does degrade your credibility, even if you haven't done anything to bring the bigot into your support.

Luís Henrique

[Thug Lessons]

Here are some references to check out
1. Camille Paglia
2. Erin Pizzey
3. Christina Hoff Sommers
4. E Belfort Bax (socialist)

There are men of color in the men's movement.

Those people are all morons. You pollute your brain every time you read them.

[Thug Lessons]

Suicides in the US are predominantly straight white men though.

Even in situations where white men are disproportionately affected by some social ill or another, it's useless to look at these as "men's issues" or "white issues" the same way we look at abortion or domestic violence as women's issues. Suicide among white men is a product of poor mental health, alienation and a whole host of other problems, not because they're white or because they're men.

You're not going to learn anything about suicide by focusing on gender as the cause the same way you can use a feminist perspective to explain domestic violence because these sorts of critiques exist to highlight the role of institutional discrimination and oppression. In the case of suicide or prison rape, they fall flat unless you focus on the actual oppressions involved, like failure to care for the mentally ill and the brutal prison system. This goes to the heart of why "men's rights" doesn't make sense even if you frame it as leftist.

[Sean]

Having just read this thread, its clear that "LeftyBastard" is an MRA. They've come in pretending not to know much about this cool new movement all the hip kids are joining and "just asking questions". You're a loon. And for Christ's sake, stop shaking black people around in your posts like you're trying to entice kids into your creepy van with candy bars.

I get it, MRAs aren't racially exclusive, black people can hate women's rights too.

MRAs are to eliminating sexism what the BNPs "racism cuts both ways" campaign is to eliminating racism. Its not, its just that political correctness has forced both groups to become more creative in their hatred.

Its a hate group dressed up defensively as an oppressed group. You're not a real activist group because you exist on blogs and reddit as noone outside your own clique has time for you. Go fuck yourself sir.

[Le Libérer]

LeftyBastard has been banned - MRA troll

[Einkarl]

I think the only real issue many men on the left have with feminism. Is just the fact it is called "feminism". It makes it sound something that is exclusive to women even though it isn't. Some people in their minds think it is synonymous with wanting to create a matriarchy. In the same way some think that "communism" is synonymous with the DREADED GULAGS.


I know this is a stupid reason but believe me, some dudes I've talked geniunely believe that.

[Nico Belic]

The whole "masculinist" movement is fucking stupid. Feminists fight for gender equality. They want whats best for both genders.

Not really, masculinist movements are generally offspring of fear of feminism. Some feminists (not all) come across in a hateful and aggressive manner, this is triggering counter movements.


Since feminists are working to abolish gender roles anyway that's another reason a men's rights movement wouldn't be needed. Most of the rights they lack are because of traditional gender roles anyway.

I disagree, I generally find that feminist movements claim to want to break down gender roles, but specifically cover issues faced by woman, rather than men. I'm yet to see a established feminist cover the inequalities faced by men, therefore a male rights movement is needed.

[Kindness]

I'm a man who's 100% in favor of feminism. The "issues" raised by MRAs are actually, as others have mentioned here, products of patriarchy and traditional gender roles. Because men are privileged in society, there is no need for any kind of movement addressing men's rights.

[Sean]

Not really, masculinist movements are generally offspring of fear of feminism. Some feminists (not all) come across in a hateful and aggressive manner, this is triggering counter movements.
Entire counter movements spring up out of fear of some people. Name me these people right now. Please oh please list these Hitlers and Pol Pots of feminism that struck such terror into your heart that you have to band together into "counter movements". Tell me who they are, what they did to you and how you countered. I am all fucking ears for this.

[Luc]

I disagree, I generally find that feminist movements claim to want to break down gender roles, but specifically cover issues faced by woman, rather than men. I'm yet to see a established feminist cover the inequalities faced by men, therefore a male rights movement is needed.
as i said in another thread replying to a similiar post:

http://feministing.com/2012/11/19/teen-boys-also-risking-their-health-in-pursuit-of-unattainable-bodies/
http://everydayfeminism.com/2012/08/why-men-need-feminism-3/
http://everydayfeminism.com/2012/12/5-challenges-black-gay-men-face/
http://everydayfeminism.com/2012/11/6-ways-to-talk-about-male-violence-and-healthy-masculinity/

this is all i can pull up in 5mins i'd post more if i cared. point is ur arguement isnt very compelling

edit:

Feminist writer Jessica Valenti dedicated full chapter to men in Full Frontal Feminism, Chapter 10 Boys Do Cry
Feminist group Men of Strength Clubs http://www.mencanstoprape.org/The-Men-of-Strength-Club/

aswell there is much work on queer men which those who criticise feminism for "not listening to men" (in essence) never seem to be talking about

[#FF0000]

I'm yet to see a established feminist cover the inequalities faced by men

Then you haven't been looking. The college feminist "TAKE BACK THE NIGHT" crowds I've run into always have women talking about the depressingly high rate of sexual abuse among girls and boys. Just like a month ago, I saw a feminist blogger (I want to say it was on Jezebel but I don't think it was) talk about suicide among males.

And I don't buy for a minute that these MRA dorks give a shit about the issues faced by men. I know hella women out there who call themselves feminists who are active in groups to help the homeless -- a group made up mostly of (depending on what stats you're looking at), men. Same goes for the feminists I know who work for prison abolition and reform and seek to improve that horrific conditions faced by women and men in the American prison system.

How many MRAs or masculinists are out there in those groups, taking action against the same problems the he-man woman hater's clubs all over the internet rail on about?

Zero. None. Not a goddamn one. Because they don't care about these issues. They don't care about men getting raped in prison, they don't care about homeless men, and they certainly didn't care about men when I talked about my experience with sexual harassment in my workplace (the feminists, on the other hand, did).

And to make it clear, no one is saying it's okay to hold someone's gender against them -- that's wrong in principle. But the fact is, men don't have their gender held against them the same way women do. Men get shit regarding their adherence to their gender role. Women get shit regardless of their adherence to their gender role -- to not be feminine is ridiculed, and to be feminine, in a lot of ways, even today, is to be a lesser to men.

In both cases, the problem isn't some war between the sexes -- the problem is patriarchy.

[Nico Belic]

Entire counter movements spring up out of fear of some people. Name me these people right now. Please oh please list these Hitlers and Pol Pots of feminism that struck such terror into your heart that you have to band together into "counter movements". Tell me who they are, what they did to you and how you countered. I am all fucking ears for this.


What are you on about? Hitler and pol pot of feminism are you serious?

I am saying that some people are taking the goals of feminism in the wrong manner due to a few individuals.


as i said in another thread replying to a similiar post:

I said established feminist, so lets say Germaine Greer, ever heard her talk about male victimization?

[MarxArchist]

MRA's are garbage but this doesn't mean all feminist theory/practice is beyond criticism and or totally compatible with Marxism/Anarchism. Feminism has various different sects and currents just as revolutionary socialism does and sorry to say but just like revolutionary socialism there's some bunk theory/practice floating around, a lot of which is responsible for the knee jerk reaction against feminism in general. Most of it but not all is found within certain RadFem theory/practice. Some will say they're a small minority but they function as a sort of ideological (coercive) vanguard pushing things into, in some cases, rather absurd territory.

From the experience I've had online with MRA's, and it's only been online, I've gathered, many with left leanings are having a strange reaction to radical feminism. Others are just right wing libertarian types who would be meatheads no matter what. Some are even women as is the case with this one- she usually ignores my posts criticizing her views. No, she always ignores my posts.

http://www.youtube.com/user/girlwriteswhat

I think what a lot of people generally have in common is a misconception of what feminism is, in the same fashion people generally misunderstand what communism is. There's a lot of theory to take in, a lot of different views, a lot of conflict even within the broader feminist tradition. Conflict usually comes from feminists outright calling for a matriarchal society, from separatist feminists, from sex negative feminists, from feminists who see women and men as belonging to separate classes, from feminists who completely throw out class analysis, from lesbian feminists to feminists who think women should abstain from sex with men (different than the sex negative position), from feminists who attack trans women etc and so on.

My point is, lets not act like feminist theory as a whole, by default of being feminist theory, is the holy grail of fighting oppression. I think all Marxist/Anarchists should be feminists ,as in, standing for the immediate and future liberation of women but not defenders of specific shit theory that borders with reactionary nonsense and actually does quite a bit of harm to the prospect of liberation. A lot of it also turns into identity polotics ie struggle completely separate from the fight for communism, as in, a vote for Hillary Clinton is advocating the liberation of women. Yikes.

Lets also not forget working class men of all colors have it pretty shit under capitalism and some feminist theory end's up under the umbrella of privilege theory in practice. Read the below and let me know what you think:

http://blackorchidcollective.wordpress.com/2012/03/12/guest-post-privilege-politics/

On Identity politics here:

http://socialistworker.org/2008/07/11/marxism-and-identity-politics

Same author:

http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/newspape/isj2/1994/isj2-062/smith.htm

[#FF0000]

MRA's are garbage but this doesn't mean all feminist theory/practice is beyond criticism and or totally compatible with Marxism/Anarchism.

We know.

[Nico Belic]

Then you haven't been looking. The college feminist "TAKE BACK THE NIGHT" crowds I've run into always have women talking about the depressingly high rate of sexual abuse among girls and boys. Just like a month ago, I saw a feminist blogger (I want to say it was on Jezebel but I don't think it was) talk about suicide among males.

And I don't buy for a minute that these MRA dorks give a shit about the issues faced by men. I know hella women out there who call themselves feminists who are active in groups to help the homeless -- a group made up mostly of (depending on what stats you're looking at), men. Same goes for the feminists I know who work for prison abolition and reform and seek to improve that horrific conditions faced by women and men in the American prison system.

How many MRAs or masculinists are out there in those groups, taking action against the same problems the he-man woman hater's clubs all over the internet rail on about?

Zero. None. Not a goddamn one. Because they don't care about these issues. They don't care about men getting raped in prison, they don't care about homeless men, and they certainly didn't care about men when I talked about my experience with sexual harassment in my workplace (the feminists, on the other hand, did).

And to make it clear, no one is saying it's okay to hold someone's gender against them -- that's wrong in principle. But the fact is, men don't have their gender held against them the same way women do. Men get shit regarding their adherence to their gender role. Women get shit regardless of their adherence to their gender role -- to not be feminine is ridiculed, and to be feminine, in a lot of ways, even today, is to be a lesser to men.

In both cases, the problem isn't some war between the sexes -- the problem is patriarchy.

Point one: I have been looking, but it's not easy information to find.

Point two: You're talking from personal experience, I want something more mainstream.

Point three: being from the UK, forgive me but what is the MRA?

[MarxArchist]

We know.
Way to ignore my point ;)

[Nico Belic]

I think what a lot of people generally have in common is a misconception of what feminism is, in the same fashion people generally misunderstand what communism is.

I couldn't agree more. Misinformation is the greatest threat to society.

[LOLseph Stalin]

I disagree, I generally find that feminist movements claim to want to break down gender roles, but specifically cover issues faced by woman, rather than men. I'm yet to see a established feminist cover the inequalities faced by men, therefore a male rights movement is needed.

Which issues are faced by men that breaking down traditional gender roles won't address?

[MarxArchist]

# FF0000, take the MR "activist" woman's page on youtube I linked to. Her main video or the video on her page uses quotes from Cathrine Comins saying men unjustly accused of rape can learn from the experience. That "they have a lot of pain but it's not a pain I would have necessarily spared them. I think it ideally initiates a process of self exploration. How do I see women, if I didn't violate her could I have?".

Is encouraging the 'loose use' of the term rape something we should advocate? This is just a small example of the sort of ammo we give to our opposition, in line with certain tactics past communists have used which make it that much easier for capitalists to manufacture reactionaries. Part of what my point was (outside of the interior conflict and problems certain theory presents to organizing).... being as reactionary as they are unfortunately they have some pretty good propaganda to work with given to them by feminists much in the same way Marxists have given a plethora of ammo to reactionaries.

[#FF0000]

words

No not everyone who calls themselves a feminist is someone we should support and no one ever said that, suggested that, or anything. I posted that dismissive response because I don't think this is the thread for that discussion.

No one is saying feminists and feminism can't be criticized. People criticize and critique feminists and feminist concepts all the time on here.

[MarxArchist]

No not everyone who calls themselves a feminist is someone we should support and no one ever said that. I posted that dismissive response because I don't think this is the thread for that discussion.

No one is saying feminists and feminism can't be criticized. People criticize and critique feminists and feminist concepts all the time on here.

lol. Just getting to the bottom of why certain people feel the need to attack feminism. Not defending them. Sub par theory and practice make for sub par results. This is a discussion forum with MRA's as the topic. I'm exploring, besides the majority of them being reactionary no matter what, why some would feel the need to attack feminism, people who may otherwise have OK politics.

[#FF0000]

Just getting to the bottom of why certain people feel the need to attack feminism.

Well I mean, feminists are demonized in society at large. People who have never heard a feminist talk about their ideas themselves think they have a clue of what they're talking about because they heard bill maher beat up a strawman or something.

It's p. simple I think

[#FF0000]

Point one: I have been looking, but it's not easy information to find.

Point two: You're talking from personal experience, I want something more mainstream.

Luc actually addressed this and posted some articles (the one I was thinking of I managed to find on the Guardian, by Jane Powell, though I remember first finding it on a feminist blog)

I'm wondering what you mean by "mainstream", though? Feminists don't often show up on TV or radio, you know. Which is kind of why this information might not be easy to find -- but it's certainly out there if you look. Like I said, Luc posted several articles by feminists talking about men's issues.


Point three: being from the UK, forgive me but what is the MRA?"Men's rights activist".

[#FF0000]

I said established feminist, so lets say Germaine Greer, ever heard her talk about male victimization?

What makes one an "established" feminist? Looks like you're shifting your goalposts here.

[Sean]

What are you on about? Hitler and pol pot of feminism are you serious?
The question is whether YOU are serious or not, don't try and answer a question with another question. You said:

Not really, masculinist movements are generally offspring of fear of feminism. Some feminists (not all) come across in a hateful and aggressive manner, this is triggering counter movements.
You clearly state that feminists are behaving in such a way that anti-feminist activist groups had to be formed in response.

I am saying that some people are taking the goals of feminism in the wrong manner due to a few individuals.
Even though you're talking to someone on the other side of the world anonymously there's a little voice at the back of your mind saying telling you how dumb all this anti-feminism activism is. Its saying "holy shit man, MRA is dumb, talk about it in the third person and hopefully people won't realize you're considering these beliefs."

MRA is the Creationism of politics. No one plays devil's advocate with either because unless you completely swallow its whole spiel you can see they have absolutely no basis in reality. The only people who talk in terms of giving anti-feminist groups a fair hearing are MRAs too embarrassed to outright say they're fucking MRAs.

I said established feminist, so lets say Germaine Greer, ever heard her talk about male victimization?
You didn't say established feminist in the post I quoted, but seriously? Germaine Fucking Greer's words rattled you so much that you felt the need to set up a defense force against her? You're either a lunatic or the most easily frightened man on earth.

[Luc]

I said established feminist, so lets say Germaine Greer, ever heard her talk about male victimization?

i gave u an established feminist Jessica Valenti (she has written many books, is a founder/contributor - tho she has just moved on - to that blog Feministing and she has done activist work even met with former president Bill Clinton) and shes a liberal, i could only offer one example from her work cos i havent read much of her work (to be fair i havent read much of anything :p)

i cant speak for Germaine Greer i actually picked up The Female Eunuch but never got around to reading it :lol:

[Flying Purple People Eater]

Not really, masculinist movements are generally offspring of fear of feminism. Some feminists (not all) come across in a hateful and aggressive manner, this is triggering counter movements.

The fuck is this supposed to mean? 'Oh, the ***** friendzoned me - she actually thinks I'm a friend and not a creepy feller who wants to have sex! Feminist dogs!'

Mens' Rights, for a society in which women are bullied back into social closets that they've fought to get out of for three-hundred years.

[Thug Lessons]

lol. Just getting to the bottom of why certain people feel the need to attack feminism. Not defending them. Sub par theory and practice make for sub par results. This is a discussion forum with MRA's as the topic. I'm exploring, besides the majority of them being reactionary no matter what, why some would feel the need to attack feminism, people who may otherwise have OK politics.

There's a really simple answer to that question: because they're privileged and massively insecure about it.

[MarxArchist]

There's a really simple answer to that question: because they're privileged and massively insecure about it.
Or some are insecure about women who say things like false rape accusations are a great thing (i can compile a list a few pages long highlighting certain theory I myself disagree with but I have the ability not to throw the baby out with the bath water). Here's where I get accused of defending MRA's lol. The complex world we live in rarely has simple answers, especially when dealing with humans. Some people just need to admit there's a lot of feminist theory/practice that manufactures reactionaries much in the same fashion Stalinism did (but you see, some of us don't reject communism whilst rejecting Stalinism).

The only time I give two shits about MRA's is when people who otherwise have good politics latch onto that nonsense. In these cases calling them misogynist defenders of male privilege who are potential rapists that want to keep women barefoot and pregnant isn't going to necessarily move them from their erroneous positions. Understanding why they decided to take an anti-feminist position will help the situation though.

[Crux]

Not really, masculinist movements are generally offspring of fear of feminism. Some feminists (not all) come across in a hateful and aggressive manner, this is triggering counter movements.



I disagree, I generally find that feminist movements claim to want to break down gender roles, but specifically cover issues faced by woman, rather than men. I'm yet to see a established feminist cover the inequalities faced by men, therefore a male rights movement is needed.
No, that's like saying racist movements are *really* just a response to aggressive [insert your minority here]. It's nonsense, "masculinist" just like their white power comrades are created out of a fear of losing privilege, imagined or real. MRA's lie. (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2012/spring/myths-of-the-manosphere-lying-about-women)
As a white man, I like them just as much as I like white supremacists.
I also don't think it would be uncalled for to see the Men's Rights Movement as a violent movement, not only because their appeal to terrorism (http://manboobz.com/2013/02/12/with-courthouse-violence-on-the-rise-mens-rights-activists-continue-to-lionize-the-author-of-a-terrorist-manifesto-urging-men-to-burn-down-courthouses/), but because essentially much of their activism seem to concern covering for rapists and domestic abusers. And what is that if not violence?

[Thug Lessons]

Or some are insecure about women who say things like false rape accusations are a great thing (i can compile a list a few pages long highlighting certain theory I myself disagree with but I have the ability not to throw the baby out with the bath water). Here's where I get accused of defending MRA's lol. The complex world we live in rarely has simple answers, especially when dealing with humans. Some people just need to admit there's a lot of feminist theory/practice that manufactures reactionaries much in the same fashion Stalinism did (but you see, some of us don't reject communism whilst rejecting Stalinism).

The only time I give two shits about MRA's is when people who otherwise have good politics latch onto that nonsense. In these cases calling them misogynist defenders of male privilege who are potential rapists that want to keep women barefoot and pregnant isn't going to necessarily move them from their erroneous positions. Understanding why they decided to take an anti-feminist position will help the situation though.

Sorry I am really not buying this argument that dudes who would otherwise be great are driven to MRA bigotry because of the hysterical feminists. Really, how many of these guy were just awesome on women's issues before they encountered some horrible misandrist Dworkian dick-chopper and suddenly flipped to being a misogynist?

[#FF0000]

Or some are insecure about women who say things like false rape accusations are a great thing

I'd imagine they would be, but if they were reasonable people, they'd investigate further before coming to a conclusion about an entire worldview based on only one dumb thing they heard someone say.

I think uh, it's a lot more reasonable to think that people are suspicious of feminism because feminism is demonized in society at large except for college campuses or something.

[MarxArchist]

I'd imagine they would be, but if they were reasonable people, they'd investigate further before coming to a conclusion about an entire worldview based on only one dumb thing they heard someone say.



The thing is, it's not just one dumb thing one person says. I could compile a list of stupid shit people say under the banner of feminism but in doing so I'd simply be painted out as anti-feminist. I could also compile a list of stupid shit people say and do under the banner of communism but this would simply be a matter of tendency. This is my point, there's a lot of feminist theory, points of view and practice that's absurd if not downright reactionary.

Admittedly I spend more time in discussions with strangers trying to clear up misconceptions about Marxism but I attempt, at times, to do the same with feminism but it's more complicated when the specific people/theory I'm criticizing hold me up as the oppressor class, as in, a distinct class totally separate from women with fundamental opposing class interests. In their view I'm not even suppose to have an opinion on feminism or anything to do with woman's liberation or revolution (get out in activist circles more and you run into it sooner or later). Robin Morgan comes to mind. To her, and the women who operate under the same ideological umbrella, I'm a rapist oppressor and have nothing to offer in regards to any revolutionary process. Only first and foremost women, the most oppressed third world populations and lastly men of color have anything to offer as far as building a new society based on equality.

These aren't just 'fringe' views that have no impact on the broader feminist tradition these are things that need to be openly criticized without the label of misogynist, oppressor, rape culture supporter or my personal favorite "dudebro" being thrown around. Maybe I will make a list but again this will open up the door for all manner of mud flinging. It'll get ugly (which in large part is why so much of the bunk theory goes unchallenged). If not undertaken by a woman feminist it's an "exercise in supporting patriarchy", even then some of our female comrades get labeled "not a real feminist" or "brainwashed by some man".

[MarxArchist]

Sorry I am really not buying this argument that dudes who would otherwise be great are driven to MRA bigotry because of the hysterical feminists. Really, how many of these guy were just awesome on women's issues before they encountered some horrible misandrist Dworkian dick-chopper and suddenly flipped to being a misogynist?

I don't think anyone is awesome on women's issues then reads some shit theory and just freaks out and rejects feminism as a whole I think peoples views aren't necessarily built all at the same time and some people can be open to the ideas of communism but be 'offended' by feminism because of their experience with certain feminists online or within the activist community. I've seen it happen with this guy:

http://www.youtube.com/user/mr1001nights


This is just one example I use because of the online record- I may be wrong but I don't think he hates women or was some great womans lib advocate before he started making MRA videos but what I do think is his interactions with feminists on youtube was largely with radical feminists and that pushed him in the wrong direction as a sort of knee jerk reaction. I think this happens more than we'd like to admit (within Marxist and Anarchist circles). Over the decades as my views have progressed I've personally been able to isolate various people/theory within feminism that I don't agree with without having the knee jerk reaction to feminism as a whole. Many of us can do this as our views are progressing but in my opinion some people can't in the same manner many people can't or don't support communism because of the Russian Bolsheviks. It's what they see, it's all they know of communism. They haven't had a chance to develop a broader understanding of what's going on and many never will but this has been changing over the past few decades with some harsh criticisms of the Russian path by Marxists. I don't defend people who reject communism on that level of reasoning but I understand them just as I understand why some people would reject feminism.

[Thug Lessons]

In one sense I hear you man, there's a lot of more-radical-than-thou shit out there and plenty of people that drive me up the walls with how they push everything to the most radical extreme. But that's by no means specific to feminism, because you can say the same thing about communists, anarchists, whatever, and in fact it's basically a universal fact of politics. There's no good reason to single out feminists and it makes me rather suspicious that you're doing that. Also I think you're exaggerating the problem and acting like minor points are really huge ones, (who cares if feminists on the internet say "dudebro"?), not to mention just overestimating the scope of what's actually happening.

But more to the point, to quote Linkin Park, everything you say to me puts me one step closer to the edge and I'm about to break. If you don't stop pushing this radical anti-feminism on me, pretty soon I'm going to be walking around with a megaphone yelling "Check your privilege! Kill all men! Misandry FTW!" so you should be careful who you alienate with your extremist rhetoric.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

The thing is, it's not just one dumb thing one person says. I could compile a list of stupid shit people say under the banner of feminism but in doing so I'd simply be painted out as anti-feminist. I could also compile a list of stupid shit people say and do under the banner of communism but this would simply be a matter of tendency.
So why isn't it a matter of tendency for feminism? Feminism is made up of many different tendencies, too.

[Crux]

Over the decades as my views have progressed I've personally been able to isolate various people/theory within feminism that I don't agree with without having the knee jerk reaction to feminism as a whole.
And I think being able to separate what is essentially received prejudices (about women, immigrants, marxists, jews you name it) and what is actively embracing a reactionary ideology. MRA's by definition belong in the later group. Does that mean that people who are actively reactionary can't be won? Or that people exhibiting more passive, received reactionary traits can't at times do just as horrifically reactionary things? No.

But I think it is a fundamental mistake to view reactionary views as merely the response to radical views becoming "too radical." White supremacy ultimately created groups like the "New Black Panther Party". That they would exhibit petty-bourgeoisie ideals and/or reactionary ideals that are pervasive in our society, like homophobia, sexism or anti-semitism is not the result of being too opposed to white supremacy, i e being "racist against whites". Nor could a fringe group like that be held up to represent black nationalism in general or as the ultimate end position for black nationalism or even as purely the expression of a certain section of the petit-bourgeoisie. Because that takes the overarching ideology of white supremacy out of the picture. And understanding cause and effect here is essential, same with sexism.