Working for mens rights is wrong. Read before you down vote.

YetAnotherCommenter · 2014-04-12T15:16:11+00:00

This is precisely why the name "Men's Human Rights Movement" is used.

It begins with the proposition that all human beings have a set of rights which they possess by virtue of their humanity. This is an inherently egalitarian position.

It then acknowledges that male human beings sometimes experience some of these rights being violated simply because of being male.

It then proceeds to address this problem by way of a movement.

CMOS222 · 2014-04-12T15:18:26+00:00

It is YOUR assumption that wanting men's rights = wanting to dominate women. Not ours. It's the common assumption made by people who hear the term for the first time and think they know all about what it means, without reading anything written by MRAs or exploring what MRAs mean when they use the term.

nigglereddit · 2014-04-12T15:23:12+00:00

So call yourself an egalitarian. Call yourself a gender equality advocate. Call yourself Schlomo The Magical Clown. Call yourself whatever you like.

What matters is what you do, not what you call yourself. The whole point of men's rights is that we live in a world where for many people including yourself the idea of a man having rights is framed as automatically meaning domination over women.

When we can talk about our rights without someone immediately shouting that it's not fair to women's we'll be making progress.

SirSkeptic · 2014-04-12T15:41:02+00:00

I also feel uncomfortable with the term MRM. While we will never fight for privilege and unfair treatment like the feminists do, we do need to concentrate of undoing the un-equal treatment that men face in our society just for being men.

JtO gave a good rationalisation for retaining the word Men in the title. Any movement that does not specifically state that we will fight for the equalisation rights of men (say egalitarianism) will be flooded with feminists with the opposite agenda. They are much better funded and promoted in the media than we are.

I think the MHRM is a fair compromise.

oneiorosgrip · 2014-04-12T16:00:17+00:00

Talking about the MRM as a movement to impose male domination over women is a clear sign that you have read/watched/experienced absolutely nothing of the movement.

Also, you guys are submitting your troll posts too close together. It makes them way too obvious.

ghebert001 · 2014-04-12T16:35:26+00:00

Unlike feminism, we don't tout any dictionary definitions of equality try to convince people that that's what we're all about while our actions are the exact opposite. Our actions will speak for themselves and in time there will be no doubt in anyone's eyes that we aim for equality between men and women...not equality for men and men alone.

AloysiusC · 2014-04-12T15:17:34+00:00

If you want to fight famine, would you propose doing so for all people and no subsets? No. So your argument fails. "Can't we all just love each other?" has never solved any problems.

labeling it under mens rights makes us sound like assholes

Ok downvote earned for total ignorance and still telling others what they should or should not do.

One more just for laughs:

We should be working under a name that can imply we want equality and not to be dominate over woman.

So fighting for animal rights implies wanting animals to dominate over humans. Lol. You need to read a lot more and think even more.

geoboy1234 · 2014-04-12T17:02:35+00:00

You are right. And we are creating better world with equality, by standing up for ourselves, just like women do.

Exactly_what_I_think · 2014-04-12T23:58:02+00:00

What have you done to help?

Title	Working for mens rights is wrong. Read before you down vote.
Author	Zacky007
Upvotes	0
Comments	18
Date	April 12, 2014 3:08 PM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/22uv9a/working_for_mens_rights_is_wrong_read_before_you/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/working-for-mens-rights-is-wrong-read-before-you.1001748 https://theredarchive.com/post/1001748

Comments