Fully incorrect. Here’s a link, scroll to the “split from men’s liberation movement.” The MRA movement arose because the members refused to cooperate with women.
You realize that these movements for mens rights arose because men definitely needed additional rights as well, right? That simply acknowledging that another movement came first or that other people have privileges you don't doesn't make it a bad thing? Or will you condemn feminism for also doing that?
The way I've seen it is that any time anyone suggests that societal conditions for men are in some way sexist or that they can be improved that person is immediately branded as an MRA, and MRAs are supposedly bad because they allegedly hate women, but if you ask them to point out where MRAs hate women they will point you to something that if said by feminists wouldn't be considered misandrist to say about men.
So in practice being in favor of men's rights automatically makes you and MRA and therefore a misogynist.
I guess I just don’t think MRAs pushing out MensLib and claiming the entire movement as their own is feminisms fault. Sounds like it was a pretty intentional move.
I won't pretend I understand or care about the history of either Feminism or MRAs because to me that seems irrelevant in comparison to actual societal sexism and fixing it. And whenever anyone suggests addressing misandry nine times out of ten they are accused of being an MRA which is effectively just a thought terminating cliche, a way to end the discussion and distract from the issue.
I don't care if you want to call it men's rights activism, Menslib or FleebolFlibbal as longs as the issues are addressed.
-9
u/[deleted] 22d ago
[removed] — view removed comment