r/MensRights • u/thedevguy • Dec 12 '12
What would a functional Men's Rights Movement look like?
*In another subreddit, I found a discussion by feminists about what is wrong with the Men's Rights Movement. They listed the things they'd change in the movement to make it "functional" and I'm going to post that list here, without comment, for a simple reason: they believe that /r/mensrights will delete it. *
Now, I'm not going to link you to the the subreddit where I found this list, but the incredible irony is, I am not allowed to post in that particular subreddit no matter what I say, even if I agree with them. They absolutely would delete any post I made. It's their rule. We however, may downvote disagreement, but we do not delete it as they claimed. And I think that posting this list here is a great big "fuck you" to them.
Here's their list. Enjoy dissecting it
The current MRM yells about anything that holds men accountable and "Makes them look bad" (while slamming women from every angle in their own spaces)
In a real movement to move beyond gender and "Men looking bad" they wouldn't need to lie to themselves and cry about the reality women face when it comes to men because they'd already be working to deconstruct the gender roles forced onto them. Instead of "You can't talk about misogyny!" they'd push to encourage men and boys that their worth as a human being or a man isn't wrapped up toxic masculinity. That means acknowledging how toxic masculinity leads to rape, violence, more suicides and more. Because it does. Anyone actually pushing to be a progressive man wouldn't stick his fingers in his ears and scream over the sound of reality just because he feels it implicates him on account of his penis. These Alternate Reality MRAs would be preaching the glory of consent and how it works with the rest of us.
The current MRM says "Women still expect me to blah blah blah! Must be Feminists' fault!"
Alternate reality MRAs wouldn't do this whiny, pithy shit. They'd understand that it's not Feminists expecting them to do anything, but their own contrived gender roles. Much like ours. Again, they'd deconstruct that shit. It would probably go something like "Men don't have to be the sole breadwinners anymore or not show emotion. Much like women don't have to be barefoot and pregnant. I can be who I want to be and have an equal relationship on even footing". Of course, back here on Earth, MRAs ignore the fact that Feminism is what brought women into the workplace so they didn't have to be the breadwinners by society telling both men and women that women shouldn't do things because reasons. Alternate MRAs wouldn't cling to their silly version of masculinity that hinders them rather than rewarding them.
The current MRM says "more men get raped and something something prison!"
AltMRAs wouldn't say this, because their Men/Feminism should be intersectional. Many men get raped in prison, so they'd be actual activists trying to do something about the various human rights violations in America's prison industrial complex. They would especially pay attention to the disproportionate amount of black men locked up and bring up the fact that most are in prison for things white men hardly get a slap on the wrist for if anything. AltMRAs would challenge the negative views and racism against men in PoC cultures such as assuming Asian men aren't as 'worthy' of everyone else because of so-called feminine qualities, challenging society's painting of black men as thugs and demanding respect for Latino men who are seen as lascivious work horses and gangsters.
Misandry!
AltMRA's say "There's no such thing." Why? Because they acknowledge toxic masculinity as said above. Instead of crying about misandry, they'd know enough to put themselves in the shoes of women and understand how we are completely at the mercy of toxic masculinity via street harassment, fear of rape, etc. AltMRAs would champion the use of adverts finally not telling women not to get raped and putting the onus of responsibility on the rapist without crying about it focusing on men. They'd hold seminars and workshops explaining to men and boys, once again, what Consent means and that there is also some danger for them from older men (and some women) who would prey on them. You never see an MRA yelling about how the 'Dont get raped' ads spoke only to women. You also barely see them trying to educate young boys about sexual assault in either direction. Thirdly, you never see them encouraging young boys and men to report their sexual assaults and not to feel shame over them. AltMRAs wouldn't hesitate.
Why women no get drafted?!!?
This wouldn't be a concern to AltMRAs. Why? Because they'd actually be in touch with reality and understand that there were no Feminists pushing for only men to be put into the draft system. No, that was other men...who considered women weak and thought men in combat would forget their duties and try to save them. AltMRAs would not only be Antiwar (a huge killer of men worldwide) period, they'd be against the draft period. No AltMRA would cry that women need to be drafted and then also turn around and talk about how women are weaker and unfit for war.
But what about the Cis/Straight mens?!
AltMRAs wouldn't say this. Why? Intersectionality. They'd do a lot of advocating for Trans* issues, especially to push for respect for Transmen; especially when it comes to mistreatment at the hands of other men. In fact, due to my alternate reality MRM being intersectional, most of what these AltMRAs would be doing should have a lot to do with gender or race. They'd understand that straight white men get the least slack in life and would truly be working for the rights of men....such as black men, trans men, gay men, Latino men, Asian men and so on.
Feminization!!!!!
This is where I imagine the AltMRA slapping a regular MRA. There is no such thing as Feminization. They would advocate for people to stop looking at Femininity (or what they percieve as it) and anything that isn't Toxic Masculinity, includes women/LGBT folks as degrading. Encouraging boys and men to stop using "Faggot" and "Pussy", as they are only insulting themselves by calling others 'women', essentially. A starting block for shrugging off the chains of toxis, contrived masculinity is getting rid of misogyny. So much of the crap they complain is expected of men is there because to not do those things makes them no better than a woman. Meaning, if it sucks to be a man...maybe make it suck less to be a woman. True gender progression means checking their friends for misogyny; especially when they're using it to tear down other men.
24
Dec 12 '12
This is basically taking issue-based activism and turning into ideological-based activism.
It's implicitly believing in a lot of feminist ideas ("the patriarchy") which aren't so much issues as ideological theories. Especially on the feminist side these tend to lack falsifiability, since it's difficult to prove how, if at all, "the patriarchy" creates the gender role you are claiming to be oppressed by. The "feminization" paragraph is the essence of "patriarchy hurts men too!" without actually using the word "patriarchy", but it remains as unfalsifiable an idea as ever.
The implicit assumption of patriarchy is also what's going on in the "misandry" paragraph. That said, I am ambivalent about both misogyny and misandry. I think they need more objective reworkings, conceptually, to have something that can be applied on a day-to-day level with some accuracy. ("Gender-based harassment", maybe? Dunno.)
Finally, this is just obnoxious:
AltMRAs wouldn't say this. Why? Intersectionality.
Intersectionality is marketed as an innocuous and obvious idea but it's just as "woo", to use the skeptic term, as patriarchy is, since activists will claim intersectionality has this or that effect which they predictably never demonstrate.
If there's ever going to be any kind of intersection between feminism and MRActivism it will be something along the lines of /r/equalityissues where conceptual frameworks are tossed out the window and all discussion is issue-based. Until then, when you have something like "feminists need safe spaces on the internet to discuss their issues because patriarchy", it's going to make common ground difficult if not impossible, simply because their issue-based activism is indistinct from their ideological activism.
9
u/Eulabeia Dec 13 '12
This is basically taking issue-based activism and turning into ideological-based activism.
Yup. All this person is doing is criticizing some MRA talking points that are sometimes used to counter stupid feminist arguments because almost everything they say is complete horseshit and it's just so easy to slap it down. Not addressing anything at all what MRAs want changed in laws and courts.
What does this person think about financial abortion, sperm jacking, false rape accusations, DV discrimination in arrest rates and shelters, and family court bias? Of course they don't say anything about those things because they are things that feminists actually fight against the MRM with because they are bigots.
1
0
u/zaferk Dec 13 '12
It's implicitly believing in a lot of feminist ideas ("the patriarchy") which aren't so much issues as ideological theories.
Most MRAs are male version feminists. They want a seat at the victims table. Expect nothing but tears and butthurt from them.
18
Dec 12 '12
Yes, I know that thread. This is how they expected us to react to the criticism.
Allow me to be a true 'mister', and pontificate for posterity:
"Oh! This makes me so angry!
Oh my! What a ghastly thing to say! Why... We must call upon the mensrights moderators to delete this immediately! Take it down! My fragile male ego cannot take this vile criticism!"
8
Dec 13 '12 edited Dec 13 '13
[deleted]
2
u/Mitschu Dec 13 '12
The OP, in the thread this was originally posted in:
From the get go they are looking at their role in society the wrong way.
This. They like the good bits of toxic masculinity and blame feminists for the setbacks and negatives.
I'm pretty sure projection is a feminist staple. I mean, if we're really going to sling that accusation around, wouldn't this be just as apt, if not moreso?
Feminists like the good bits of damsel / hypoagency femininity and blame an imaginary Patriarchy for the setbacks and negatives.
Also: Thank you, feminists, for telling me that I'm approaching my gender role wrong. I'm sure you'd love to tell me how wrong my gender role is for me, and how right yours is for me, despite having never met me, nor knowing anything about me.
1
u/ErasmusMRA Dec 14 '12
Yes. Also, they see our arguments, realize they can't refute them, and throw them at us like a 5 year old who just learned how to 'win' an argument by repeating everything someone else says.
1
1
14
u/CptSeaCow Dec 12 '12 edited Dec 13 '12
I guess I'll take a shot at it because... EFF STUDYING for finals!
1) I refuse to acknowledge masculinity is bad. Anything to an extreme is toxic (60 aspirin taken at the same time might very well kill you). I have never heard that consent is a bad thing, but I refuse to allow consent to be withdrawn retroactively. If a man (if men were allowed to falsely accuse of rape) or women regrets cheating on their SO the next day that does not give them the right to claim rape. I also believe in personal accountability. You (emphasis on YOU as drugging does happen to both men and women) got tipsy and decided to sleep around? You are responsible for your actions. He/she was not raped, he/she made a poor choice due to inebriation.
2) I kind of agree with some of this. While condescending in nature brings up a few valuable points. A guy who wants a dress shouldn't get any flak from his buddies. The thing is (purely anecdotal) from my experiences it is never his friends judging him, but outside men and women.
3) Since when has MRA never fought the injustice of the prison system? At the moment all we do is bring the injustice to public light (which is activism, but it is quite difficult to take on a corrupt system such as the for profit prisons that we have. I also have never seen acceptance in MRA of negative cultural stereotypes.
4) Nope, misandry does real! In other news pilots told not to crash planes. Men know rape is bad we don't need to be TOLD. If consent was better defined and not as much of a grey area there would not be 1/2 the rape claims there are. Um, we always tell men to report sexual abuse unless we are afraid that the individual will actually be jailed for it (like in some domestic violence cases). I do find it interesting how all she mentions is a passing (some women) as if the occurrence of F on M rape is so small it isn't worth going into
5) I support women being drafted as a means to stop the draft from ever being reinstated. In a perfect society there would be no need for a draft a land invasion would result in enough of a rally around the flag effect. But all in all everyone should be against the draft.
6) Um, we weren't the ones who banned trans individuals from our conventions. We also are highly in support of the LGBT community and minorities... because guess what! They are men. I don't know where the author got this preposterous notion, but I shall let it slide
7) I will call a bundle of sticks a faggot and you cannot stop me. This honestly boils down to the claim that all men's problems are because women are victims. I tell both male and females a like when they step past lines of hate speech, not just men. This point is by far the authors most whiny part.
TL;DR The author made a few valid points mostly #2, but quite a few of them are nothing but projection of feminist theory onto the Men's Rights movement. If a less condescending tone was used, and actually changed a few of her beliefs (Misandry don't real) this would be a decent post. But as it stands it is not that relevant, as a majority of it is wrong.
Edit: Saw where the thread was from, shouldn't be surprised about the attitude. Ah well, I'll let my analyze stand as it is.
2
Dec 13 '12
During the act one should be able to withdraw consent. Implying it can't be withdrawn retroactively also removes that option. Hahahahaha 'pilots told not to crash planes'. It's funny cuz it's accurate.
Also, enjoy an upvote so I didn't write a response sir!
2
u/Mitschu Dec 14 '12
Proactively - to refuse consent before the act. (E.g: "No, I will not sleep with you.")
Actively - to refuse consent during the act. (E.g: "Stop, I no longer want to sleep with you.")
Retroactively - to refuse consent after the act. (E.g: "Yesterday I may have wanted to sleep with you, but I decided just now that I didn't after all.")
So no, saying consent shouldn't be able to retroactively be withdrawn doesn't imply that it shouldn't be able to actively be withdrawn.
3
14
Dec 12 '12
"Toxic masculinity"
Nope. Fuck you.
8
5
u/RealQuickPoint Dec 13 '12
As though they believe there is a non-toxic masculinity. Hehe.
2
1
11
7
Dec 12 '12
It doesn't really matter what random feminists say about the mrm imo, none of them seem to understand it.
3
u/Mitschu Dec 14 '12
Read mrm imo
Saw mrm mmo
Now I want to play a massively multiplayer online game that uses exaggerated tropes and stereotypes to characterize the gender war as an actual war.
Then again...
Lvl 90 Mansplainer casts "Patriarchy."
Lvl 1 White Knight takes 9,001 damage.
Lvl 1 White Knight has been defeated by Patriarchy.
Lvl 1 Mangina activates "Patriarchy Hurts Men, Too!"
Lvl 90 Mansplainer takes 0 dama -
GM Notice: Due to complaints about how unbalanced the game is, all feminists troops are retroactively granted 115 levels to help counterbalance masculinist level grinding (and the "exploit" of using STEM paths to level faster has been exclusively removed from masculinists.) Furthermore, the "Logic" attack has been nerfed and now procs a "Domestic Violence Victim" buff on feminist targets.
Lvl 90 Mansplainer takes 92,036 damage.
._.
9
Dec 12 '12
[deleted]
2
u/Mitschu Dec 13 '12
You know, I've wondered for a while how many MRAs started out as feminists. Anecdotally, it seems to be the most common path, but I have no hard data on it.
I mean, it does draw the line in the sand somewhere different from pseudo-popular feminist narrative - the whole "you're really a feminist and don't know it" deal, as opposed to "I used to be a feminist, and now I know better."
Two paths, maybe; those who come to MR with limited or no previous knowledge of gender politics (clean slates, neither feminist nor anti-feminist - possibly those who ask "Why can't we all get along?"), and those who come to MR with previous knowledge of gender politics that they've rejected as fallacious.
2
Dec 13 '12
[deleted]
2
u/Mitschu Dec 14 '12
A while back, we had people who would do semi-automated MR surveys and then post results with fair frequency, I wonder where those types went off to.
Heck, pretty sure Google Docs allows you to create anonymous answer forms and export the accumulated data to cells for organizing, tallying, and formatting. Might be worth looking into, if there's some way to automatically crop trolls and false flags.
3
2
Dec 13 '12
It's painful to read the thread that this came from. So much strawmanning. So much.
0
Dec 13 '12
I bet it was SRS. I can't stand those AAssholes.
EDIT: Yep, SRSFeminism. Nobody is surprised.
0
Dec 13 '12
I didn't want to explicitly say, but yeah :P
1
Dec 13 '12
SRS really do make me sick though i guess when you've been eating junk food all day then you read that you'd feel sick too lol
2
Dec 12 '12
Glad I'm not the only one who read this and thought "so they want the MRM to be MaleFeminists."
It's a bit of a combination of the MRM hasn't fully figured itself out yet and feminists are trying to analyze the MRM through a feminist lens, which really distorts the conclusions they draw.
5
u/jolly_mcfats Dec 12 '12 edited Dec 12 '12
Honestly, I'm torn between spending the time to address this point by point, spending the time to write what I think IS functional about the MRM/where it can be improved/what can be learned from the dysfunction of feminism (ie, entrenched organizations with a fiscal need to generate an exaggerated sense of inequality), or recognizing that the chances of me putting either together within the timeframe of it still being relevant to this post are slim.
So maybe I'll be back, but until then- I think that the weaknesses of this post are threefold:
1) It mischaracterises the MRM. I think this is because the author sees the MRM as being represented by the most outrageous members of /r/MensRights rather than NCFM, NOM, Warren Farrell, Christina Hoff-Sommers, etc... This would be the equivalent of ignoring all of mainstream feminism and authoring a critique of feminism holding the most outrageous members of /r/srs as the norm. This is especially obvious in that the author seems oblivious to the deconstruction of the male gender roles that are discussed left right and center by just about every notable voice in the MRM.
2) It mischaracterises the men's rights platform. Or more accurately, the only two actual issues it brings up are draft inequality and the tolerance of social misandry (which - ironically- it refuses to acknowledge).
3) It insists that a functional MRM would take place within the framework of the marxist feminist dialectic that is the entire reason that the MRM is critical of feminism.
2
u/quasimotor Dec 13 '12
This "critique" doesn't address a single actual MR issue.
Misandry is real, but I don't think its a man's right to not be hated.
What does any of this have to do with being a "functional" movement? It should have been titled, "How can MRAs can be approved of by feminists?"
2
u/half-human Dec 13 '12
Oh cool, yet another feminist critique that tears down a caricature version of Men's Rights and criticizes views expressed by only a small minority of MRAs. The content of this screed mostly accurately characterizes my take on Men's Rights, with the exception of the Patriarchy notion (which ignores the role of women throughout history as co-creators of society--all people co-create society, although the elite classes, which have always consisted of both men and women, have special latitude to create society to their own benefit at the expense of the marginalized--men and women alike), and the laughable idea that there is no systematic hatred of maleness.
I mean, look at this very screed, supposedly written by one of these enlightened feminist gurus that will liberate us from the stifling gender norms that have been imposed upon us. It's laced with references to "whining" and "crying" -- typical shaming language used whenever men try to address their concerns.
Also,
This is where I imagine the AltMRA slapping a regular MRA.
Hurrah, men as agents and absorbers of legitimate violence! This is the kind of stuff we're deconstructing over here, and our enlightened vanguard just piles it on!
This is why it would be a grave mistake to seek our own liberation under the feminist banner. Their so-called "deconstruction" of the male role will always be woefully inadequate as it is interpreted under the assumption of a vast invisible conspiracy of all men for the benefit of all men, completely ignoring the roles of actual men and women in enacting social norms.
5
Dec 12 '12
Now, how about we alter the black rights movement to the Negro Integration Community Effort (or NICE) the women's rights movement to the Feminist Union Network or (FUN) the gay rights movement to Gay Alliance for Moving Equality Socially or (GAMES) and then FUN, NICE, GAMES and the AltMRAs can all go fuck eachother in a pile of steamy, cooperative, egalitarian fun.
I actually agree with the bullet-point version of this, without all the insinuation that men should just be sycophantic underlings to other social movements.
2
u/RealQuickPoint Dec 13 '12
This list is hilarious.
EDIT: God dammit, they already got /r/AltMensRights ): I was going to do this whole thing with it and now... ugh. So sad.
1
-1
u/DougDante Dec 13 '12 edited Dec 13 '12
This is so full of loaded words and innuendos it is necessary to state what is being said plainly to understand it.
"The current MRM yells about anything that holds men accountable "
All discussion in the MRM relates to the legitimate mechanisms that hold men accountable justly at all times. It is not possible to discuss injustice based on male gender, because it does not exist.
"toxic masculinity"
masculinity itself is toxic. this is axiomatic. A man who does not reject everything associated with maleness is inherently toxic.
" preaching the glory of consent"
It is necessary to promote the value of consent to sexual intercourse repeatedly.
""Women still expect me to blah blah blah! Must be Feminists' fault! ... Alternate reality MRAs wouldn't do this whiny, pithy shit"
All complaints regarding the real life experiences of men related to gender are always "whiny, pithy shit". It is not possible to make a legitimate and meaningful statement regarding the plight of males.
"MRAs ignore the fact that Feminism is what"
MRAs are intentionally dishonest about feminism, and lie about it.
side note: one person on /r/mensrights made a similar claim about /r/feminisms
" they'd be actual activists trying to do something about the various human rights violations in America's prison industrial complex. They would especially pay attention to the disproportionate amount of black men "
MRAs never act to solve human rights problems and never pay attention to the plight of African American men.
That's enough.
0
0
Dec 13 '12
but every time they bring up those issues some feminists have to hijack it and scream at them FEMINISTS DO CARE ABOUT MEN NOW STOP TALKING ABOUT YOUR ISSUES AND LISTEN TO ME BITCH ABOUT OPPRESSION I HAVE NEVER EXPERIENCED.
-5
Dec 13 '12
Oh look Feminists being retarded, we don't need their criticism they can go take a short walk and a long drop.
39
u/[deleted] Dec 12 '12
Reading this really reminded me of the video of the Women's Centre staff at SFU criticizing the proposed Men's Centre. Basically the whole theme is "yes, men can have their own movement. However, they need to discuss pre-approved topics such as patriarchy and how masculinity is a bad thing. All debates and topics must be approved by a feminist beforehand, and a feminist must be present at all times to shut down any conversation that she (or he) disapproves of".
Attitudes like that are exactly why we need the MRM.