Tackling Men’s Rights is a great idea… in theory.
Men have some legitimate grievances. Dads are undervalued in our culture and divorced moms, by default, usually get custody of the kids. People tend to care less about men getting battered, molested or killed than women. And the realignment of traditional gender roles has led to contradictory expectations… are men supposed to be strong now, or sensitive?
So, I completely understand men wanting to get together to address these inequities, or even just talk what being a man in the 21st century should mean.
Except that none of the MRA websites appear to be doing this.
In fact, they hardly mention men’s issues at all. Instead, most are cesspits of burning misogyny spending half their time blaming (Western) women for everything wrong with the world and the other half figuring out foolproof ways to trick them into bed.
Mostly, these guys seem bitter about not having packs of underage, sandwich-making supermodels at their beck and call. They totally would if it weren’t for stupid Feminism, amirite??
And I keep wondering whether these guys have an actual end goal in mind, or if they just like getting together in thinly-veiled hate groups to bitch and moan. Of course, it’s tough to formulate a clear agenda when your group is constantly making these nine baffling arguments:
1. Modern women are a bunch of indiscriminate sluts that are too hard to get into bed
Men’s Rights Activists seem pretty irate about the degree of sluttiness in today’s modern woman. Shows like Sex And The City, these guys claim, made sleeping around seem too okay. Now, instead of being appropriately shy and virginal, we’re sampling a whirlwind variety of uglies on the great “cock carousel,” while remaining too high and mighty to have sex with every “nice guy” who likes us.
So… which is it, guys? Are we too selective or too promiscuous? Or are all of us only supposed to be having sex with you, specifically?
2. You can tell modern women are broken because of all the tattoos
This one truly confuses me.
I don’t happen to have any tattoos myself, mostly because I don’t trust that my tastes won’t change five years down the line. But pretty much everyone else my age or younger has a tattoo these days. Because it’s in style.
That includes my hyper-Christian cousin who won’t ingest sugar, gluten, or caffeine and saved herself for marriage.
But to hear Men’s Rights Activists tell it, tattoos are a sure sign of promiscuity, misandry, and general moral degeneracy. I don’t begin to understand their fixation, but they’ll frequently post “shocking” pictures of tattooed women like they’ve uncovered their secret meth habit or participation in dog fights.
A little trivia: a lot of men have tattoos as well. But no one seems to care.
3. Western women are too fat and don’t hate themselves enough for it
While it’s true that developed nations are currently experiencing an obesity epidemic, for reasons that are debatable and complex, this is hardly a female-only problem. As of last year, for example, 35% of American men and 40% of American women were obese.
When accounting for men’s higher metabolisms, the issue seems practically gender-equivalent. It’s not as though men are all working hard to maintain a svelte physique while women are collectively exploding.
But the MRA doesn’t care about obese men. No, they get a pass, whereas female obesity is taken as a personal insult. Apparently, we have a duty to give you all boners which we’re currently shirking. Never mind the health concerns… what’s truly important here is being attractive enough to keep you sexually interested, even if we’ll be hated for either not having sex with you or for having sex at all.
And to make matters worse, these women don’t hate themselves enough for not looking enough like the videos you jack off to. It’s not enough for you to just not date them… you’re angry that they dare to exist in your airspace at all, that their first priority isn’t measuring up to your fantasies and that they’d rather eat real food than get a taste of your sweet, sweet dong. Regardless of how attractive you may actually be.
But we’re the ones who seem entitled. Okaaaaay…
4. Feminists should understand how unfair it is for men to be the only ones drafted, die in combat, let women and children escape first on a sinking ship, or be expected to pay for everything on dates
What’s weird about this is how these expectations never came from Feminism in the first place.
Quite the opposite, in fact. They’re part of a centuries-old code that assigns different roles to men and women. According to this code, women are fragile beings to be protected and funded as they care for the next generation while men should do all the dirty and/or dangerous work.
So, do you think that’s unfair or not?
Because from what I can tell, the MRA wants to return to an earlier time when these expectations were even stronger, which hardly makes them seem like a raw deal for you guys. More like a contract for an offer we “can’t refuse” that we ending up signing with a gun to our head. One where we trade the bulk of our everyday power for first priority in highly-unlikely situations.
And if you think this deal is unfair too, you really should be backing the feminists. Because they’re the ones who have been fighting for the right to be in combat zones for decades, as well as the right for enough workplace power to share the economic burden. They’re also the ones petitioning for paternity leave, as well as the general notion that you bring more to a family than a paycheck, or that you shouldn’t be forced to adhere to traditional gender roles.
From what I can tell, the MRA cherrypicks various stances from whatever disparate female arguments help them build a victimization narrative. They’re fusing traditional expectations with feminist reforms, then complaining about the unfair advantages even though the same women aren’t usually raging for both sides. Otherwise, why bitch about having to go off to war to the women trying to join you?
5. If feminists really cared about equal rights, they’d be fighting for Men’s Rights too
Well, to my way of thinking, they do. They’ve been fighting for years to equally contribute to the workplace and free everyone from rigid definitions about how people of a given gender should act.
For example, I fully support stay-at-home dads. I believe there’s nothing wrong with the dad staying home with the children if the woman makes more money and/or feels more passionate about her career than her husband does.
While I can’t speak for every feminist (some women are crazy and can declare themselves “feminists” while making lunatic claims and there’s little we can do about it), I’m guessing feminists would generally be much more likely to support a man’s equal ability to be a good caregiver than would a more traditionalist woman who believes women are uniquely suited to raising kids.
But that doesn’t seem to be on the MRA radar. If I can speak from personal experience, the last time a man argued with me about the “men’s rights” he felt women should be championing, he was wondering why feminists aren’t more upset about how prostitutes charge high prices that poor men can’t afford. It was on an earlier blog post of mine, and I didn’t even get the sense that he was trolling.
He genuinely felt that the way feminists weren’t concerning themselves with lowering the price of illegal activities so men could get laid proved their unsavory motives, and none of my analogies about hypothetical petitioning for cheaper heroin seemed to get my point across.
6. Men are about to replace us all with fembots, because women won’t act like women anymore
The MRA are constantly threatening to replace us all with fembots if we don’t start shaping up and behaving the way they believe we should.
The technology is almost there, they keep saying, and we’ll all be out of work the moment they can get their hands on compliant sexbots who will do what they’re told without any back talk.
And despite the fact that 99% of women I know have a “go get ’em, Tiger” attitude about the whole fembot deal, the MRA’s seem convinced that we’ll soon finally be getting our long-deserved comeuppance.
I’ve seen articles about the rise the fembots where many men comment about how women are finally getting what’s been coming to them and have no right to be so pissed off about it, even though literally none of the female commenters had said anything to indicate being pissed off about it.
Because why would we be? If you want a dead-eyed female body form with no free will to cater to your every sexual demand without any argument or expectations of being treated with dignity, then the bulk of us will be happy to weed you straight out of the dating pool.
But the most ridiculous part of this argument, of course, is the idea that women no longer act like women.
Why would men assume they understand what being a women means better than an actual woman would?
Shouldn’t acting “like a woman” inherently be defined by how women act?
How would these guys react if we, say, told them that they’re getting the whole man deal wrong… that we women have better ideas what being a man really entails and we’re about to build robots that will be more accurate?
7. Women are getting too uppity, as are transsexuals and blacks
You’d think that if the MRA considers a built robot more accurately female than someone born with a vagina and its associated hormones, then a trans-woman who is more traditionally-female should easily be able to out-woman naturally-occurring vaginas without breaking a sweat.
Yeah, no. Transexuals, at least according to the Return of Kings, are just a bunch of mentally-ill men who are trying to trick alpha men into falling for a “freak in a dress.” They’ve compiled a list of pitfalls to clue you into those particular shenanigans, mostly involving the ways trans women tend to be too academic and feminine.
And because they’re especially worried about “failed” men throwing in the towel by becoming women, they’ve also run a “helpful” article about preventing omega men from defecting to the other side out of desperation.
But why stop at transphobia when you’ve got a massive history of racism to exploit? MRA groups routinely make shockingly insulting remarks about women of color, too. We Hunted the Mammoth, for example, which markets itself as a kinder, gentler men’s rights activist site, likes to talk about black women being a lower class of female. Like in this article, entitled “Why Black Females are More Repulsive than Any Other,” where they discuss how even black men supposedly don’t want to get with black women because they’re so arrogant, unattractive and self-serving.
Look, while I realize that some fringe feminist TERF’s have had really unenlightened attitudes about the transsexual community and that white feminists aren’t always well-schooled on the importance of intersectional issues, no garden-variety feminists are routinely spouting off extremist hate-speech like this. Feminists may have their flaws, but at least they aren’t trying to reassert cis/white/male/heterosexual rights to the top of the hierarchy with the sort of vigor the MRA groups routinely employ.
8. Society needs to return to an earlier time, when men were men and good women made them sandwiches
One thing MRA men don’t seem to realize about living life in the 1950’s or earlier, is that male responsibilities used to include the art of chivalry.
That means you didn’t get pissed off about women not sleeping with you, because you respected their natural right to preserve bodily integrity.
That means you didn’t throw the words “slut” and “bitch” around like a badge of honor, because you cleaned up your language in the presence of ladies. Even if they were fat or cut their hair.
That means if you knocked an unmarried lady up, you had to marry her and support your children if you ever wanted to be accepted in respectable society. Which makes MRA complaints about modern child and spousal support demands seem ridiculous, since you would’ve had an even greater duty to do this in the past.
9. Women need to accept that men have a biological imperative to get with young, attractive women. But gold diggers are evil.
Yet another case of wanting to have your cake and eat it too.
The MRA frequently claim that the desire for much younger, super-attractive women shouldn’t be vilified. Men are just doing what comes naturally, because they have a biological imperative to mate with the healthiest, most fertile women who will give their offspring the strongest chance of survival.
So women shouldn’t be upset by 50-year-old men marrying women in their twenties, because they are just doing what their DNA tells them that Nature intended.
Yet women who care about a man’s income are greedy and evil, because they shouldn’t be superficial like that.
Okay, if we’re going off the premise that whatever our evolutionary drive to ensure the greatest chance for our offspring’s survival should be accepted, then we really shouldn’t be wildly hypocritical about that, right?
Well, women should theoretically be at least as interested in keeping themselves and their children alive. The ones who weren’t were less likely to pass their genes along to the next generation, so logic tells us that they would’ve been as invested in survival as men would’ve been.
And a woman, back in the jungle days, would’ve been handicapped by reproduction. Being massively pregnant (which most relationships would’ve resulted in), then needing to cart around a baby and constantly breastfeed would’ve been a real burden on her ability to get enough resources to survive. She didn’t have daycare and formula available.
So she would’ve needed a man to regularly bring her resources. Otherwise, she and her baby probably wouldn’t have made it. It wouldn’t even have mattered whether the one bringing her resources was actually the father of her offspring, because the mother’s genes are getting passed on, either way. His apparent ability to hunt well and generosity would’ve been his most important quality.
Additionally, if a man was devoting all of his time and resources to her, he probably wasn’t about to abandon her in the cold to chase after some other women. It meant that she and her baby wouldn’t die.
And I can’t see any reason why evolutionary rules wouldn’t persist in women today as much as they would in men. If responding to attractive women should be natural and acceptable in men, then so should women be respected for wanting strong men with a fat wallet who lavish them with presents.
So which is it, MRA? Do you want to respect our respective biological imperatives or start demanding something more evolved?
To recap, Men’s Rights Activists claim legitimacy by pointing out valid problems faced by the modern man, but actually spend the bulk of their time talking about how women actually enjoy all the privileges and are inherently evil, unless they’re desperate enough to do whatever men tell them to.
They complain about how said privileges are unfair, then demand that the world return to an imaginary time where men all married virginal women, who were half their husband’s age, who accepted their role as sex slave and baby-makers while showing proper gratitude for their first rights to exit a sinking ship, in the unlikely even that it happened.
The failure of modern women to understand that they are women (and that black women and trans-women are the lowest of low) will eventually result in their fembot replacement as well as the eventual realization that, despite all evidence to the contrary, their chosen lives with more egalitarian beta males thinly veil unrealized disappointment. And boy, won’t they be sorry then.