Does The Men's Rights Movement Have A Future?
Does The Men's Rights Movement Have A Future?
Inspired by this essay https://scholarworks.calstate.edu/downloads/d504rr026
The parallels between the contemporary MRM and Environmentalism are striking, and elucidated sharply in the writings of dissidents within The Green Movement, similar to those expressed in the link above. Just a few parallels
Quote: "There is a paradox at the heart of contemporary American environ- mentalism. On the one hand, its organizations are generally larger, stronger, bet- ter funded, and more knowledgeable than ever before. Membership has grown in recent years; there are now more than eight million dues- paying members of the major national organi- zations—and many more in local and statewide organizations—compared to about two million in 1980. Moreover, polls consistently show very high levels of public support for environmen- tal protection, levels that would be the envy of many progressive movements."
In a similar fashion, "men's issues" have, in a sense never enjoyed the sort of exposure that they enjoy today. While MRA organizations aren't necessarily larger and stronger than they were in the past, more of them exist than was the case at the beginning of the 2010s, especially at the local and state level. Similarly, polls consistently show that public support for initiatives like shared parenting legislation, criminal justice reform, and restoring due process on university campuses is high
"And yet: environmentalists find themselves playing defense far more than offense, devoting time and resources to fighting proposals such as drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, rather than forging new responses to crises such as climate change. Indeed, noth- ing that these large and expert organizations accomplished during the Clinton-Gore years— to say nothing of the present Bush years—com- pares to such landmark victories as the Na- tional Environmental Policy Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Endangered Species Act, which a much more inchoate movement won a generation ago."
We here at The MRM have similarly been playing defense more than offense since this iteration of the movement began in the mid-10s. During the movement's heyday between '15 and '19, our activity was mostly confined to Triggering The Libs on social media, and issuing rebuttals to things like The Gillete Ad and Brie Larson's comments( https://variety.com/video/brie-larson-crystal-lucy-awards-critics/ )via YouTube videos, rather than forging fresh responses to crises like under and unemployment in America, a phenomena which disproportionately affects men. The present MRM's achievements during The Trump years(an era which was ostensibly more friendly to MRA talking points) aren't remotely comparable to the legislative and social victories of a more inchoate movement during The 90s and The 2000s https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10183 https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1991-06-30-9102270767-story.html https://reason.com/1994/07/01/man-troubles/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d28usWdvmSg Robert Glover published his seminal book No More Nice Guy in '02 https://archive.seattletimes.com/archive/?date=20020509&slug=niceguy09 , and Marc Rudov published his book around the same time https://www.amazon.com/Mans-No-Nonsense-Guide-Women-Succeed/dp/0974501719
James Cook and David Levy won imperfect yet monumental legislative victories, while advocates like Baber, Kammer, and Arst gave us what The Woke Warriors over at The Take now lament as The Post-Feminist late 90s-2014 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBxgEIcMB6o Ya know, the days where Askmen.com was writing from an unapologetically male standpoint ( https://uk.askmen.com/top_10/dating/top-10-signs-youre-too-good-for-her.html https://www.askmen.com/dating/dating_advice_60/80b_dating_tips.html https://www.askmen.com/top_10/dating/top-10-signs-shell-be-a-bad-mother.html https://au.askmen.com/top_10/dating/things-women-do-to-emasculate-men_3.html ); loudly as today's Ayatollahs Of Red Pill Theology doth protest to the contrary, they haven't said anything new.
Starting in the early 2000s, public willingness to acknowledge that women were just as prone to murderous acts as we men are led to the creation of the series Snapped, which didn't portray the gals they profiled as anything but the criminals that they are. In '09, one of NPR's flagship programs-Talk Of The Nation-brought the terrific Ned Holstein on to discuss the fraud that is The Duluth Model https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106820029 , and even Tyra Banks devoted an entire hour to female on male DV, in which the perpetrator wasn't given a free pass because she was female https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdC0a_agt0E By contrast, the present day MRM is largely seen as sideshow unto itself, more famous for it's association with non-troverseries like Gamer Gate and Comics Gate than anything else. Here in '22, Third Wave Feminism still exerts the stranglehold over the mainstream media that an earlier decade of feminism did during the late 70s-the late 90s, and there's no signs of this stranglehold loosening it's grip anytime soon
"The same polls that regularly show high levels of public support also reveal this support to be quite shallow. The environ- ment rarely rises to the upper levels of con- cern. This may help explain why, despite the gulf between George W. Bush’s and John Kerry’s policy proposals, environmental issues generated almost no attention during the presi- dential campaign."
Not much of a rewrite required here. The polls also indicate that while public support for making shared parenting legislation the law of the land, criminal justice reform, and enforcing due process on campus are high, that support is also remarkably shallow, and rarely coming anywhere close to the Top 5 worries which are foremost in the minds of most Americans. This may account, at least in part, for the fact that neither Donald Trump nor Joe Biden said much about men's issues during the last election cycle, despite The MRM having enjoyed 18 minutes of fame during the mid-10s, during which time they were often blamed for Trump's victory by the mainstream media
For all of they hype around Cassie Jaye's documentary The Red Pill upon it's release, it was also largely a phenomena among self-proclaimed Anti-sJWs(the contemporary MRM is an outgrowth of this subculture, much in the same Environmentalism is an outgrown of of this subculture, much in the same Environmentalism is an outgrown of The Counterculture of The 60s)and their followers. The general public still continues to view The MRM as little more than a gaggle of socially inept and neck bearded man-babies, who blame all of the disappointment sin their lives on women, feminism, The New World Order, The Lizard People, etc etc
I could go with the parallels, but I'm not sufficiently motivated to do so. The rest of you all read Meyer's essay, and let me know where you agree with me or think I'm flat out wrong
You're viewing a single thread.
As long as the majority of people in the MRM movement thinks it's gay for a man to get pegged by a woman then the movement is doomed to fail.
That topic was never broached in any of the discussions I had with MRAs
If it makes you any better I also don't go looking for answers, the statements just falls into my ears. I hear a lot of people when they're behind closed doors. I think the funniest one I heard was when 2 people were chatting on a radio and they were told to quit it because "gossiping is what girls do". So I guess it's gay to talk to your homies too?
It's not something people bring up in meetings.
It's not a point that's needs to be said. It just "is".
And as long as gay is a term used to insult people, as long as people care to be better than women, as long as being stoic is the only way to be a man, MRA movement will fail. People reap what their fathers have sown.
Another way of thinking about all of this:
Much of what’s said here https://www.spectator.co.uk/podcast/peter-pomerantsev-how-to-win-an-information-war/ Is equally applicable to turning the tide of public receptivity to “men’s issues”
7:05-7:13 We here at The MRM have been operating under the (uninterrogated)belief that Intersectional Feminism’s proponents are nigh-omnipotent sorcereresses(occasionally sorcerers), who turn docile plebs into blood thirsty misandrists, just by uttering magic lies from behind their microphones. Turns out, the explanation for their success at winning public influence may be simultaneously more prosaic AND more profound:
Intersectionalists provide their prospective converts with not simply one, but SEVERAL roles to play, within the framework of what appears to be, at first glance, a heroic saga… Powerhouse career women and their male allies, who successfully balance lucrative corporate careers with bravely campaigning for social justice, and thwarting the bigots’s schemes to establishing world domination. Bombastic, yet highly seductive and exciting
By contrast, The MRM really only provided our potential converts with one role, in an extremely dreary, unusually unattractive tale… Societal dropout, who’s idea of fun is endlessly griping over all the shit in modern life he disapproves of, yet rarely if ever discussing his/they’re goals and desires. Or a vision of the world they’d like to see
9:50ish-12:00 We’ve been, dare I say, Blue Pill in our understanding of the way many Intersectionalists operate, especially in their speeches and writings. To a large degree, they’re acting whilst doing so. We know this because the Susan Danuta Walters’s of the world(An admitted angry lesbian slithering through the halls of academia, who leads a highly bohemian lifestyle, even when she’s off the clock)really are a microsliver of the human race. The vast majority of Intersectionalists are themselves mostly upper middle class-all points beyond, leading highly “traditional lives”. Including marriages to people of the opposite sex, and raising kids of their own. At first glance, these folks are indistinguishable from those who comprise The Heritage Foyndation’s executive board
Those gigantic crowds who erupt in orgies of virulent rage during Intersectionalist soeeches? They’re almost certainly playing a role also. That Woke sympathizing grads of The New School like this chick https://youtu.be/lZs-Eb6H5BU?si=Gkq5Pj8IphUjWfBH 5:20-7:00 still yearn for a white picket fence house, kids(Plural), and a loving husband of her own is testament to this
This misreading poisoned fatally the way most MRAs conceptualized the extrenal world. That in turn tanslated into their/us pursuing a strategy which failed to convince The 80% of the public who’s still on the fence-and thus amenable to persuasion-to support us
26:19-26:43 It may behoove those of us who are Post-MRM to imagine ourselves having similar conversations with our descendants, at some future date:
-“Daddy, Mummy says you were an activist back in the day. Does that mean you were kinda like Iron Man or a Jedi Knight”
-"No, sweetness: I was pretty much a real life equivalent to The Continental Op. Go Wiki that name, and pay close attention to this paragraph: “The Continental Op is a master of deceit in the exercise of his occupation. In his 1927 Black Mask story “$106,000 Blood Money” the Op is confronted with a dilemma: should he expose a corrupt fellow detective, thereby hurting the reputation of his agency; and should he also allow an informant to collect the $106,000 reward in a big case even though he is morally certain—but cannot prove—that the informant has murdered one of his agency’s clients? The Op resolves his two problems neatly by manipulating events so that the corrupt detective and the informant get into an armed confrontation in which both are killed”
That’s how I and most of my peers rolled… We used highly innovative tactics in the neverending quest that is enhancing and safeguarding the cause of liberty for one and all. Both you and every other child today enjoys a richer, freer life than those of who’ve lived prior, largely thanks to your predecessors’s iron commitment to pragmatism and the pursuit of concrete, tangible objectives"
29:56-30:43 The current iteration of The MRM similarly has, since it’s inception, operated under an assumption which goes something like: “We need to provoke a psychosocial revolution in the human species, the likes of which rids Normie society of all it’s prejudices and biases towards men. THEN, when can go about not simply changing laws and policies, but building A Red Pill Kingdom Of Heaven on Earth, free of all tragedy and pain”. Such an assumption fails to take cognizance of at least one inconvenient reality though… System Justification https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2011-21802-017 Or, as Morris Fiorana has observed: “We humans are hardwired to be politically liberal, and socially conservative. That is: We want to live our lives and pursue our desires without being hassled or impeded, AND we’re also not automatically inclined for life to change drastically, in a very short period of time”
Thus, it’s not surprising that The MRM’s dream of awakening The Revolutionary they believed to be asleep within an alleged silent majority found itself shattered beyond all salvation by 2019, just as The BBC’s attempt to trigger a liberal democratic revolut against The 3rd Reich in Nazi Germany fell flat on it’s face, never to get back up
Severely diminishing the influence of not just Feminisism, but that of Illiberal Wokeness over the public is a far wiser and more achievable goal for those of us who are Post-MRM to pursue
31:00-31:46 There’s nonetheless a deep commitment to the principles of textbook liberalism(Equality before the law, unimpeded access to opportunity, and prosperity for one and all. Regardless of skin color, ethnicity, gender, creed,or sexual orientation)at the core of The Post-MRM. We just realize that continuing to screech “Feminisism/Gynocentrism/Hypergamy bad!!” hasn’t been especially effective at winning widespread public support
And that the way to do so is quite simple, even if not easy: Start hammering home all the ways in which many current laws and policies(Quite a few of them brainchildren of lawmakers and lobbyists who are under the influence of Intersectionalisism)aren’t just harmful to men, but actually hamstring the most basic ambitions of the majority of the female population:
-Snagging solid, reliable husbands
-Having kids of their own
-Accessing a career which grants her the flexibility to split motherhood and work, 70/30
-Acquiring affordable housing in a pristine neighborhood for her to raise her children in
Ngl, I started skimming half way through because what you posted seemed to be more taken from a video than your own words. I agreed with most of it "intersectionality is mostly upper class white people." But that's because it hasn't really escaped college.
Then I paid attention to the end because a lot of people post their crazies there. "lawmakers and lobbyists who are under the influence of Intersectionalisism" who? Where? No really, who?
And also "Intersectionalisism [isn't] just harmful to men..." Harmful in what way? Maybe someone posted something crazy I don't know about, but my understanding of intersectionality is [women are more oppressed then men, black people are more oppressed then men, therefore black women are more oppressed than both] like a punnett square of oppression.
So instead of using someone else's words I want you in less than 100 words describe what you're trying to say, the fumes have gotten to me and thinking is hard.
"Ngl"
Relieved to read that you're Not Gonna Lie. This would complicate the conversation needlessly