Re: The Men’s Rights Movement is Making a Huge Mistake

“The Men’s Rights Movement” is not a homogeneous group of men. The Men’s Rights Movement encompasses, activists, as well as simple advocates, from all political, religious and cultural variations. You speak of it as though it has ideological tenets. It doesn’t. The sloppiness of your language creates many non-existent issues.Your biggest error is to vaguely conflate “The men’s rights movement” as a whole, with, what appears to me to be an criticism of one unnamed activist group, A Voice For Men.

“Men’s Rights Activists want men and women to be treated exactly the same in every situation.”

False. Men’s Rights Activists expect men and women to enjoy equivalent rights and be subject to corresponding duties, equally. We work and advocate toward these goals.

“Their basic philosophy boils down to this: we’re victims, too.”

False. The basic philosophy is that men and women should enjoy equivalent rights and be subject to corresponding duties, equally, and that the one-sided message that Feminists promote of men as perpetrators and women are victims is false, that men have issues to address, just as do women.

“The men’s rights movement has no answers to the individual men who wants to improve his life.”

And that is not the job of a movement to provide individual answers. It is up to the individuals to do so. May I recommend activists groups that serve men’s interests without self-declaration thereof? Consider The Innocence Project, or The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, both of which involve women who are focused on helping individuals, frequently men. Your understanding of the Men’s Rights Movement is shallow, when you fail to include the entirety of the movement.

You are also setting up a dichotomy, where your way is better, because it addresses the needs of certain men, in certain contexts. Fair enough, there may indeed be value in this, but one need not work only at the micro or macro level. Both can be complimentary.

“While they offer a societal fix to eliminate the damages caused by the Feminist movement, they can’t help the Average Joe on the street who is just trying to improve his day-to-day existence.”

While The Sanitation Department is trying to handle and deal with garbage and refuse from millions of homes, they can’t take out the individual’s trash to the curve and brush their teeth. If you were more precise in your thoughts, you’d never have made such a claim.

“The mistake that The Men’s Rights Movement is currently doing right now, as we speak, is allowing women to infiltrated their movement to become figureheads and spokespersons driving the policy and the weight of the movement itself.”

You haven’t given much thought to your commentary. Movements don’t have policies, organizations do. A movement is not an organization, though it may include many organizations moving toward the same generalized goals. I believe I understand where you’re coming from. You are trying to address the issues that you perceive in one organization, which is part of the generalized Men’s Rights Movement, A Voice for Men. Well, maybe that one organization is making a mistake, and maybe not. I have no evidence that women are driving policies, and even if they were, that the policies are driving a movement in a direction counter to the equitable treatment of men in law and culture.

Further, your whole attitude conveys the notion that you believe that men are weak and stupid, and are unqualified to accurately assess another’s character, for not reason other than the character has a vagina associated with it. Do you really believe that all men are so stupid as to be nothing but dupes?

“They’re [AVFM, presumably] allowing women to rise to the very top!”

I wasn’t aware that AVFM–or any men’s activist groups–had ceded organizational control or ownership to women.

“They are giving power and influence to a gender…”

First, assuming that they is AVFM, do you you believe that an organization can be run by a gender? Organizations are run by individuals. Which female individuals are now in charge of AVFM? Which female individuals are in exclusive charge of CAFE, or The National Coalition for Men? And what negative impact are they having on the consciousness, thoughts and actions of millions of men world-wide?

The truth is that rather than being solution oriented, of aiming for, working towards and achieving specific goals, such as reform in law, you are vaguely waving your hands and exclaiming that the sky is falling because men aren’t treating some female individuals as representatives of some form of gender ebola. You are merely advocating for chauvinism, and are moralistically wagging your finger at those who are actually doing what it takes to influence positive change.

Your whole argument boils down to “Girls got the Cooties!”

And what do you think will happen, if these women turn against AVFM? Hint: look at it’s history. And for the men’s movement as a whole? Allow me to point to the giant curb that many ideologues are being kicked to is made of the bones of the previous ones. The men’s movement as a whole has a simple direction: equivalent rights and duties for all. Don’t want to play nice? We aren’t shutting up. I will tackle this one issue. MGTOW do the very same thing: “No fair play? We go away.”

You repeat that “men” are transferring “influence and power” without having given any shred of evidence that women, generalized or individual when the movement as a whole is doing the very exact opposite, and, if you are referring to AVFM specifically, are failing to make clear lines of who, what, where, when and how, with precise evidence as to what the effects are.

“How do you know if the Men’s Rights Movement was a cause that had a chance to succeed?”

Every time a politician gets booted out, a policy changed, a mind influenced, a character expanded, it has succeeded. If you want to be useful, Roosh, rather than speak about a subject that you have evidently given very little thought, and on which you have done very little research, drive your readership to and have each donate $10 dollars. You want to protect men from Cootie Girls? Help us come up with a solution that controls our fertility. That is a solution for the Average Joe. Ironically, the Parsemus Foundation is headed by a woman.


2 thoughts on “Re: The Men’s Rights Movement is Making a Huge Mistake

  1. But we do offer a path for Men that want to improve themselves. It’s just not his overtly traditionalist path of “More Money” “More women” “More Sex”. It’s MGTOW, do what makes YOU happy. Will more money really make YOU happier? Will all the headache heartache and legal BS associated with relationships really make YOU happier? MGTOW is a path the Men’s Rights movement offers to help a man improve himself, it’s just not improving his ability to be a disposable utility object for the betterment of women.

    • Francis Roy says:

      I believe that the point that the author, someone who sells personal development courses, teaching interpersonal skills for men looking to be able to communicate with women on a sexual level is making, is that “the movement” isn’t giving courses on the specifics of addressing specific issues. I view this as attempting to create a dichotomy between teaching the small and changing the big, when both are necessary to effect change. The President of the United States doesn’t train new recruits in Boot Camp. He does policy.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: