MRA = white supremacy?

[SmirkerOfTheWorld]

Would it be fair to label men's rights activists on a par with white supremacists in terms of defence of privilege?

Should society register the same level of disgust towards both?

[Creative Destruction]

In terms of their defense of privilege, yeah. But WS groups are often extremely violent and are also, sometimes, crime rackets. I don't think the MRA is that far long. They're just a bunch of dumb meatheads.

[SmirkerOfTheWorld]

In terms of their defense of privilege, yeah. But WS groups are often extremely violent and are also, sometimes, crime rackets. I don't think the MRA is that far long. They're just a bunch of
dumb meatheads.

I dunno, quite a few rapists as well. Plus, I'd imagine the WS and MRA have quite a bit of crossover...

[Creative Destruction]

I dunno, quite a few rapists as well. Plus, I'd imagine the WS and MRA have quite a bit of crossover...

There's probably some overlap and with the statistics that we know regarding m-on-f rape, there is likely quite a few rapists of them in the MRA movement, agreed, but I don't think MRAs have organized campaigns around raping people the way WS groups have had organized campaigns of harassment and violence. The MRA apologia, often times, for rape filters under "defense of privilege" imv.

[RedAnarchist]

They defend privilege, so in that sense they are similar.

[JoeHoganSmokyDaHeefa]

What happened to the marxist analysis of society?

Feminism is a response to patriarchy.

MRA is a response to women divorcing a man and taking half his money, which is fucking robbery. Or women nearly always getting control of kids. Or men having to pay women for the rest of their life but doing nothing but marrying them.

I think MRA will cease when Tiger woods and Kobe Bryant can send their ex wives to prison for 20 years for robbery.

thesis-patriachy
antithesis-women robbing men and stealing their children
synthesis-people chilling the fuck out

[Thirsty Crow]

What happened to the marxist analysis of society?It obviously get caught up in a nasty infatuation with the likes of Kobe Bryant and Tiger Woods.

[tachosomoza]

I'd say that 99% of "men's rights" activists would find common cause with 99% of white supremacists. Historically, male chauvinism and white ethnic chauvinism have gone hand in hand. Both seek to maintain their privilege at others' expense.

[Red_Banner]

We already have feminism, which although it's name might not indicate so, is for equal rights.

But it has frequently been hijacked by feminine chauvanists/sexists.

[#FF0000]

But it has frequently been hijacked by feminine chauvanists/sexists.

who

[Flying Purple People Eater]

We already have feminism, which although it's name might not indicate so, is for equal rights.

It's name indicates clearly so. Women objectively have less political and social rights and representation than men in the majority of the world. Feminism seeks to promote womens' rights and part of that is combatting gender roles.

To imply that feminism is against equality is to buy into the myth that women already have these rights and representations in modern society.

[Red_Banner]

It's name indicates clearly so. Women objectively have less political and social rights and representation than men in the majority of the world. Feminism seeks to promote womens' rights and part of that is combatting gender roles.

To imply that feminism is against equality is to buy into the myth that women already have these rights and representations in modern society.

Feminism isn't against equailty, but there are some women and maybe even some men that will use the term to promote their chauvanism.

[#FF0000]

...but there are some women and maybe even some men that will use the term to promote their chauvanism.

who

[Quail]

These elusive "some women" seem to crop up quite a lot in discussions about feminism, but I haven't met a single feminist who wanted female supremacy.

[Red_Banner]

who

Well, for example with the abortion issue, there are people who think that every legislator that is against abortion must be a man.
And they often think that men shouldn't be allowed to vote on such an issue.
But they won't take into account that not all women are pro-abortion either.
And would they even acknowledge that a man is pro-abortion?

You are asking who, well I do not know of anybody on this board or that is famous off the top of my head that is a feminine chauvanist.

But from my personal life, there was one from my town who I disagreed with on facebook.

[#FF0000]

These elusive "some women" seem to crop up quite a lot in discussions about feminism, but I haven't met a single feminist who wanted female supremacy.

there's some weirdo spirtualist "goddess feminist" who thinks weird things out loud on youtube but that's the only one i can think of.

[Red_Banner]

These elusive "some women" seem to crop up quite a lot in discussions about feminism, but I haven't met a single feminist who wanted female supremacy.

I am not accusing actual feminists.

[Thirsty Crow]

I am not accusing actual feminists.
But whop are you accusing? You talk as if you ran across a real example of female chauvinism or something like it.

[Red_Banner]

But whop are you accusing? You talk as if you ran across a real example of female chauvinism or something like it.

Um, because I have.

A woman, an accquintance from when I was highschool on facebook.

[tachosomoza]

These elusive "some women" seem to crop up quite a lot in discussions about feminism, but I haven't met a single feminist who wanted female supremacy.

Neither have I. The general practice of MRA's seems to be to criticize everyone that is against patriarchy and deconstructing gender roles as being in favor of eventual matriarchy and female dominance. We see the same thing when racists attack social progress of people of color. They can't comprehend the fact that we don't want to dominate or oppress anyone, we want to stop being dominated and oppressed and want measures taken to remedy the results of centuries of domination and oppression.

[zoot_allures]

These elusive "some women" seem to crop up quite a lot in discussions about feminism, but I haven't met a single feminist who wanted female supremacy.
Didn't Mary Daly advocate this? And Valerie Solanas? (Although I have heard people say that the latter was not being serious.)

I also once met someone online who claimed to support mass killing, followed by female governing, of males. Of course, it's possible that this person was trolling.

Those are the only examples I can think of offhand, which I think is quite telling. It seems to me that most of the hysteria about some feminists wanting female supremacy is caused by cherry picking, taking statements out of context, and so on.

[synthesis]

They can't comprehend the fact that we don't want to dominate or oppress anyone, we want to stop being dominated and oppressed and want measures taken to remedy the results of centuries of domination and oppression.

It's classic psychological projection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection). I don't really see any other framework with which to view it.

[tachosomoza]

It's classic psychological projection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection). I don't really see any other framework with which to view it.

Pretty much.

[Thirsty Crow]

Um, because I have.

A woman, an accquintance from when I was highschool on facebook.
Yeah okay, I didn't notice the post you put up. But I'd hope you don't think this is representative of feminism in any way.

[human strike]

I think there are lots of different reasons people (and bizarrely it isn't exclusively men) are drawn to MRA. Yes, it's a defence of privilege, but i think we also need to recognise a crisis of masculinity that MRA is in part a manifestation of. It's not uncommon for MRA sympathisers to complain about feeling pressured to adhere to an unreasonable masculine stereotype. I think to an extent we can talk about MRA as symptomatic of a genuine alienation on the part of men that is caused by gender - it's a failure to recognise you can't have it both ways; you can't have your male privilege without gender (I don't mean to exaggerate the extent to which gender roles are bemoaned, but it's there). The insubordination of women, i.e. feminism, and the gains it has lead to has inevitably caused many men to feel a deep-seated confusion about their role as men that unsettles their very identity and sense of self. To recognise this isn't to lament women's insubordination in any way - needless to say men feeling insecure in their role as oppressor is a healthy development - but I think recognising this can help us to understand MRA as the specific product of specific conditions.

I've only ever known one man personally who took any MRA stuff seriously. I don't expect him to necessarily be reflective of most, but in conversations with him I could see that he was intellectually conflicted when it came to MRA vs. feminism and that he seemingly could genuinely have gone either way. I think often these people show a rare consciousness of how issues are gendered, but ultimately blame women and hence perversely only sustain the real injustices they claim to be against.

But maybe I'm being too generous - it's clear that many of the most ardent MRAs are pure misogynist pricks.

[synthesis]

I think there is a certain truth to the idea that the flip side of the purpose of MRA as maintaining male privilege is the subconscious discontent that men have with prescribed gender roles. When MRAs complain about women gaining custody of children, it can be perceived as rooted in the socially prescribed position of women as caregivers, as I believe Tim Cornelis noted in the other thread, which can preclude men having a significant presence in their children's lives; when they complain about divorce settlements, it can reflect a discontent with the prescribed role of men as primary breadwinners; and when they complain about double standards in issues of domestic abuse and rape, it can considered as a complaint about the common conception of women as being victims, intrinsically devoid of agency.

Obviously those types of arguments can miss a lot of context, and oftentimes it is just wrong, but the larger problem is that MRA frames "feminism" as the culprit, rather than societal gender roles, which precludes the perception of feminists as allies in that respect. It kind of reminds me of the appeal of right-wing and/or white nationalist narratives to working class white people as a way to explain their frustration with the powerlessness they feel in their lives. People expressing those types of sentiments don't always have to be dismissed as irredeemable fascists whose only goal is the maintenance of privilege; they're obviously not always deserving of the sympathy of socialists, either, but sometimes a more productive solution can be to present the counter-narrative of the way in which capitalist society needs to prescribe and maintain restrictive gender roles in order to function properly.

[Sea]

MRA and white supremacism are different things, but the two often overlap. I'll let you figure out why.

[Super international]

I don't find MRA'S misogynistic. I view them more as a bunch of whiners that complain about first world problems.

[Red_Banner]

Yeah okay, I didn't notice the post you put up. But I'd hope you don't think this is representative of feminism in any way.

Of course it isn't, but right-wingers have a way of stealing our symbols and terms.

[creamsicle]

These nutjobs do not seem very similar to white supremacists. They just seem like sexists who have a label attempting to justify it.

Considering I had to look up a "mens rights" website to know what you are all referring to, I think that shows how nonexistent of a movement they really are outside of the internet.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

I think there is a certain truth to the idea that the flip side of the purpose of MRA as maintaining male privilege is the subconscious discontent that men have with prescribed gender roles. When MRAs complain about women gaining custody of children, it can be perceived as rooted in the socially prescribed position of women as caregivers, as I believe Tim Cornelis noted in the other thread, which can preclude men having a significant presence in their children's lives; when they complain about divorce settlements, it can reflect a discontent with the prescribed role of men as primary breadwinners; and when they complain about double standards in issues of domestic abuse and rape, it can considered as a complaint about the common conception of women as being victims, intrinsically devoid of agency.

Obviously those types of arguments can miss a lot of context, and oftentimes it is just wrong, but the larger problem is that MRA frames "feminism" as the culprit, rather than societal gender roles, which precludes the perception of feminists as allies in that respect. It kind of reminds me of the appeal of right-wing and/or white nationalist narratives to working class white people as a way to explain their frustration with the powerlessness they feel in their lives. People expressing those types of sentiments don't always have to be dismissed as irredeemable fascists whose only goal is the maintenance of privilege; they're obviously not always deserving of the sympathy of socialists, either, but sometimes a more productive solution can be to present the counter-narrative of the way in which capitalist society needs to prescribe and maintain restrictive gender roles in order to function properly.

Yeah a lot of MRAs are men with legitimate complaints, but they direct those complaints towards feminists, not the system of patriarchy. I wouldn't want to lose access to my child just because the State views women as caregivers. Feminists didn't come up with that, though.

Also for every man who reasonably articulates legitimate complaints there are like ten who are uncomfortable with or just outright hate women.

[creamsicle]

Didn't Mary Daly advocate this? And Valerie Solanas? (Although I have heard people say that the latter was not being serious.)A few whacky books written by feminists over the course of the 20th century doesn't indicate any real trend in feminism.

[Landsharks eat metal]

A few whacky books written by feminists over the course of the 20th century doesn't indicate any real trend in feminism.

True, but people have a tendency to deny that these sorts of people exist at all.

[Red Flag Waver]

The rhetoric of "men's rights" echoes David Duke's mantra of "not anti-black, but pro-white." They fight specifically for the interests of the dominant group while claiming not to be against the subordinate group. Of course, they don't think that the oppressed group is really oppressed. They believe that we live in a matriarchal or gynocentric society, and some even claim that the government is run by radical feminists. It's a persecution complex much like the white supremacists with their ZOG and white genocide fantasies.

Some are open about their misogyny but most hide it ... badly. Like that JoeHogan guy, they say they're not sexist but if you listen to them talk it becomes obvious that they have deep-seated issues with women. I don't know how their violence compares with that of white supremacists, but they do support rape. Also I'm pretty sure that this guy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Collier_Township_shooting) was an MRA, or at least shared their worldview.

Lastly MRA defends male privilege in the workplace, not unlike the way that white supremacy pits working-class whites against minority workers.

[human strike]

True, but people have a tendency to deny that these sorts of people exist at all.

Mathematically speaking I doubt there are enough to make it statistically significant. It would be impossible to calculate something like that though, of course. Sometimes I feel some things are so exceptional they're probably not worth talking about, like false rape allegations. If only everyone else agreed with me on that, eh.

[creamsicle]

The rhetoric of "men's rights" echoes David Duke's mantra of "not anti-black, but pro-white." They fight specifically for the interests of the dominant group while claiming not to be against the subordinate group. Of course, they don't think that the oppressed group is really oppressed. They believe that we live in a matriarchal or gynocentric society, and some even claim that the government is run by radical feminists. It's a persecution complex much like the white supremacists with their ZOG and white genocide fantasies.

Some are open about their misogyny but most hide it ... badly. Like that JoeHogan guy, they say they're not sexist but if you listen to them talk it becomes obvious that they have deep-seated issues with women. I don't know how their violence compares with that of white supremacists, but they do support rape. Also I'm pretty sure that this guy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Collier_Township_shooting) was an MRA, or at least shared their worldview.

Lastly MRA defends male privilege in the workplace, not unlike the way that white supremacy pits working-class whites against minority workers.That man was a severely mentally damaged individual and he doesn't seem to be an MRA.

Just because a movement is defending privilege doesn't make it very intelligent to say it's "like white supremacism". Libertarianism defends privilege, so does the Republican party, Zionism, etc. Defending privilege is a core aspect of all right wing ideologies. I wouldn't directly compare any of these to the white supremacist movement.

[zoot_allures]

A few whacky books written by feminists over the course of the 20th century doesn't indicate any real trend in feminism.
I never said it did. In fact I explicitly said, later in the very post you're responding to, that it probably wasn't a significant trend:

Those are the only examples I can think of offhand, which I think is quite telling. It seems to me that most of the hysteria about some feminists wanting female supremacy is caused by cherry picking, taking statements out of context, and so on.

[Red Flag Waver]

That man was a severely mentally damaged individual and he doesn't seem to be an MRA.

Just because a movement is defending privilege doesn't make it very intelligent to say it's "like white supremacism". Libertarianism defends privilege, so does the Republican party, Zionism, etc. Defending privilege is a core aspect of all right wing ideologies. I wouldn't directly compare any of these to the white supremacist movement.
It was a hate crime, even if he was disturbed.
In the note found at the scene in Sodini's gym bag, he complains he had never spent a weekend with a woman, never vacationed with a woman and never lived with a woman, and that he had had limited sexual experiences, Moffatt said. He makes similar complaints in his online blog, which also documents his growing rage at women for rejecting him and at the world he felt had abandoned him. That is the MRA attitude towards women. I don't know if this guy was a card-carrying MRA. My point was that there are consequences to that type of attitude.

Libertarianism per se doesn't target a specific oppressed group as the enemy. It might be harmful to the working class, for example, but it isn't a hate campaign against workers in the way that MRA is against women or white supremacism is against POC.

[creamsicle]

It was a hate crime, even if he was disturbed.I didn't dispute it being a hate crime, and it being a hate crime is in no indication he was an MRA or affiliated. I would not accuse someone who commits any racially motivated crime of being a KKK member or affiliated person if they are not one.


That is the MRA attitude towards women. I don't know if this guy was a card-carrying MRA. My point was that there are consequences to that type of attitude.Basically what you're saying only amounts to "he was a misogynist, and MRA's are misogynists, so he's kind of like them". It's not relevant. There are plenty of sexist individuals who are unrelated to mens rights activism.

[Rottenfruit]

I dunno, quite a few rapists as well. Plus, I'd imagine the WS and MRA have quite a bit of crossover...
maby but i remember on youtube when i studies the mra creeps a little alot of the guys making videos supporting mra stuff were black

[Bolshevik Sickle]

I'd say that 99% of "men's rights" activists would find common cause with 99% of white supremacists. Historically, male chauvinism and white ethnic chauvinism have gone hand in hand. Both seek to maintain their privilege at others' expense.

Yeah. Even though it's really a Pro-Male group. I'm sure some sexist non-white men would sympathize with it. But it would be like the Tea Party, not racist but definitely inherently racist.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

That man was a severely mentally damaged individual and he doesn't seem to be an MRA.

Just because a movement is defending privilege doesn't make it very intelligent to say it's "like white supremacism". Libertarianism defends privilege, so does the Republican party, Zionism, etc. Defending privilege is a core aspect of all right wing ideologies. I wouldn't directly compare any of these to the white supremacist movement.

How is the modern Zionism of Israel not like white supremacy? It is for all intents and purposes exactly white supremacy - with Israelis being 'whites' and Palestinians being 'others'! America has it bad, but you don't see African Americans segregated on buses or their children stoned by citizens on the way to school.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

Yeah. Even though it's really a Pro-Male group. I'm sure some sexist non-white men would sympathize with it. But it would be like the Tea Party, not racist but definitely inherently racist.

I don't think you understand. Women were the primary group targeted, along with people of lower socioeconomic class and people who weren't considered 'white' (e.g. African-Americans, Indigenous Americans, up until recently Irish people and Jews) by the racists and eugenicists of politics and academia in historical America and Britain. This is what Tachosomoza was referring to, I believe.

[peacegirl9292]

It's hard to compare anything to something that has oppressed the entire world (white supremacy), but I know in some cases "men's rights" and white supremacy can be the same exact thing, yes. It usually depends on who it is on the soap box.

[waqob]

who

Many

[#FF0000]

Many



Who

edit: hell yes posting from work steal time all day every day

[Rottenfruit]

Yeah. Even though it's really a Pro-Male group. I'm sure some sexist non-white men would sympathize with it. But it would be like the Tea Party, not racist but definitely inherently racist.
i have seen videos by black mra´s on youtube, and yeah what ive noticed with mra they extremely angry men who hate women with a passion.

it does not appear to be in anyway racially motivated although the mra movement attarcasts extremists so its no wonder that some whitepower types would be involved with it, i also could see that the mra movement might attract nation of islam extremists as well

They are not sexists they are misogynistic

Sexists sterotype women into gender roles, jobs and such and view women as a blowup doll to use for sex. Pat Robertson is such a person

Misogynsitic hate women and i mean they hate women like white power types hate jews,theres a difference between being a old fashioned sexist and violent hatred of women . THe Mgtow (men going there own way) subgroup of the mra are the most extreme and are femicidal in there views

[SmirkerOfTheWorld]

It's hard to compare anything to something that has oppressed the entire world (white supremacy), but I know in some cases "men's rights" and white supremacy can be the same exact thing, yes. It usually depends on who it is on the soap box.

I think it would be fair to say that male chauvanism and patriarchy does oppress the entire world...perhaps more than even white supremacism...

[PhoenixAsh]

I think the question is highly skewed and is laden with dangerous sentiment. It is the exact same question as "Is bolshevism on par with Nazism in terms of their disdain for parliamentary democracy" or "Is a bike on par with a car in terms of having wheels". See where I am going with this?

They are both entirely different creatures with an entirely different origin, an entirely different goal and posing an entirely different danger to society...and it is extremely important to understand this and avoid unnecessary comparisons and generalizations which do not serve a purpose other than obfuscating the issue.
Second, any if not all, things in life will have similarities. To equate them on their similarities can be valid but also poses a contextual danger when you do not understand what the hell you are comparing.

White Supremacy is exactly what it says it is. There are no ifs and buts. White supremacy is the eventual objective. This is absolutely not the case with MRactivism (which is NOT to be confused with the MRassociation or any individual group or how individuals tend to describe themselves)

MRActivism is not a unity…just like feminism isn’t…it is a generalization for various organisations which concern themselves with rights of men in society. Organisations which are labelled MRA however do not have similar end-goals, objectives, ethnic make-up or ideology. Nor is MRA limited to what it appears to be on the internet.

It usually comes as an f-ing surprise to learn that the origins of MRA is an opposition to traditional gender roles and patriarchy…much like feminism. In fact a large part of the MRA movement finds its origins in feminism and the drive for gender equality itself…and a lot of organisations still do.

It is a fair enough assessment that a majority of the MR organisations (like for example The MRA) today are thoroughly reactionary, misguided and misogenist…as well as enforcing a stereotypical gender role on men. But to say all of them are; is a complete and utter generalization. Just as is the case with feminist organisations. Of which IMO 80% can be dismissed as misguided, one sided, dangerous and objectionable to even downright loathsome….as well as thoroughly reactionary. …the group is diverse.

A lot of MRactivist groups focus on the enforced gender roles by patriarchy and more often than not work hand in hand with feminist organisations. In contrast to feminist organisations these MR groups tend to focus on men who do not conform to traditionalist gender roles as well as point out and try to repair the inequalities in the current legal system.

When we are talking about MR activism….a far more valid question for a revolutionary left wing site would be: “Is MAR on par with bourgeoisie feminism ?”

This site unfortunately has very little understanding of MRactivism, its origins and its nature and as such generally tends to dismiss MR’s as “misogyny and defense or privilege” because of a huge blind spot which is all too common in revolutionary organisations…we tend to solely side with what we perceive as the suppressed group and exclude everything else…even if that causes the very same inequality we actually oppose.

We tend to forget that feminism once was rejected by Marxists/Communists and Anarchists as a stand alone movement because we tend to view feminism as an integral part of the class struggle. We also haven’t come to terms with the fact that the revolutionary left, even though it ideologically strives for gender equality, is thoroughly riddled with latent and not so latent sexists. So we overcompensate. We are also hampered by our immense self righteousness.

So lets be clear. I am a revolutionary first. This implies complete gender equality in both theory and praxis. I am however not a “feminist” in the sense that I detest the notion that equal rights can be accomplished within the current sociological and economic system and should be a stand alone objective of the revolutionary left. I am active on certain focus points…but these are just that…focus points. Like for example…abortion rights. Which is only a small part of the equation to the larger question of womens rights to their own bodilly autonomy (much overlooked: economic support structures etc. and rights to child care etc.) .

As such I acknowledge the patriarchical overall structure of society. But think it is far more accurate and is a far better reflection of reality to speak of Kyriarchy as a workable benchmark for any debate.

And I am not misguided enough to forget the nature of the very system we are combating. That nature is to divide to exploit weakness and create opposition by any and all means necessary. So the realization is that patriarchy does not only affect women. And bourgeoisie feminism implemented in current society leaves gaps, inequalities and very real day to day problems for both men and women which is counter productive to gender equality. It does this because it is the nature of the current social and economic structure to do so. But it is the revolutionary left’s obligation to acknowledge that inequality and oppression maybe unequal but are a very real day to day reality for both sexes. So yesssss.....men generally are less oppressed than women...which does not mean patriarchy does not oppress men...and does not mean the nature of the current system creates inequalities for men which need to be corrected which have nothing to do with privilege.

So yeah…it is true that most MR groups are thoroughly reactionary, misguided, down right misogynist and enforcing stereotypical gender roles…we can not falsely generalize. A lot of MRA groups are working on the very notion of gender equality and opposed to patriarchy. A very ironic not is that the revolutionary left has several feminist groups which also focus on MR issues. So there.

The revolutionary left often forgets to acknowledge how patriarchy works...probably because the harsh reality is that the revolutionary left is mostly comprised of men.

Now...this all is completely different from WS. Which is, like I said, exactly what it spells out to be.

So to answer OP's question...you are asking the wrong question and make a false equation. But in essence the answer is: some parts of the MRA movement defend privilege. Some do not.

[#FF0000]

Can you name a single "Men's Rights" group that is not all about reinforcing already existing gender roles?

[Criminalize Heterosexuality]

Can you name a single "Men's Rights" group that is not all about reinforcing already existing gender roles?

Yeah, I'd like to know this as well. It's a bit strange how they talk about allegedly progressive MRE groups and then fail to give a single concrete example.

[Rottenfruit]

Yeah, I'd like to know this as well. It's a bit strange how they talk about allegedly progressive MRE groups and then fail to give a single concrete example.
there are none , at best they are nostalgic about the 60's and want to be like don draper.

At worst they are femidical and view women as object to exterminated alas the mgtow crowd

[Psycho P and the Freight Train]

I think there needs to be a distinction, kind of like the square and rectangle thing.

Most white nationalist males are almost guaranteed to also be an MRA. I'd say 99 percent of the time. However, any given MRA should not be automatically assumed to be a white nationalist.

[TheTrueAtheist]

Would it be fair to label men's rights activists on a par with white supremacists in terms of defence of privilege?

Should society register the same level of disgust towards both?

Yes they also happen to almost always be the same people neo nazi white supremest male republican Christians who don't even understand what others go through.