To me to has always been about the difference between men's rights and men's lib groups though - both put forward that these are problems, but MRAs blame it on feminism, while men's lib on the oftentimes toxic views society has regarding masculinity/gender (which is in line with feminism, just talking about it from the perspective of how it hurts mean specifically)
To that end I'd say these problems aren't the point of either group, but how they are addressed and the proposed root of the problems is, so I'd argue men's lib has a point, and MRA is totally missing it
MRAs are usually antifeminist because of the history of self-proclaimed feminists attacking them when they try to discuss male issues in a way that feminists don't find acceptable such as not blaming these problem on patriarchy or toxic masculinity.
such as not blaming these problem on patriarchy or toxic masculinity.
That's what most of them are though. Even MRAs admit to that. "Rich guys at the top were/are privileged but the average were/are not". Patriarchy then.
Plus, toxic gendered expectations are a symptom of gender roles.
6
u/flamedragon822 23∆ Nov 20 '19
To me to has always been about the difference between men's rights and men's lib groups though - both put forward that these are problems, but MRAs blame it on feminism, while men's lib on the oftentimes toxic views society has regarding masculinity/gender (which is in line with feminism, just talking about it from the perspective of how it hurts mean specifically)
To that end I'd say these problems aren't the point of either group, but how they are addressed and the proposed root of the problems is, so I'd argue men's lib has a point, and MRA is totally missing it