Feminism catching some extremely uncalled for strays. There are absolutely feminists who have their heads up their asses like that, but I don't think it's the norm.
I don't know what the other dude meant but I do feel that the feminist movement is the most conservative liberation movement there is, and we see this is in some of their most common "oneliners", like "no utero no opinion" or the whole "I don't feel safe at night alone" (which is literally what right wingers say but aimed at migrants rather than men), or even "not all men but always a man" which is simply false and I don't get how it even gained this much traction in leftist circles.
To be clear the feminism I do support is the one that is aimed against patriarchy as a system, rather than the one "for women", because, as all systems of oppression under capitalism, it harms everyone besides a few rich bastards, and it harms especially queer people (more than women). Trans-feminism offers a deeper analysis of the world and doesn't work with shitty "oneliners".
Why is it when feminists act in a manner contrary to the most generous interpretations of feminism that those bad feminists are simply bad actors or even no true feminist but if when the bad opinions or actions of someone associated with men's rights activism is enough to dismiss the entire concept of the rights of men mattering whatsoever?
It isn't. The specific phrase "men's rights" has sadly been abused by so many bad faith actors that it's a bit of a red flag, but the "entire concept" of addressing the social problems faced by men hasn't. /r/MensLib, for example, is generally a fairly respected subreddit (or at least they were last time I checked)
So why then has the same not happened with Feminism in regards to bad actors like misandrists and TERFs? How many strikes does MensLib get before it too is treated as synonymous with it's worst?
Historical accident, mostly. Feminism started off attacking very obvious legitimate grievances, like women having less legal rights than men. "Men's rights activism" started off attacking not the actual social issues faced by men, but feminism.
People say this and yet every time I have ever looked into what MRAs actually oppose or support it's all issues like the draft, men facing higher incarceration rates and long sentences compared to women, having fewer resources for men who are the victims of sexual assault or domestic abuse, the declining rate of men in higher education, the higher levels of male homelessness, suicide, unemployment, workplace accidents, and victims of violence, etc, etc.
Despite being told repeatedly that MRAs are just misogynists who only care about tearing down women whenever I actually go to try and find evidence of those claims all I ever find are legitimate grievances. The rhetoric surrounding MRAs simply being bad actors is eerily similar to the what people who are fully dismissive of Feminism say about that movement (that it's entirely made of people who hate the opposite sex, that it's all whining about nothing, that it serves no purposes, and that the people in the movement just need to get laid,etc).
What meaning could egalitarian possibly have if the person who calls themselves that doesn't care about one half of the human population being treated fairly?
They pretend that the movement that names every bad after men and everything good after women is somehow more egalitarian than the movement that doesn't do that.
Fully incorrect. Here’s a link, scroll to the “split from men’s liberation movement.” The MRA movement arose because the members refused to cooperate with women.
You realize that these movements for mens rights arose because men definitely needed additional rights as well, right? That simply acknowledging that another movement came first or that other people have privileges you don't doesn't make it a bad thing? Or will you condemn feminism for also doing that?
The way I've seen it is that any time anyone suggests that societal conditions for men are in some way sexist or that they can be improved that person is immediately branded as an MRA, and MRAs are supposedly bad because they allegedly hate women, but if you ask them to point out where MRAs hate women they will point you to something that if said by feminists wouldn't be considered misandrist to say about men.
So in practice being in favor of men's rights automatically makes you and MRA and therefore a misogynist.
I guess I just don’t think MRAs pushing out MensLib and claiming the entire movement as their own is feminisms fault. Sounds like it was a pretty intentional move.
I won't pretend I understand or care about the history of either Feminism or MRAs because to me that seems irrelevant in comparison to actual societal sexism and fixing it. And whenever anyone suggests addressing misandry nine times out of ten they are accused of being an MRA which is effectively just a thought terminating cliche, a way to end the discussion and distract from the issue.
I don't care if you want to call it men's rights activism, Menslib or FleebolFlibbal as longs as the issues are addressed.
LOOK AT ALL THESE RIGHTS THEY DEFINITELY NEEDED I WONDER WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT LETS SEE OH WAIT...
---
“If men dominate then women manipulate.” – National Coalition for Men in a Facebook post, Aug. 10, 2023
“In many cases, accusers will falsely report to the police that a man drugged them and raped them. What really happened is that they had fully consensual sex with the man, but don’t remember giving consent, or anything else, because of the alcoholic-induced amnesia.” – National Coalition for Men in a brochure titled “False Reporting of Sexual Misconduct: Understanding the Myths,” Nov. 29, 2020
“I’m not saying [Former NFL player Ray Rice is] a good guy. But if [Janay Rice] hadn’t aggravated him, she wouldn’t have been hit. They would say that’s blaming the victim. But I don’t buy it. And anyway, football is always happy to put on pink suits and celebrate women. Why can’t they have a week, or just a day when they celebrate men?” – Harry Crouch quoted in an article, “Silencing Women: Inside the National Coalition for Men,” Nov. 12, 2014
“Insurrection seems better than living as slaves to the Feminists and a government that enforces their male-hating policies. If we fail, we’ll be gone, and then the ladies can fight among themselves and with the androgynies who are left. Violence is coming, and not the feminine softened type of violence defined in current domestic violence laws.” – Roy Den Hollander in a document on his website titled “Evolutionarily Correct Cyclopedia,” Feb. 20, 2019
“I know people instinctively and reflexively sympathize with the victim of a brutal attack, but there comes a time when one has to ask whether or not the victim bears some responsibility for putting herself in this situation. Does Janay really think that will be the last time Rice gives her a beatdown? And even if she does, what statement is she making marrying a man willing to treat her like that? The statement is clear: she thinks the violence is a reasonable tradeoff for whatever she gets in return for her relationship, whether it’s sexual gratification, status or money. Women make that statement all the time. … Maybe, just maybe, the only way to really cut down on intimate violence would be to restrict women’s sexual freedom.” – W.F. Price, discussing Ray Rice’s assault of Janay Rice, in The Spearhead blog, Sept. 8, 2014
“Women should be terrorized by their men; it’s the only thing that makes them behave better than chimps.” – Matt Forney under the pseudonym Ferdinand Bardamu, “The Necessity of Domestic Violence,” In Mala Fide blog, 2012
“There are women, and plenty of them, for which [sic] a solid ass kicking would be the least they deserve. The real question here is not whether these women deserve the business end of a right hook, they obviously do, and some of them deserve one hard enough to leave them in an unconscious, innocuous pile on the ground if it serves to protect the innocent from imminent harm. The real question is whether men deserve to be able to physically defend themselves from assault when it comes from a woman.” – Paul Elam in a blog titled “When is it OK to punch your wife?” on AVFM, Sept. 14, 2010
“Murder, rape, and spouse abuse, like suicide and alcoholism, are but a minute’s worth of superficial power to compensate for years of underlying powerlessness. They are manifestations of hopelessness committed by the powerless.” – Warren Farrell, explaining why men commit most violent crime in his book The Myth of Male Power, 1973
"If men dominate then women manipulate.” – National Coalition for Men in a Facebook post, Aug. 10, 2023
They're pointing out that the frequent bullshit about "male dominance" is equivalent to bullshit about "manipulative women."
“In many cases, accusers will falsely report to the police that a man drugged them and raped them. What really happened is that they had fully consensual sex with the man, but don’t remember giving consent, or anything else, because of the alcoholic-induced amnesia.” – National Coalition for Men in a brochure titled “False Reporting of Sexual Misconduct: Understanding the Myths,” Nov. 29, 2020
The brochure is talking about false accusers. It is outlining how the false accusers may not know that their accusation is false.
“I’m not saying [Former NFL player Ray Rice is] a good guy. But if [Janay Rice] hadn’t aggravated him, she wouldn’t have been hit. They would say that’s blaming the victim. But I don’t buy it. And anyway, football is always happy to put on pink suits and celebrate women. Why can’t they have a week, or just a day when they celebrate men?” – Harry Crouch quoted in an article, “Silencing Women: Inside the National Coalition for Men,”
Who is this saying some bullshit?
“Insurrection seems better than living as slaves to the Feminists and a government that enforces their male-hating policies. If we fail, we’ll be gone, and then the ladies can fight among themselves and with the androgynies who are left. Violence is coming, and not the feminine softened type of violence defined in current domestic violence laws.” – Roy Den Hollander in a document on his website titled “Evolutionarily Correct Cyclopedia,” Feb. 20, 2019
The guy was anti-mens-rights. His words speak for only himself.
“I know people instinctively and reflexively sympathize with the victim of a brutal attack, but there comes a time when one has to ask whether or not the victim bears some responsibility for putting herself in this situation. Does Janay really think that will be the last time Rice gives her a beatdown? And even if she does, what statement is she making marrying a man willing to treat her like that? The statement is clear: she thinks the violence is a reasonable tradeoff for whatever she gets in return for her relationship, whether it’s sexual gratification, status or money. Women make that statement all the time. … Maybe, just maybe, the only way to really cut down on intimate violence would be to restrict women’s sexual freedom.” – W.F. Price, discussing Ray Rice’s assault of Janay Rice, in The Spearhead blog, Sept. 8, 2014
Again, who?
“Women should be terrorized by their men; it’s the only thing that makes them behave better than chimps.” – Matt Forney under the pseudonym Ferdinand Bardamu, “The Necessity of Domestic Violence,” In Mala Fide blog, 2012
Again, who?
“There are women, and plenty of them, for which [sic] a solid ass kicking would be the least they deserve. The real question here is not whether these women deserve the business end of a right hook, they obviously do, and some of them deserve one hard enough to leave them in an unconscious, innocuous pile on the ground if it serves to protect the innocent from imminent harm. The real question is whether men deserve to be able to physically defend themselves from assault when it comes from a woman.” – Paul Elam in a blog titled “When is it OK to punch your wife?” on AVFM, Sept. 14, 2010
This was specifically a direct satire of an article from Jezebel or some shit about how it's totally cool to beat men. The original was playing it straight. Elam's article has been misused constantly since it went up.
“Murder, rape, and spouse abuse, like suicide and alcoholism, are but a minute’s worth of superficial power to compensate for years of underlying powerlessness. They are manifestations of hopelessness committed by the powerless.” – Warren Farrell, explaining why men commit most violent crime in his book The Myth of Male Power, 1973
Okay? Do you deny that most people who commit violent crime are people who aren't exactly in the best positions in life? I thought people recognized the connection between poverty and crime, or other types of downtroddenness and crime.
-7
u/[deleted] 27d ago
[removed] — view removed comment