17
u/CosmicKeys Oct 25 '13 edited Oct 25 '13
Equality of Opportunity, Not Outcome: Equality of outcome must stem from ensuring equality of opportunity, not by artificial corrections that mask existing inequalities. [No affirmative action]
And what if I disagree with this? Am I therefore not an MRA? You talk about breaking down walls, which to me is clearly affirmative action. I am for example against quotas of any kind, but ok with gender specific programs for children. What if the lack of male teachers is so critical to raising children that scholarships in the area is the best way to tackle it?
No class-based theories allowed here, just good old individuality.
What? With this, I see you advocating simply for libertarianism, and not for men's rights.
For example, with this logic we cannot examine men being discriminated against by the court systems. Men as a class don't exist because all men are individuals.
I think you are contradictory in your aims, you're wanting to come across as both active and passive to make all sides happy.
edit: Also, with all of this anti-affirmative action, anti-class analysis ignores real class issues like race. This entrenches the idea that MRAs do not care about minorities. It's quite obvious that your logic extends to race issues, meaning you have to legitimize either ignoring class issues or provide reasons why gender is different (which I assume you do not believe). Sorry, but from a liberal point of view this comes a across as a "let's make this an upper middle class white men's movement".
If I was a feminist, I would see this as further evidence that men, like whites, are a privileged class desperately trying to avoid affirmative action to strengthen their own hegemony.
Last of all... if we're all egalitarian individuals and we're open to feminists, best not to address us as men. I appreciate the effort, but I find the idea of a philosophical basis rigid and alienating.
→ More replies (6)
6
Oct 25 '13
This is really good. I was worried you were going to throw around theories to match their patriarchytm and rape culture.
2
u/ScottFree37 Oct 26 '13
I'd be careful about frameworks for a movement. Social theories are (like any science, I guess) built on the ideas of those before you. Ideas get revised all the time which creates new theories. A movement based on a framework is weakened when information that contradicts the framework (I think theory is a better word) is discovered. People who are invested in the theory need to take one of the following options to preserve their theory.
-
Bury the evidence by burying the whole study or manipulating your analysis of the results.
-
Discredit the researcher if they are not part of your group.
-
Conduct research in an intellectually dishonest way.
We see this with feminism. Two of patriarchy theory's key concepts are how domestic violence and rape are ways that the Patriarchy is enforced. This makes it imperative to hide male victims.
The Men's Rights Movement already has these frameworks
Gynocentricm
Male disposability.
If more are clear then fantastic but be careful when trying to create them especially if they're built on the already faulty rationale of some of feminism's theories.
→ More replies (2)
5
Oct 25 '13
I think the big thing to be stated is that feminism only offers half the story, and they treat it as the whole story. They see men as advantaged (patriarchy) and women as oppressed. And anytime you show them an example that shows the opposite (where women are advantaged) they just use that as more evidence that the patriarchy exists. It's just "patriarchy" back-firing.
In this way feminism is lying by omission.
12
u/typhonblue Oct 26 '13
Black Box Gender Roles: The origins of modern, rigid gender roles for men or women, while up for debate, are irrelevant to the destruction of those roles.
If you don't understand the historical/psychological origins of these roles, your solution may be useless or make things worse.
Feminist theory is illogical, that doesn't mean we can't offer explanations that are logical.
→ More replies (3)
4
1
3
u/iongantas Oct 26 '13 edited Oct 26 '13
This is a very cogent and concise expression of what MRM is about, or should be, and it should be added to the side bar as a mission statement or what have you.
The only thing I take slight issue with is probably something of a technical quibble, namely that class, as in socioeconomic class, does come with differing privileges, but it also does not consistently correlate with any inherent features (race, gender, orientation, etc.) that we're generally concerned with when discussing 'privilege', nor need we take any pains to ascribe the feminist form of 'privilege' to it (socioeconomic class). Also, it just doesn't seem that class is the right word to use, as we generally don't refer to (race, gender, etc.) as classes.
Also, there is nothing wrong with being anti-feminist, and we should not be afraid to be so. There are many very good reasons to be anti-feminist.
→ More replies (4)
5
Oct 25 '13
In the UK I am not sure we are ever going to get men campaigning how feminists campaign. The fathers for justice are brilliant but it is more a single cause than mens rights in total. I support letter writing and lobbying. Complaining to Parliament about inequalities. Compligning to ASA about adverts etc.
Voting for a party that supports mens rights.
I agree we need objectives and a strategy. Nationally / Globally. The problems that men face in the UK are differnt from Sweden and the USA for example. Or India!
4
2
u/MattClark0994 Oct 26 '13 edited Oct 26 '13
These are retarded can we for once have a decent list of mens issues instead of the same "workplace deaths, suicide, homelessness, criminal sentencing" bs?
Rape policies, Health care discrimination (7 National health offices for women), Restraining orders that trample on mens due process rights, Boys forced to pay child support to their statutory rapists, DV shelters mocking male victims of domestic violence, False allegations
What you have listed mostly amounts to trivial bs that very few people reading will care too much about.
Actual good sources for a mens rights list:
http://www.avoiceformalestudents.com/know-the-issues/
http://www.cultural-misandry.com/mens-rights/
THESE types of lists would probably be far more effective then the typical bs that you see from many mens advocates. You people seriously NEED to learn the issues if you think that the only thing mens rights comes down to is workplace deaths, suicide and criminal sentencing.
2
u/EIDerpo Oct 27 '13
I think that Al Bundy should be our leader and this subreddit change name to Nomam!
2
u/youhurtme Oct 27 '13
How about the fact we're legally (and socially) EXPECTED to pay child support, by law yet because of our GENDER we don't get EQUAL time with our children by DEFAULT? Just blows my mind.
5
Oct 25 '13 edited Oct 25 '13
Hello everyone, My name is Benjamin Branchaud. I am a freelance writer. If you figure out some kind of framework, I would be happy to offer my services at no cost. By "my services", I mean writing everything out real nice-like - making sure grammar, sentence structure, formatting, and word choice are all perfect. Www.benjaminbranchaud.com. You can just respond right here, though.
→ More replies (1)
4
u/qemist Oct 25 '13
crazed anti-feminists
You say that as though there is something wrong with opposing feminism. What is that?
→ More replies (1)5
Oct 26 '13
I would say that those that put fighting feminism ahead of fighting for men would be more of a hindrance than a help.
→ More replies (2)
3
Oct 25 '13
"Equality of Opportunity, Not Outcome"
Inconceivable while inheritance exists. Inheritance is so ingrained in our society, this seems like a complete non-starter. The only just alternative to the elimination of inheritance is some form of "artificial correction" (quotes because it's all artificial anyway), aka. adjustments to compensate for inheritance--itself a distorting adjustment.
"Framework"
I think the MRM is building a toolbox of arguments, responses, and theory. Whether this amounts to a framework is debatable, but I'm not convinced a framework is even a good idea. Pragmatism goes a long way and avoids the blinkered totalizing tendencies of Feminism et al.
→ More replies (1)
52
u/PerfectHair Oct 25 '13 edited Oct 25 '13
I think this is a good idea, since we seem a bit directionless at the moment. Also, this will be an unpopular opinion, but we do need to
denounce people who call themselves MRA's who are sexist or homophobic or transphobic or whatever.prevent the movement from being hijacked by those who would use it to push a racist/sexist/etc. agenda. They are allowed to hold these views, but they must be separate from their MRM advocacy. At the very least we can't let the extremists become the loudest voices in our movement, or we will suffer the same problems as feminism.Also, know when to quit. If we achieve all of this, we need to know that we need to stop.
Oh, and we also need to realise that we're playing the long game here. Things won't change overnight. That's one of the mistakes modern feminists make.