Why “men’s rights” groups are wrong (and Warren Farrell is a misogynist bigot)

C0CKPUNCHER · 2012-11-08T16:40:50+00:00

He is focused on men as perpetrators as if that nullifies men as victims - when the reverse is true. To paraphrase 'more men kill themselves than women, but that doesn't matter because men kill themselves for reasons and women kill themselves for better reasons'.

He really struggles to understand what is a salient fact and what isn't, he really struggles to understand what is a meaningful in context argument and what isn't.

MRB2012 · 2012-11-08T15:44:19+00:00

Yes they do, but this is an abstract statement that ignores the main perpetrators and reasons. Boys are not bullied by girls for being boys, they are mainly bullied by other boys—who also bully girls

That does not make male bullying victims any less bullied.

When men are victims of interpersonal violence it is usually from other men, and often related to police brutality, racism and Islamophobia, ableism, homophobia and transphobia.

That does not make the male murder victims any less murdered. Further, hate crimes and police brutality are actually pretty rare. Most murders are not due to police corruption or bigotry.

When male soldiers are sent to kill and die, they are sent by male generals and male presidents, not women

No, the women just vote the warmongers into office and put "support our troops" stickers on their cars while blissfully pretending that war is like a video game that young men actually enjoy.

Turning Paul Nathanson’s version of history right-side up, the evidence shows that for most of human history people lived in equality, with no rigid division between production/reproduction.

No. For most of human history, the local warlord ruled with an iron fist, and the 99% of men who weren't in charge got screwed over just like the women.

(We don’t need “men’s studies” to study masculinity, we have feminist and socialist analysis)

That's like saying we don't need psychology because we have the journals of schizophrenics.

The Russian Revolution started on International Women’s Day, culminating in a movement that ended WWI

The Russian Revolution (playing straight into German hands) ended Russian involvement in World War I. It also led to Joseph Stalin's reign of terror. Not sure that's the example you want to use here to support the idea of women being necessary to bring about positive political change (or maybe it is, given the sheer idiocy in this article).

ignatiusloyola · 2012-11-08T15:47:17+00:00

So apparently breast cancer gets more funding than prostate cancer because heart disease is misdiagnosed in Women?

And boys are not bullied by girls - I want to say "citation needed" and also "where the hell did you grow up?"

Okay, I am going to stop going point by point.

I think it is hilarious when they point out how the Men's Groups "believe the goal of true equality and human rights is best served by conducting inclusive conversations based on facts and evidence, not by promoting ideology or special interest agendas."

This site just proves that point by not using any facts or evidence in their claims.

sibqm_lmvm · 2012-11-08T16:08:46+00:00

Remember, boys... You don't have any real problems. Any perceived problems are actually misogyny in action. /sarcasm

T_T

vonhattendorf · 2012-11-08T18:50:44+00:00

Okay, for my first comment on this sub, I feel it necessary to address this one,

the evidence shows that for most of human history people lived in equality, with no rigid division between production/reproduction. There are obvious biological differences regarding childbearing, but child-raising was a collective task—and women also gathered food (which often provided more food than the hunt) and had equal say over community decisions. Without the nuclear family there was a free range of sexualities, and without a capitalist labour market there was neither racism nor disability oppression.

This is probably the single biggest turkey the SJW types try to sell. There is literally no evidence of how these societies operated outside of conjectured from a handful of archaeologists such as Marija Gimbutas who pretty much conjectured whole societies out of thin air from the findings of a handful of clay figurines. We have no way of knowing the social structure of societies that A) left almost no material remain, B) Had no writing and thus no way to transmit their ideas.

Feminist Historians jump to a lot of conclusions with absolutely no evidence but wishful thinking.

Miracle_Fruit · 2012-11-08T17:28:21+00:00

They call that picture "being exposed"? Looks more like libel to me, honestly.

megatuxracer · 2012-11-08T17:21:22+00:00

This was an extremely dishonest article. If the author wanted to find what is wrong witih the MRM, she could have found several honest criticisms.

dermanus · 2012-11-08T19:08:03+00:00

His main point seems to be that our arguments about men's issues don't hold because none of them are caused by explicit male opression, in the sense of "I am bullying you because you are male."

Apparently getting bullied "for acting like a queer" makes someone homophobic, but doesn't say anything about what our social expectations for men are.

Apparently taking reasoning further than one step is not something the author excels at.

Hamakua · 2012-11-08T15:33:33+00:00

[permanently deleted]

RightsMod · 2012-11-08T21:08:16+00:00

[permanently deleted]

btardmcniggerfaggot · 2012-11-08T16:29:14+00:00

This is partially because women’s health has been ghettoized into what some have called “bikini medicine” that reduces women’s health to breasts, ovaries, uterus. Women have higher rates of misdiagnosed heart disease because their symptoms have been called “atypical”—because the science on heart attack symptoms (amongst others) was derived from middle-class white men.

by the time the average woman has her first heart attack, the average man has been dead for three years.

The main causes of bullying are sexism, racism, ableism, homophobia and transphobia—issues “men’s issues” ignore.

bullshit.

Boys are not subjected to the systematic sexist bullying that drove Amanda Todd to suicide

yes they are. and they don't get anonymous doxxing the perpetrators of the crime either.

And many more girls attempt suicide than men, often related to a history of sexual abuse—an endemic problem that “men’s issues” clubs ignore.

except they're not really trying to kill themselves. they're just doing it to get attention. and sexual abuse is a concern of mens rights groups. specifically: the sexual abuse of men that gets ignored and downplayed.

In terms of interpersonal violence, the vast majority of domestic abuse and rape victims are women.

half truth. women commit as much or more domestic violence than men, and men are almost as likely to be forced into intercourse as women.

It’s true that more men die on the jobs (though less men are sexually assaulted on the jobs), but this is not because of women but because of the (often male) boss—and the solution is strengthen trade union rights, another issue ignored by “men’s issues” clubs.

wrong, the reason they die on the job is because they work in the death profession. and the reason they do that is because of discrimination in the educational system and the societies gender role that men are disposable and have to be the providers.

AnthonyZarat · 2012-11-08T16:00:29+00:00

Misleading, dishonest, and disappointing article. The author misrepresents the men's rights stand that "equal rights for men and boys is ONE OF MANY legitimate civil rights narratives" with a dishonest false flag claim that "equal rights for men and boys is THE ONLY legitimate civil rights narrative." Egalitarian women and men who fight for equal protection under the law for men and boys do not detract from other worthy civil rights agendas.

callthebankshot · 2012-11-08T17:41:52+00:00

Summary: Men's problems are cause by other men. Women have it worse.

Haven't heard that before. /s

ErasmusMRA · 2012-11-08T15:33:28+00:00

Question for anyone masochistic enough to read the blog post, is there anything worthwhile in there?

Theophagist · 2012-11-08T21:09:14+00:00

that reduces women’s health to breasts, ovaries, uterus

What an utterly asinine statement. In the very first paragraph the author is already grasping at straws to turn every privilege a woman has into a curse. I don't have time to read any more words from an intellectually dishonest individual.

dermanus · 2012-11-08T17:24:17+00:00

Both the banner someone vandalized and the banner next to it have been removed, and not by CAFE or the university.

This is the second socialist to write an article critical of CAFE. Here is the first.

2012-11-08T17:44:29+00:00

Conveniently ignores some of our most important concerns such as men getting harsher sentences for the same crimes. Wonder what they would say about that. It usually becomes clear who the real bigots are when that gets brought up.

AloysiusC · 2012-11-08T21:37:43+00:00

Please don't give these people traffic and ad impressions. You're fueling them, making them money and giving them reason to keep churning out this drivel.

Surfing_magic_carpet · 2012-11-08T18:36:14+00:00

Mary Bell When boys are bullied by girls, they get murdered.

This whole article starts from a conclusion then works to prove itself. That's bad writing right there. Rather than saying "Are men's rights groups bad?" then examining the various views of men within those groups, the article starts out with "Men are whiny and want to play the victim. Here are things they've talked about."

ZimbaZumba · 2012-11-08T17:15:58+00:00

I am guessing my comment on the page won't get passed moderation so I'll post it here.

The Socialist movement was the champion of the plight of the common man. The fact that now it attacks those who fight for issues that effect them would make Marx turn in his grave.

This article employs the age old maxim of demonize the enemy and tell the big lie. The fact the author should dismiss the educational gap with such a dismissive wave of the hand is breath taking. Keeping men uneducated has always been a tactic of the ruling classes. The graffiti on the Warren Farrell poster is reminiscent of Hitlers Brown Shirts, Farrell is one of the more articulate and reasoned voices on gender issues effecting men. Anonymous Ad Hominem’s are easy, cowardly and cheap.

This whole article is sad and discouraging, especially so in that it comes from the Socialist Worker. The Socialist movement needs to return to its roots and retrieve it from those who have co-opted it for their own agenda. As a long time Socialist all of this saddens me.

mythin · 2012-11-08T18:11:00+00:00

The problem with “men’s rights” is how they generalize these experiences, who they ignore and who they blame. These groups claim there is a “large societal pattern of discrimination, ignorance and harmful public policy that disadvantages boys and men.” This implies that men are oppressed as men, and in relation or because of women—a claim that is justified using simplistic sound-bytes and “evidence” that is cherry-picked, ideologically-driven, and easily debunked.

And they support feminism why?

2012-11-08T21:15:27+00:00

6) legal: “women have higher rates of custody over children”

Given women provide the majority of unpaid labour raising children, it’s no surprise that courts might award more custody cases to the mother. But the legal system is not generally skewed towards women—as survivors of sexual assault and domestic violence can attest to. The legal system fails to challenge endemic sexism, while incarcerating poor, indigenous and racialized men—groups who also get no mention from “men’s issues” groups.

What a load of shit.

sigbox · 2012-11-08T21:25:58+00:00

The entire article was "Men's Rights is wrong because they don't focus on other people's issues."

We don't focus on other groups' issues because we are a MENS RIGHTS advocacy group.

2012-11-09T03:03:23+00:00

Getting outraged at criticism from pinkos is like getting outraged at criticism from nazis.

kronox · 2012-11-08T15:20:18+00:00

Stopped at "ghettoized". That is one terrible article.

Curebores · 2012-11-08T15:42:45+00:00

I had to stop reading that article when in point number 7 they equated being a stay-at-home mother with being a slave... "In the home, women still do the majority of unpaid labour, despite entry into the labour market."

They also trotted out the tired old "$0.70 on the dollar" horse for another round of whipping.

All in all it came across a lot like someone preaching hellfire and damnation to all us godless heathens...

2012-11-08T18:02:59+00:00

My comment is currently awaiting moderation. Pretty sure it'll never see the light of day even though I didn't write a single cuss. I love how feminists are so open to "conducting inclusive conversations based on facts and evidence" (actual quote).

rebelcanuck · 2012-11-08T19:42:33+00:00

Well, I am disappoint. I just met with a couple guys from this group yesterday, and then saw the poster for the Warren Farrell talk at a UofT building. And then I check out their website to see this on the front page.

I'm both excited that there's a men's rights group in my city now, ground zero for the Slutwalk, and disappointed (but I guess not that surprised) to see that they're under attack already. I guess it's mostly a good thing, seeing as how these arguments are so weak and self-serving.

Paxmagister · 2012-11-08T22:39:19+00:00

“we beg men to express feelings, but then when men do express feelings, we call it sexism, male chauvinism, or backlash.” (As someone who identifies as male I’m insulted by the claim that the only feelings I’m capable of expressing are sexist).

The statement was saying that your feelings, while not sexist, are interpreted by society as sexist. The claim wasn't that you only have sexist feelings.

MarioAntoinette · 2012-11-08T15:23:06+00:00

If you searched and replaced 'men's rights' with 'feminism', that article would start to make some sense.

actanonverba8 · 2012-11-08T21:42:30+00:00

Didn't bother to read it. Might as well be a "why the earth is flat" article to me.

andreipmbcn · 2012-11-09T00:50:36+00:00

Nash Sovyetsky Soyuz pokaryat Viz' mir ot Evropy k Neva na Vostok! Nad zimeloy, byezde budut pyet' Stolica, vodka, Sovyetsky medved' nash!

-Soviet March, Red Alert 3; rough transliteration

I couldn't resist. This is what I think of whenever I see people call themselves 'socialist'.

jolly_mcfats · 2012-11-08T19:11:34+00:00

You know, the fact that Feminism != Women's Rights (and therefore anti-feminism != misogyny) to the MRM, but it does to the rest of the world provides a real handle for groups like this to attack MRM.

I'm not saying that we shouldn't be critical of Feminism, but I do think that we need to keep hammering home that an attack on Feminism is not an attack on women's rights, as much as Feminists would like it to be. Once the phrase "Feminism is not the same as Women's Rights" is recognizable to the uninitiated, we'll have deprived groups like this with one of their most comfortable sources of misinformation.

2012-11-08T20:46:43+00:00

He feels the need to frame everything in the context of "oppression." He's totally missing the point.

xionaxa · 2012-11-08T20:55:51+00:00

essentially all the author tried to do is spin around issues and dismiss them by blaming men for the issues and stating that men are less capable and are less harmed by things then women.

purplepowerpete · 2012-11-09T01:17:54+00:00

Know what bugs me is that it always has to be about race or gender or sexuality with these people, ever thought maybe the person was being bullied because people didn't like them.

ThePigman · 2012-11-09T01:38:46+00:00

Fuck the writer. He/she doesn't even know the meaning of the word abstract!

Purple_Serpent · 2012-11-09T02:23:28+00:00

In summary:

#) MRA's say that men suffer from X more than women. But X in men is caused by A whereas X in women is caused by B. Therefore we don't care about X in men and only about X in women.

tigonometry · 2012-11-09T02:27:17+00:00

My comment on the site: I came across one comment in your article that I disagree with: "Given women provide the majority of unpaid labour raising children, it’s no surprise that courts might award more custody cases to the mother."

It's not about who put in the most unpaid (or paid, for that matter) labor into the rearing of the children. It's about whatever situation is in the best interests of the children.

You go on to say:

"But the legal system is not generally skewed towards women—as survivors of sexual assault and domestic violence can attest to. The legal system fails to challenge endemic sexism, while incarcerating poor, indigenous and racialized men—groups who also get no mention from “men’s issues” groups."

I feel that making this comparison is a little apples-to-oranges.

A_Shining_Paragon · 2012-11-09T05:12:31+00:00

Honestly, I only got as far as "ghettoized."

namae_nanka · 2012-11-09T11:17:03+00:00

a socialist and marxist about the unpaid labour of women:

"The wife, we are told, is the only unpaid servant! A more blatant lie could scarcely be imagined. As every educated person possessing the slightest acquaintance with the laws of England knows, the law requires the husband to maintain his wife in a manner according with his own social position; has, in other words, to feed, clothe and afford her all reasonable luxuries, which the law, with a view to the economic standing of the husband, regards as necessaries. This although the husband has no claim on the wife's property or income, however wealthy she may be. Furthermore, it need scarcely be said, a servant who is inefficient, lazy, or otherwise intolerable, can be dismissed or her wage can be lowered. Not so that privileged person, the legally wedded wife. It matters not whether she perform her duties well, badly, in- differently, or not at all, the husband's legal obligations remain just the same. "

considering that it was written 100 years earlier and the feminist propaganda has gotten only more deceitful, expect no valid reasoning with these sort of folks.

Apellosine · 2012-11-10T06:05:32+00:00

All arguments basically come down as: 1) Men may have problem but it doesn't matter because women have problem too 2) Patriarchy 3) Corporations

2012-11-08T18:00:46+00:00

Reds are enemies of all free men, now and forever. They've made that perfectly clear.

memymineown · 2012-11-08T18:31:53+00:00

They are socialists. No one cares what they think.

2012-11-09T00:03:56+00:00

Should've been preceded with a TRIGGER WARNING. :P

That was excrutiating.

Title	Why “men’s rights” groups are wrong (and Warren Farrell is a misogynist bigot)
Author	Sasha_
Upvotes	85
Comments	134
Date	November 8, 2012 3:15 PM UTC (13 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/12uxqe/why_mens_rights_groups_are_wrong_and_warren/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/why-mens-rights-groups-are-wrong-and-warren.1009673 https://theredarchive.com/post/1009673

Comments