Venting to a feminist

It’s fairly rare that I listen to feminist promo pieces any more, but I was persuaded to watch this one by it’s brevity. I don’t really recommend taking the time to listen to it, it’s little more than the typical rehash of feminist arguments, very poorly expressed. I include it only for context.

The following was part of a comment exchange with one LJY08. I admit that I was venting, but I think that a lot of MRA’s might be able to identify with my fulmination. I am pleased, however, that s/he seemed to be among one of the more lucid, even if incorrect, in my opinion, and articulate feminists I’ve spoken with. I may be wrong, but I place him or her at a second-year women’s studies student.

“Your movement appears to have no theories about how society should be organised or what the overarching issue is with our current societies.”

You’re right–the men’s rights movement has no political theories. We aren’t here to dictate how people should think. We have goals. I’ve previously mentioned mine.

Your movement seems to be able to be reduced down to the following: “we feel cheated and we hate feminists”

Only someone who has never spoken with a Men’s Rights Activist would make such a comment. But that aside, not only do we feel cheated, but we know, measurably, that we’ve been fucked. Fucked hard. Without Vaseline.

We don’t hate feminists, we hate what has been done in the name of feminism. We hate that feminism convinces easily influenced yet potentially strong people to become victim-minded grievance mongers, finger pointers, self-adjudicators of political and moral correctness based on little more than the sensitivities available only to wealthy, well-fed and overly sheltered people who fear embarrassment–and so use shaming ostracism as their primary coercive and offensive tool.

Feminists are much like priests; they preach cotton candy and rainbows while reaching into your pocket and scheming to create laws and standards to ones which advantage women, even (especially?) when no advantage should be given, and to the detriment of men. Primary aggressor laws, for example, or changing the standards of proof so that “It’s more likely than not” that a young man is a rapist and thus potentially ruining not only his education, but potentially his career and the rest of the 60-80 years of his life.

We hate that feminists lie with statistics, tormenting them to fit a narrative though omission, distortion and Orwellian interpretation, such as Mary Koss claiming that that “made to penetrate” cannot be considered rape when the numbers are the same down to a few hundred.

We hate the self-righteous moralistic finger wagging, the plausibly deniable shaming, the refusal to listen and learn, and we hate the empty, thoughtless go-to argument of The Patriarchy Done It, when it’s evident that the use of rhetoric and indirect accusations are preferred over inconvenient facts.

We hate that feminist behaviour does not match feminist’s words.

What we hate is that people like you, rather than listening, assume that you are right, and that we’re merely uneducated about this wonderful ideology that will make the world one of rainbows, flowers and cookies, that we just don’t understand, that we simply don’t know the wonders of Feminism.

We’ve lived in your world, and it’s not what you make it out to be if you’re a man.

We hate that you use words like “privileged” when feminists are the very personification of privilege yet have the hypocritical temerity to wag your finger at us and chide us for being so gosh-darned hysterical, pardon me, “angry”.

“How do you intend to make the world a better place? Through a humanist movement?”

Through the accomplishment of our goals–men having reproductive rights would certainly change the world for the better. Through bringing in discreet long-term contraceptives for men–that would be a huge game changer too. In short, by taking power over our own lives, over feminists and women’s objections, because it would be inconvenient for them to not create “oopsie babies”, or to have automatic access to men’s possessions, money and life energy.

None of this requires humanism, or any other ideology.

“What would this movement look like?”

You’re witnessing it now. It looks like men not being shamed into silence. It means that when Feminists and women say ‘you should be less vocal and listen more’, we raise our voice–because we’ve listened, and we’ve changed to make you happy, and we’ve adapted, and feminists have not bothered reciprocating. Instead, like spoiled children, they demand more and more mattresses to cover a pea. It is a movement that is driven by the simple understanding that the world cannot work well unless both sexes have an adult understanding that in order to reap the benefits of fairness that both must also accept commensurate responsibilities and sacrifices, or in other words, the understanding that freedom don’t come for free.

We will continue to raise our voices and take action on our own behalf, because the so-called “gender equality” movement of feminism has more than failed in every respect for men, it has been ignored at the expense of men. “More equality” is not equality, it is a euphemism for superiority and dominance in law, culture and politics.

“What would its tenets be? Who would be coming up with the ideology?”

Who says we need tenets or an ideology? All we need is enough men to stop supporting the system, or acting to change it. We know what we want in a way that a Western woman can never know. You don’t need an ideology to dodge bullets, or avoid people who try to control you. You just do it. And many of us are.

“How do you intend to reconcile the masculine ideals with the feminine ideals?”

Honestly: we don’t. Fuck them both. Generally, men have the tendency to be individualistic, rather than collective minded. We’ll just do what we need to do, and find a way to get along as we go.

“There’s more to a movement than ranting and assigning blame.”

Yet, this is a precise description of a common behaviour used by feminism to have achieved its power over the system.

No more. The time of Feminism is coming to an end, and we who actually care about equality will make it inevitable, even if only by withholding our value. Get ready to learn about obligation and duty and responsibility and accountability when there’s nobody left to cover your butt or to carry your share of the load.

It felt really good to get that off my chest, wish I’d been more articulate, but such is the nature of things

Advertisements
Tagged , ,

4 thoughts on “Venting to a feminist

  1. Kerina says:

    “…they demand more and more mattresses to cover a pea”. Do you get credit for this analogy? I thought it was very evocative.

    The rant was very articulate but I’m not sure venting at feminists is the best way to convince anyone but the already converted. The arguments of the MRA are mostly rational and I think hitting people with those repeatedly is the surest road to agreement.

    I’m in strong disagreement that just withholding value will get the MRA very far as I don’t believe anything close to a majority of men will join that movement. The MRA needs to convince ordinary men and women that things are unfair, just like feminism had to do back in the day. Without those people, I think the MRA is doomed to obscurity.

    As long as people in the MRA keep to the opinion that women lack the empathy for men necessary to sympathize with their issues, and as a result do not try to impress women with the rationality of men’s cause, they will not sway most of the population since even most MEN find this opinion of women grotesque. The MRA needs to push hard with their rational arguments and leave anger and ad hominums in the garbage heap as much as possible.

    I keep hearing MRA people saying things like “don’t worry, we are in our growing phase, later we’ll narrow our focus and weed out the angry, scary bits.”. Well, that’s all fine and good, but don’t be surprised when rational people take a look at the movement as a whole and are horrified by what they see inside it, and don’t be surprised if feminists just USE the existence of the MRA as MORE fodder for their worldview that the things are “vewy, vewy scawy” out there in a world of misogyny.

    This is my rant. I am very interested in the MRA cause but I think they are making some big mistakes in alienating most of the population.

    • Francis Roy says:

      “…they demand more and more mattresses to cover a pea”. Do you get credit for this analogy? I thought it was very evocative.

      I guess so. I’ve been looking for years for a way to express the the trend of ever refining one’s scope and degree of grievances to the absurd. If this does the trick, then I’m glad.

      The rant was very articulate but I’m not sure venting at feminists is the best way to convince anyone but the already converted. The arguments of the MRA are mostly rational and I think hitting people with those repeatedly is the surest road to agreement.

      I understand that, and I’ll gently remind you that I was venting, letting off some steam. Humans get to do that occasionally. This individual was obviously practised at speaking for her side, and made pronouncements regarding men and MRA’s that demonstrated a smug ignorance. It is my interlocutor’s ignorance of men, the bigotry and prejudice demonstrated toward us in various other comments that led me to believe the the likelihood that s/he was unaware of of anything other than the feminist/female side of the argument.

      I’m in strong disagreement that just withholding value will get the MRA very far as I don’t believe anything close to a majority of men will join that movement. The MRA needs to convince ordinary men and women that things are unfair, just like feminism had to do back in the day. Without those people, I think the MRA is doomed to obscurity.

      Admittedly, withholding value is a MGTOW strategy, not an MRA strategy. Men’s Rights Activists are active, by definition. Withholding one’s value is a very much removing one’s self from the battle field as a means of self-preservation, refusing to give away time and energy to those who either don’t appreciate, abuse it or denigrate it. I at times make the error of speaking for myself, rather than being descriptive of one specific position. The error is mine and I should have clarified, this mostly flowed out naturally.

      As long as people in the MRA keep to the opinion that women lack the empathy for men necessary to sympathize with their issues, and as a result do not try to impress women with the rationality of men’s cause, they will not sway most of the population since even most MEN find this opinion of women grotesque. The MRA needs to push hard with their rational arguments and leave anger and ad hominums in the garbage heap as much as possible.

      But this demonstrated lack of empathy was the very motivation for my response! I’m sure you don’t have the time to read the comments that I’ve linked to, nor to expose yourself to individuals ranging from women like Germane Greer to tumblr feminists, but understand that people miss the obvious all the time. Can you tell me the count of all the telephone poles on your street? You see them near-daily I’m sure. You observe their existence, but have you ever taken the time to notice that they have metal tags with codes, and other plastic tags with different codes? Have you noticed that they are of a consistent distance from the road, etc? We are surrounded by such thing, yet, they fall beneath our notice because they are common place.

      While it is true that there are many women and feminists who are fair, who are kind, who are respectful, what may not be apparent to you as someone who is likely all of the preceding, is that there are those who are not. Having only personal life experience to go by (where on earth would one find a study that demonstrates bigotry against men?!) I would conservatively say, that in North America, that a good 50%+ of the population demonstrate these anti-traits.

      I keep hearing MRA people saying things like “don’t worry, we are in our growing phase, later we’ll narrow our focus and weed out the angry, scary bits.”. Well, that’s all fine and good, but don’t be surprised when rational people take a look at the movement as a whole and are horrified by what they see inside it, and don’t be surprised if feminists just USE the existence of the MRA as MORE fodder for their worldview that the things are “vewy, vewy scawy” out there in a world of misogyny.

      To the former, I can only say that if someone is approaching it from a rational point of view, they will see past it. I, at first had the same response, and I’m now part of the movement. As for feminists using it against us? They already do. It is not so much the “tone” that people are responding to, I think, but rather that it is an idea that is 180 degrees from what they are currently comfortable with, and so, being human, they reject it simply because it requires work to process such a large scale set of issues.

      This is my rant. I am very interested in the MRA cause but I think they are making some big mistakes in alienating most of the population.

      I don’t view what you’ve said as anything resembling a rant. I think you’ve brought up some excellent heartfelt points, and you’ve done so judiciously and diplomatically. Allow me to pose a question both for an answer to engender reflection: you claim that we are “alienating most of the population”. What metrics do you use to found this assertion upon? Your own personal experience? A small group of people, or do you include “the” population? I would hazard to guess, based upon my own inquiries and observations that few people who aren’t feminists or men who’ve been chewed up in court are even aware of these issues. How many men on the planet have ever been made aware that they have no reproductive rights? This is a base, even elemental observation, yet, how many men are you aware of to whom it has even occurred to think of the question?

      Perhaps at the moment we come across as abrasive. I understand that, and I understand the concern of those who want fairness that this might drive people away–but history shows that until people march, protest and are vocal, that they remain ignored. There’s the factor of a threshold to be considered. At one time, Feminists were viewed as shrill, hysterical harpies. Today, they are in most positions of power, or at the very least are paid lip-service to by those who are. You make the argument that our message will not be listen to–yet it was not until we became loud and spoke up that people were even aware of us or our issues. I’ll gladly accept negative attention over no attention at all. I’d rather gain one follower in a million than one in none. Until we started being loud and abrasive, we weren’t considered a nuisance because were weren’t considered at all.

      What caused me to join the MHRM is simply that someone was finally able to articulate all of this unprocessed stuff that I’d lived with for years. When I did try to bring this up to the average joe or ultra-hard core feminists, I was not listened to, no clarifying questions were asked. The response was typical “Your issues don’t exist, and they’re wrong”.

      Your issues don’t exist. And they are wrong.

      This is how men are generally treated by society at large, small pockets of decent people excepted.

      It wasn’t until I heard other men speaking up, finely dissecting and deconstructing what I’ve always known but could not express that I was able to let go of a big chunk of the shame that I had that came from simply being treated as a male most often is, in this society. This shame was not a result of The Patriarchy, but of the direct denigration and abuse of interpersonal, cultural and political power by women. Radical Feminism is simply the structured extreme and justification for this kind of behaviour toward men.

      If we are shouting, it’s because we’re hurt. Want us to shut up? Remove the vice so that we have no reason to complain. Want us to speak more nicely? Help us remove the source of the pain.

      We are working for change. We want men to be treated kindly and fairly. We are not asking for privileges, but simply for a fair and equitable shake. Until such time as we get notice, people, being who they are, will not become aware. Can you point me to any media pieces on television, radio or national newspapers that address the issue and evoke the population’s desires to act?

      Quiet voices get lost in the din of the discourse. This is just human nature. It is better to gain notice as the very loud and boisterous individual at a party who eventually calms down and when listened to, makes excellent points than to be the quiet and reasonable wall-flower ignored by all.

      Notice to which of my many blog posts you’ve responded to. Not the quiet exposition of facts, not the humorous pieces, not the thoughtful highly worked-at pieces. You responded to a vent. You noticed, you replied. Having engendered this conversation, are you still turned off? There’s no reason–or emotional need–to shout when you feel listened to.

      Generally speaking, I believe that I come across as gentle and kind and fair, and generally speaking, what I say is wilfully dismissed, facts be damned–because it is human nature to not have to make an effort if it can be avoided.

      Thanks for giving me an opportunity to speak and for your listening. This approach on your and other people’s parts will do more to soften the delivery of our message than a million people telling us ‘don’t be so vocal, listen to women’.

      • Kerina says:

        Thank you for your very thoughtful response.

        You wrote:
        “But this demonstrated lack of empathy was the very motivation for my response!”

        I made a mistake in my post of not being specific about what I was talking about. I wasn’t responding to anything you said when I wrote about “…the MRA keep to the opinion that women lack the empathy for men”. I believe you when you say that you were responding to a lack of empathy on the part of that particular person. What I was trying to object to is the idea, which I have now heard many times coming from some MGTOWS and MRA’s, that women are biologically incapable of empathizing with men’s issues. I think this assumption is, not only totally untrue, but very hurtful to the MRA cause because it prevents MRA’s from trying to convince women of their plight.

        I have more to say but I’m starving now and can’t make my brain work properly. I do want to correct one thing though. I have responded to another piece of yours. I was completely moved by something you wrote a while back and I believe I told you so in both the comments and in a private e-mail. Before that my excuse is that I was unaware of your blog. So-there ;-)

      • Francis Roy says:

        I wasn’t responding to anything you said when I wrote about “…the MRA keep to the opinion that women lack the empathy for men”. I believe you when you say that you were responding to a lack of empathy on the part of that particular person.

        Yes, this is so.

        Please see the rest of the out-of-control long reply to your comment here: Why might some men think that women cannot empathize with them?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: