Mens Rights Movement

Post Reply New Topic

I think we're likely agreeing then and just phrasing things a bit different. I do think however there may be small, cursory issues, that will have legal status and will be far more relevant for one gender over the other but they're relatively minor and would likely sum out equally.

I just do what the vagina tells me to do

That is probably the case.

Myth of male power is a very good read. If you are too lazy to read
Watch this youtube video. I wonder what feminists think of this video.
I would appreciate if anyone can point out any feminist sites that mention it.
I am sure the book and video are significant enough to have a mention.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFtGwBsKgKs[/youtube]

MRM:

Hated by people who are appalled by the notion that men actually have rights.

Adored by ret*d men who can't handle the fact that they are inept with women.

Attended to, in general, by idiots.

There was a thread dedicated to this book perhaps a year or two ago. Most responses were tl:dw, 'didn't want to spend my months bandwidth on it', and debates purely came from the idea of and title of the book as well as the guy's captions on his website since people felt like a 19 part video was rope-a-dope. At the time though I get the impression it mostly got read as out of touch or semi-misogynistic for right or wrong and the OP had to do a lot of defending based on the fact that what was written as his abstract could be taken as out of touch and since no one was willing to go to passed that it really just ended up being a big gridlock.

I think my biggest conclusion from it is that he's right to the extent that men themselves, whether cultured or by nature of testosterone, having grievances let alone organizing them is seen as weak and that until the time comes that buying into that is no longer the 'alpha' thing we'll pretty much be looking at more of the same.

Prehaps getting people to read this book is like convincing logically that slavery was wrong is slave times. The less one knows about the truth, the easier it is to aquire material gain from doing wrong. I think that is common theme with NT thinking.

Mmmm... the human condition still frankly sucks. Yes, its a lot better than it used to be but it seems like the degree to which people get shafted or have a hard time making it is coming closer and closer to being equal across board. I'd argue that some of what inherently makes us male and inherently has us feeling like we're 'at our best' doesn't coincide with listing grievences. I think the author of the book you listed has a great point - if guys want to get around looking like they're being catty (especially to themselves) the wisest course of action is letting women know how men's continued rolls are boomeranging back and hitting both men and women equally. The challenge we have is that there are a lot of guys in bitter situations, whether they associate with the 'Incel' bit too much or whether they're fathers who lost their house and kids and have yes - been through very legitimate pain but simultaneously aren't going to make good faces or policy-setters for a movement that, IMHO, would need to be extremely well-tempered and pragmatic.

Thanks for the link, I'm going to get my hands on that book as soon as I can.

I'll try to find it somewhere. It seems really interesting.
Also, I listened to the entire interview, and the guy raised a lot of good points.

At one point, they talk about posters apparently put up to talk eighteen-year-old guys into joining the army.
A quote apparently used often: "A man's gotta do what a man's gotta do."
Then they wonder what would happen if, in order to replace men killed in war, they put a pregnant woman on a poster: "A woman's gotta do what a woman's gotta do."

Indeed, while women have anywhere between equal and more rights, they have less responsibilities.
Where I live, as with many countries, only men are reminded that they might be called up at any time the government decides to reintroduce an active draft.
Apparently, considering the noticeable lack of public anger, equality only refers to equality for women in fields where they are doing worse than men.

IMO it's extremely difficult, if not almost impossible, to feel angry about an issue and not feel vengeful and hateful towards the target to some degree as well, even if that person is in denial that they are. Whether they are feminists or men's rightsers.

In a certain sense, I would say both the feminists and the men's rights activists are in love with the idea that they are oppressed. A sense of victimhood is the mother of self righteousness.

And neither is the pay gap men's fault (entirely, at least).

I'm a feminist and no-one finds patriarchal bs like it being a man's 'duty' to fight in a war more offensive than I do. You are ignoring that feminists would support your movement if you didn't attack them first.

I am not fighting men. I am fighting patriarchy. The notion that men should be so stoic about their health it kills them and that they should die in a war is a patriarchal one.

A legitimate men's (or women's) rights movement is one that does not base their platform on attacking the opposite sex.

If that is their basis then they are simple hate mongers.

I would expect a legitimate men's rights movement to focus on things such as...
1. Right to be relieved of child support responsibilities upon confirmation of non-paternity.
2. Right to compensation for having paid child support to a child that was not his.
3. Right to paternity leave.
4. More resources for battered men.

And I would suspect they go about raising these issues without mentionings of feminist agendas.
There's no reason to polarize the issue of men's or women's rights if you have legitimate claims. Your claims should be able to stand on the fact that they are legitimate alone.