Do you find the Mens Rights Movement a little unsettling? Would you like to see it destroyed for good?
Then let me tell you how.
It’s actually much simpler than you might think.
Talk to us. Reason with us and let us reason with you. Acknowledge what feminism has done to the detriment of society and men in general. Address these things and the concerns of men everywhere.
You don’t even have to submit any of your pro female concerns or freedoms! You just have to take ours in addition to them!
Do this, and both Feminism and the Mens Rights Movement will have no real reason to exist in their present forms! We could start a new movement together! Perhaps we could call it something pretty like ‘The New Humanist Movement’! Wouldn’t that be nice?
That’s all there is to it. Easy when you know how, eh?
So, what do you think?
Exposing Feminism 
21 comments
Comments feed for this article
November 14, 2007 at 4:56 am
literarycritic
I think it’s too simple, EF. At some point, beyond the purely ideological level, our goals are going to conflict. At that point, it’s one or the other.
It’s unfortunate, but that’s how it is.
I think your fellow MRAs would probably tell you the same.
November 14, 2007 at 6:52 pm
Exposing Feminism
On the contrary, it is my belief that the MRM would actively welcome a liberal humanist movement in place of feminism as it stands today.
Do you think that feminists wouldn’t be open to this?
Surely there is no hidden sentiment in feminism that feminists would find hard to give up?..
November 14, 2007 at 8:26 pm
Rob Case
It seems to me that at any point in time, conflicting interests are at some level of equilibrium – one particular view is often dominant, sure, but other views aren’t entirely stamped out, however much the totalitarian streak in human nature might like it to be.
Human ideas of justice are competing for territory in the collective human mindt (our culture) in much the same way as species compete for territory in Nature, and eventually find a niche in which they become dominant. Other species either die off completely, or find their own niche – but the process never settles into any settled static order. It is a constant struggle of changing context and redefinition of priorities.
As I see it, the dynamic that motivates change in the idea of justice (which is essentially what feminists and MRAs are competing for) is quite beyond the conscious. We certainly employ the conscious as a tool to communicate our desires and formulate our plans for change, but the momentum for change is generated by something much more visceral. This is why I think debate rarely achieves what many think is its purpose – to reach a consensus. We set ourselves up for failure if that is our expectation.
Debate still has its uses though – it helps the debater organise his or her thinking, and sharpens the wits. Kind of like the mock fighting soldiers do amongst themselves in preparation for real battle. It also serves as a showcase for the sale of ideological product to innocents. But it won’t get two adversaries to change each other’s minds – it certainly wasn’t debate that set those minds in the first place.
What determines a person’s priorities is self-interest. That is why most feminists are women, and most MRAs are men. Self-interest is fairly elastic, and you can abuse or deny someone’s interests without necessarily suffering an immediate backlash. But the accumulated effect of continuous abuse eventually reaches a breaking point, and then you have the beginnings of a social movement. Those at the forefront will be those who have been the most harmed (eg divorced men living in poverty, jailed alienated fathers, young men brought up in dangerous households, men jailed for crimes they didn’t commit) and they will be angry in a way that argument alone is useless against. Behind them will be those whose personalities lean toward righteousness, and then again there will always be those motivated by greed.
All it takes is the numbers. If the numbers of malcontents rise, our culture will initially label them as criminals and treat them as such. As these numbers rise more, beyond the capacity of our prisons and execution chambers, our culture will begin negotiating change with the more moderate elements. That’s the way it has always been.
November 14, 2007 at 8:38 pm
Exposing Feminism
Thanks for your comments Rob.
I would say in addition to this that another good reason for open debate is the opportunity for all sides to examine the veracity of opposing views. After all, openness and accountablility is chiefly at issue here.
In my opinion, open debate is a huge leap forward in terms of recognition of the MRM in consideration of the fact that until very recently any attempt at presenting our views outside of the movement would simply be dismissed as ‘misogyny’.
November 14, 2007 at 10:00 pm
Hawaiian Libertarian
I hold no such hope for such a simple solution ever working, because you see, feminists FEEL that they are being discriminated against by oppressive men, so they will always FEEL like victims with the need to be compensated and recognized for their victim-hood.
That’s why feminists STILL push the “women are .72 to the man’s dollar” bullshit. They can be shown statistic after stastitic and study after study that refutes this idiocy…but because they FEEL like it must be true, it is.
You cannot reason with a woman’s feelings. Only the truly intelligent woman recognize how influential their emotions are on their thought processes and mitigate that when attempting to reason logically. But those type of women are few and far between…
November 15, 2007 at 6:26 am
fidelbogen
It is simple. If you can get a feminist to such a point of negotiation, then that individual will BY DEFINITION no longer be a feminist. That is the nature of the beast (feminism) that we are dealing with.
So, in my humble but unsparingly frank opinion, feminism will be overcome by main strength. Brute force, if you prefer that term.
Political coalition-building and political arm-twisting would be the recipe of choice. A skillful propaganda game is also vitally important.
The purpose of all this would be twofold: 1. To win political victories, and 2.) To morally isolate the extremists so that they will retreat into the woodwork.
(Not necessarily in that order, but driving each other concurrently.)
Rob’s mention of “self-interest” is apropos. People will see it is not in their interest to support feminism: men at first, but more and more women as time goes on.
People need to be persuaded by various means to adopt a liberal humanist outlook. This, I think, can be done – but it shall require patient planning and plodding.
EF: Again, any “feminists” who might take you up on your offer will not be feminists by any politically meaningful sense of the term – whatever they might happen to call themselves.
Another thought: Women are naturally attracted to any form of vital, charismatic male enterprise. So let the Movement by all means possess vitality and charisma, and it will draw female adherents.
November 16, 2007 at 9:50 am
Sociopathic Revelation
I’ve read this thread more than once, and it’s got some pretty fine points made clearly by it’s posters, but I’ve said this a few times, and I think it bears worth repeating—-
Feminists will not stop attacking, defaming, shaming, and condemning men for their masculinity and trying to erode their innate rights as human beings until they realize that doing so IS NOT BENEFITING THEM.
When women win over men in the short term, in the long haul, they lose. Human nature fills in the blanks. It’s as simple as that.
Until then, we will continue to have the situation we have now—socially, sexually, legally, personally. How feminists and their male firster counterparts come to this conclusion is another matter of debate, but the fact that more men over time are being numb to the system, promoting civil disobedience, or occasionally becoming AWOL (i.e. moving out of the country for good) is a sign their ideology is out of date, and running out of time.
It is a selfish POV? That feminists won’t get their act together until it hurts them at the core by continuing to hurt men? You bet. You won’t get any argument out of me that most feminists act out of self-interest, if not selfism at the expense of men, but they have any acumen or self=examination at all, they realize that the incessant reactions of men—good men, mind you—that apt to continue to grow cold and protest to the elements against them isn’t the result of losing power . . . perhaps they never had much to begin with, and fighting against the factors that would marginalize or damage them isn’t the outcome of “patriarchy,” but a ever present consensus that deems men as borderline useless and disposable.
November 19, 2007 at 11:13 pm
khankrumtehbulgar
Self interest is at the core of politics. People Lobby for their company, industry, party, State etc. But there are competing interests that normally balance out the other parties. This has not been the case with Feminism. Until very recently it has been the only voice out there on Gender issues. The only voice heard. And Politicians eager to court Women’s votes gave Women’s groups nearly a blank check, with only token push back.
With four decades of Head Start on Men’s Rights. Men’s Rights Activists are playing catch up. Unlike Feminism a Trojan Horse for Socialism and Communism. There is no underlying accepted idealogy in the Men’s movement. No Dogma of a political approach to the Men’s Movement. We are all over the board. We have Christians, Conservatives, Libertarians, Liberals, Independents, Atheists all different viewpoints.
Until Politicians get clobbered at the Polls due to Men voting them out. There will be no major change in the status quo for Men in this Republic. As Liberals drive Feminism in the US, but Conservatives fund their Media shows, and buy their advertising.
November 27, 2007 at 7:09 pm
Khankrumthebulgar
I have made several attempts to state my reasons and justifications for my Men’s Rights stance. Very seldom will Feminists even permit such rationale to be discussed on a Forum of theirs. They are a place for unanimity of opinion to be heard that does not raise any doubts as to the idealogy being promoted.
I noted on a forum that when the Biscuit Queen made a statement in support of Men she was immediately attacked for her views. It seems there can be no dialog with the FemNags. They see themselves as being in charge and will allow no Males the right to voice their concerns. They are sadly mistaken.
November 30, 2007 at 4:55 pm
Factory
Khankrumthebulgar:
Firstly, is there an acceptable shortened version of that name?
Second, the fact that there is no underlying ideology in the Men’s Movement defacto PROVES it’s a real movement, as opposed to a revolution.
December 2, 2007 at 6:24 am
Brandon
Let’s just hope the men’s movement doesn’t get co-opted and turned to yet another power motivated political bloc.
Actually let’s do better than hope, let’s prevent it from ever doing that.
December 3, 2007 at 1:30 am
Robin
Perhaps we could call it something pretty like ‘The New Humanist Movement’! Wouldn’t that be nice?
That’s all there is to it. Easy when you know how, eh?
It’s a great idea… why not start it now?
The truth is that you guys are out in left field with your paranoid preoccupation with ruthless Feminist Bogeywoman who wants to hang all men’s penises from her belt as trophies. If she exists at all, she is marginal at best with no real effect on anything but your imaginations.
In the real world, women don’t go around considering themselves Feminists. I don’t. Most likely your mother doesn’t, nor do your sisters, your girlfriend and/or your wife. Women are as much – or more- in competition with each other as we are with men.
Exposing Feminism is on the right track with this post. We are all people… selfish, egocentric, suspicious, petty, vindictive but also loving, faithful, giving and forgiving people. Men and women, we want the same things… to be appreciated, to be loved, to be valued, to be admired, to grow old with someone who makes us feel good about ourselves and who we want to enrich with our love. You guys act like men and women are adversaries pitched in a battle against one another. No one can win such a battle. The best feeling possible is when a man and a woman are able to face the difficulties of life together.
Who wins the battle when a woman is allowed to use the court system for revenge, drive a man to the point where he kills his entire family in a park on Thanksgiving Day? Do women win? Do men? The only way to fix that problem is to attack it together, as families, as fellow citizens, as Christians, as community members, etc. with the goal to be harmony, justice, and balance.
August 29, 2010 at 11:08 am
Dabir Dalton
Just because my mother refuses to tell the truth by falsely claiming that she isn’t a feminist hasn’t stopped her from acting like one.
December 3, 2007 at 1:32 am
Exposing Feminism
Some very positive comments from Robin there – are there any other MRAs who agree?
December 3, 2007 at 6:16 am
MikeeUSA
women’s rights is bad for Men. Always has been and always will be. Those who advocate for women’s rights advocate against what is good for Men. It is good for Men to have power over their wives. It is good for Men to have young wives of child bearing age. It is BAD for women to have any power against her husband.
The truth is that you cannot get blood from a stone… unless you add the blood yourself. You cannot get women and girls to obey Men unless they have no other choice.
It’s strange that “exposing feminism” would like to give advice on how to “Quash the Men’s Movement”, especially when that advice is sound and good advice. Throwing the majority of Men a bone will indeed hold them off for another decade or two… just as it has in the past.
I wonder if “exposing feminism” is not an enemy of Men? EF has said that EF is infact pro-women’s rights in the recent past.
Death To women’s Rights.
Viva Men’s Liberties.
–MikeeUSA–
Note: MikeeUSA is not recognised by the MRM due to the holding of extremist views. EF
August 29, 2010 at 11:21 am
Dabir Dalton
EF To date the MRM {mens news daily, Glenn Sacks etc to name a couple} doesn’t speak for me either which is why I don’t recognize it as legitimate.
December 3, 2007 at 9:10 am
jw
I followed the link from Robin Steele’s blog.
There’s a joke that goes like this: “A man is walking through the woods. He says something. There’s no woman there to hear him. Is he still wrong?”
There’s a massive truth behind this joke and it is a truth that needs fixing BEFORE and combination could occur. For myself, getting women to stop yelling out things which are partly true and start LISTENING has been the biggest frustration of all.
My wife likens the problem to ones she commonly sees among three year olds. I say X, she responds “you said Y.” I say, no X. She says Z. I say no X. She says Q! on and on and on it goes world without end and no apparent way to stop it.
I have no problem with combining forces. For that to happen though, people are going to have to be willing to listen and that doesn’t look like it will happen.
FRUSTRATION!
December 3, 2007 at 4:58 pm
Anonymous
Who cares if the men’s movement fail. Those who eat their own and stab eachother in the back are not worth backing. Even here you have them fighting eachother. Useless.
December 3, 2007 at 7:59 pm
Khakrumthebulgar
http://drhelen.blogspot.com/2007/12/would-l-ron-hubbard-endorse-domestic.html
Is an ad campaign that celebrates Violence against Men by the Scientologists. A writer with the Philly Enquirer told the Men in an article to stop belly aching, and that Men have no right to complain.
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/columnists/alfred_lubrano/20071201_Unconventional_Wisdom___A_bookshelf_of_wounded_manhood.html
Nothing but insults here. No interest in an exchange or dialog. Attempts to shame Men into silence. Just STFU and go away. This is the Lace Curtain of Feminist Censorship in action. Not addressing the substance of the complaints. Just addressing the idea that Men have any valid issues at all.
Clara Harris the convicted Murderess and Adultress who ran over her Dentist Husband. While she herself was having an affair. Has Women coming to her defense.
http://www.claraharris.org and there is another site as well. It was down when I tried to access it. Friends of Clara Harris. Wow they are angry that Glenn Sacks raised the issue of Equal Protection under the law. This is not compromise, a fair and open dialog, two Parties interested in negotiations.
What you are suggesting is irrational, and will not happen.
December 3, 2007 at 8:29 pm
Bob
MEN need to recognize that violence against men is going on and fight back against ll the anti-men hate propaganda like that hate video.
It’s time to stand up for MEN regardless. We are oppressed and hated no matter what females have done to us, and females who murder men are excused.
“You don’t even have to submit any of your pro female concerns or freedoms! You just have to take ours in addition to them!”
Hello? Those two are mutually exclusive. The feminist goals of female dominance, male slavery, destruction of families, and every female a lesbian are incompatible with men’s goals of loving families, protection of children, and no slavery for men.
The MEN’s movement is not about females pretending to “hear” men while continuing on with their destruction of homes, families, children, and men. Just being heard will not overturn a century and a half of bigoted laws and female domination. We aren’t worried though. No feminist will ever listen to men, so its a moot point.
No, that’s not what real men are about at all.
Bob
August 22, 2013 at 3:46 am
Jennie
You (humorously) say that men are oppressed. How can this be when we live in a patriarchy and not a matriarchy? What is happening here is that us feminists are tired of the way we are treated because we are women. Men say they “love” women so much-so why do they call us sluts if we love sex/whores if we get paid (like the johns are soo innocent)/lesbian if we have short hair and are outspoken (you also call us a bitch for this/etc and many more lovely names. Why has porn gotten so violent? Hatred of women plain and simple. If the porn creators loved women they would not make bukkake/rape/humiliation films about us. We are fighting back from being oppressed and you think YOU guys are “oppressed?!” Enjoy all of your male privilege and being able to buy women n throw us away. Feminism is in response to my examples above and there are sooo many more!