Men's Rights Movement

[Amarok]

If that is her stance i agree. If you found  Redpill in anyway impressive .

[Thumpalumpacus]

Even men’s rights activism is needed if you take out the he-man woman hating.

Good luck with that. Women-hating in MRAs seems a lot more prevalent than does man-hating in feminist circles.

[Amarok]

Indeed if you were to remove the douchebags . The movement would have no star power. You also have to get the movement to decouple itself from the scummy PUA movement and MGTOW's . Oh and White Nationalists . Their is no real chance of that happening .

[Shell B]

Even men’s rights activism is needed if you take out the he-man woman hating.

Good luck with that. Women-hating in MRAs seems a lot more prevalent than does man-hating in feminist circles.

Depends on where you're looking. I've found both to be both unsavory or savory depending on who I was talking to. Either way, the amount of gender-hating in each group isn't really relevant to my point that both MRAs and feminism would be more palatable/useful without it.

[vulcanlogician]

I agree with Shell B. Despite the sort of characters who might get involved in such efforts, there is nothing wrong with MRAs in principle. Every group has the right to advocate for its own rights in society.

[Shell B]

Indeed if you were to remove the douchebags . The movement would have no star power. You also have to get the movement to decouple itself from the scummy PUA movement and MGTOW's . Oh and White Nationalists . Their is no real chance of that happening .

One could say the same about feminazis, etc. I'm sure MRAs say feminism isn't going to "decouple" itself from man-hating feminists and justify themselves the same way. It's clear from this thread alone that both sides are demonizing the other in much the same way Conservatives and Liberals do. Both have legitimate complaints, perhaps one more than the other, but that doesn't change that there are some issues with each label or at least "fringe" people using each label. It also doesn't change the fact that there are some feminists who adhere to a very (hu)man-friendly "code," so to speak, and there are MRAs who are just upset about something like prison sentences or losing their kids unfairly in court and don't hate women at all. Just as it's important to me not to use these labels for myself, I do try (not always successfully) to take each person who assumes one of these labels at face value, as individuals. "MRAs are all . . . " or "Feminists are all . . ." statements can never be accurate. I try not assume an MRA is a masochist until proven otherwise. I give feminists the same benefit of the doubt until they prove otherwise.

---

Every group has the right to advocate for its own rights in society.

Well put.

[Amarok]

Indeed if you were to remove the douchebags . The movement would have no star power. You also have to get the movement to decouple itself from the scummy PUA movement and MGTOW's . Oh and White Nationalists . Their is no real chance of that happening .

One could say the same about feminazis, etc. I'm sure MRAs say feminism isn't going to "decouple" itself from man-hating feminists and justify themselves the same way. It's clear from this thread alone that both sides are demonizing the other in much the same way Conservatives and Liberals do. Both have legitimate complaints, perhaps one more than the other, but that doesn't change that there are some issues with each label or at least "fringe" people using each label. It also doesn't change the fact that there are some feminists who adhere to a very (hu)man-friendly "code," so to speak, and there are MRAs who are just upset about something like prison sentences or losing their kids unfairly in court and don't hate women at all. Just as it's important to me not to use these labels for myself, I do try (not always successfully) to take each person who assumes one of these labels at face value, as individuals. "MRAs are all . . . " or "Feminists are all . . ." statements can never be accurate. I try not assume an MRA is a masochist until proven otherwise. I give feminists the same benefit of the doubt until they prove otherwise.

---

Every group has the right to advocate for its own rights in society.

Well put.

 Not even comparable 

Man hating feminists are a fringe group that have little actual power or influence in modern mainstream  feminism . For the MRA this is not the case . As many if not most of the heads of the movement(Paul Elms) or organizations that are it's main thrust (AVFM) both openly defend and openly associate  with the groups i mentioned. If men are actually concern about this stuff . The MRA are not movement is not for them. And there are better groups (like Good Men ). This is just the tired "BOTH SIDES " nonsense.

---

Well put.

To bad the MRA do anything but .

---

I agree with Shell B. Despite the sort of characters who might get involved in such efforts, there is nothing wrong with MRAs in principle. Every group has the right to advocate for its own rights in society.

I already brought up a group who does just that . Who are not the MRA . And don't rely heavily or defend creeps .

---

Depends on where you're looking. I've found both to be both unsavory or savory depending on who I was talking to. Either way, the amount of gender-hating in each group isn't really relevant to my point that both MRAs and feminism would be more palatable/useful without it.

Not even comparable

---

If truly want the greatest proof they don't care about men's rights . Go watch the videos of the "international men's issues  conference " in London . Turn it into a drinking game. Every time they blame women or feminists (or cultural marxists)  for something.  As opposed to coming up with solutions to the problems they say they care about .  Take a shot . Bonus points if you make it to the part where Paul Elms takes 6 minutes out of his lecture to chew out the FEMRA who spoke before him for daring to suggest women are not cause of all their problems . And then try and find her lecture on the AVFM website with rest of the videos (spoilers it's not there )

Oh and please say these people are just the fringe

[Thumpalumpacus]

Good luck with that. Women-hating in MRAs seems a lot more prevalent than does man-hating in feminist circles.

Depends on where you're looking. I've found both to be both unsavory or savory depending on who I was talking to. Either way, the amount of gender-hating in each group isn't really relevant to my point that both MRAs and feminism would be more palatable/useful without it.

Well, of course extremism reflects poorly on whatever movement they glom onto. I'm simply saying that in my experience, it's more rampant in MRAs than it is in feminism, as movements go. And it's not a matter of where I'm looking; it's a matter of people I run into, or know as friends, or have as family. I don't actively search out proponents or agitants on either side.

I generally dislike radicals of any stripe, but that doesn't mean all causes have an equal number of radicals. It seems to me that MRAs tend to be farther right than the broad swathe of feminists are to the left. In other words, the centers of gravity in those movements are not equivalent, balancing each other out, so far as I've seen. It seems to me that there are more moderate feminists than there are moderate MRAs.

Again, that's only my own experience, but it is an unculled sample.

---

I agree with Shell B. Despite the sort of characters who might get involved in such efforts, there is nothing wrong with MRAs in principle. Every group has the right to advocate for its own rights in society.

Of course. That doesn't, however, mean that every cause is equal. Given the length and breadth of male social dominance, there seems to be a big mote/beam factor not being considered by MRA groups.

On the whole, I, as a white male, have things easier than so many other folks that rather than starting or joining a movement, I'm fine with working for equality for all. Call me crazy, right?

---

I try not assume an MRA is a masochist until proven otherwise.

They're not "masochists". They're, in large part, apologists, making excuses rather than seeking solutions, it seems to me.

I referred earlier in this thread to my defense of my rights as a father, representing myself in court and in front of the mediator. The time I spent in the law library was well-spent. I did this in California, one of the most liberal states in the Union, and even without a lawyer I was able to secure my rights as a father.

i'm skeptical that doing this in another state, less-friendly to "feminazis", such as Texas or Nebraska or [fill in the blank] would result in my being treated worse.

Where there's a will, there's a way. But you have to want it. And I'm not sure MRAs want custody more than they want a nice, visible cross upon which they might climb.

[Amarok]

I try not assume an MRA is a masochist until proven otherwise.

There are two kinds of MRA i have encountered

There are the manipulators (Paul Elms) who use male anger a resentment and profit off it . And are determined to keep men angry because it is in their interest to do so . And feminists and women are an easy target for the resentment so they use the feminist boogeyman to keep them complacent.  


There is the followers who are generally angry confused men . Who's rage is pointed at the wrong enemy and the wrong causes for their problems . Often they become addicted to their own anger as it's an easy way to deal with their problems rather then actually dealing with them . 

Both groups are bad for men's rights. One by intention . The other by addiction .

[Shell B]

When I refer to MRAs, I’m referring to men’s rights activists, not just the most loathed faces. When you say there are good groups of men who are fighting for their rights, you’re talking about the same people I am. I’m not just talking about a group of assholes on Reddit.

Tiz, the only groups I have been calling fringe are hostile feminazis, though I’ve also used the term more abstractly.