The Men's Rights Movement: I Just Don't Get It.

[Psykhronic]

When I was looking into feminism, I did so via stumble upon at first. Sometimes Men's Rights pages would show up (The Spearhead is the only one I remember the title of). I'd read them. While they were not always off the mark (male rape victims are ignored, custody battles, etc), they loved to disregard women in those articles.

Then I took a Woman's Studies course, which I found out during the first class the department wanted to change the name to something along the lines of Gender Studies. We started learning about women of course, then we had a section on men, then on other-gendered folks, and then on how society affects all of us. Granted there were times when I thought they skewed facts, but I did not see the same dismissal of men like I had seen the dismissal of women in the men's rights sphere. And I did not see why the men's rights movement existed separately, considering thanks to feminism there IS discussion on how men are viewed in society as well.

And when I'd watch youtube videos regarding the men's rights movement, the users (males) who disagreed with them would get overwhelming feedback from the men's rights folks that primarily consisted of being called a "mangina" among other things.

That being said, I admit I have no idea if the sites I visited were "extreme". I have nothing to add to the Woman's studies class, really Gender Studies, because they already were inclusive. And youtube is a melting pot of crazy, trolls, and extremists. I will admit that not everyone in the men's rights movement is an extremist, which is something I never denied, and there are level-headed people who identify as such. Like I mentioned earlier, what exposure I DO have for the men's rights movement, and all the exposure I have regarding feminism, suggests that the men's rights movement came out of not understanding that feminism does include topics regarding men and males.

THAT BEING SAID - Onto the naming of "Feminism" - I get that, historically and at present, "feminine" is not a preferred trait. Women are already "feminine" by default, and men who have feminine traits are bashed to shit. However, there is also a history of exclusion I see in the title. First wave feminism was essentially all white middle - to upper middle - class women. Colored, and/or poor women were not seen with quite the same light as the movement - those people were not entirely "feminine" since they tended to work and dirty themselves up. The second wave and third wave sought to improve some of this, and included more insight into gender, but I think clinging to the title "feminism" represents exclusion of who was considered "feminine" and a part of the movement. By promoting the fact that feminine is not bad, I do not want to conversely make it seem that masculinity is bad either - which, the name "feminism" incites man-hating sentiments, granted for reasons other than the name alone. But as someone who is not a woman and with a female body, I often feel glanced over even though the movement includes non-binary discussions in much of their literature. If changing the name from feminist to egalitarianism brings in more perspectives, I am all for it - and that is one of the things I think may help. I also think by having such a title in the first place, the men's rights movement may not have felt the need to exist (and 'feminism' would technically not exist by that title, either).