Our most popular member is female. Heck, she's the only popular one! Likewise, "white knights" are some of the biggest feminism defenders. Do you think it's inevitable that gender/race/etc movements seek opposite gender/race spokespersons to relate and build credibility with the audience?

EpicJ · 2012-11-03T20:49:42+00:00

I explained a while back but I think it's because it's difficult to say it's male privilege when it's a female delivering the message.

MartialWay · 2012-11-04T00:25:57+00:00

GWW is popular mostly because she's just that good. Her popularity is the result of fairness and lack of bias, not the opposite.

dinky_hawker · 2012-11-03T20:40:35+00:00

sadly, yes. Just as women-firsters will insist that men check their privilege and shun sexist men, mras need women who will appear on the other side of the in-goup in order to communicate ideals.

2012-11-03T23:36:22+00:00

You have a point abut the main thing it does is prevent ad hominem attacks. being able to say, "men support feminism" or "women support mens rights." you don't get any "just cause youre a man" comments. It forces people to be (at least a little) more critical in breaking down an argument. It holds no actually validity but it is effective in disarming (some) ad hominem attacks among some other minor things. bottom line, those people are more likely to be listened to.

Edit: As for GWW I think her sex definitely helps in attracting listeners and readers because she can't be a "butthurt virgin who lives with his mom" or "A misogynist who just wants to keep abusing women."

PandaSandwich · 2012-11-03T21:11:17+00:00

Wait, who are you talking about? I'm not caught up to speed here.

Riesea · 2012-11-03T22:57:03+00:00

You think they would pay attention to the quality of the message instead of gender. I guess that's expecting too much of them.

DavidByron · 2012-11-04T00:13:06+00:00

White knights are not spokesmen for feminism. They are thug enforcers for feminism. So I think your thesis fails immidiately. Both feminists and the MRM find that women are better at PR and that's probably true for other groups too. It's not "opposite" it's just "woman".

blueyb · 2012-11-04T03:30:11+00:00

I first heard this described in a discussion of why white people were crucial in the racial civil rights movement. It boiled down to: "If black people could solve their own oppression, they would have already done so. They needed to get the help of the group oppressing them to make progress."

One of the biggest issues facing the men's rights movement is to get people to understand the power dynamic on how feminist groups (with the help of White Knights) are very capable of oppressing men. This does not mean that women aren't oppressed in different ways, but there are ways men are being oppressed by feminist groups and the politics they drive. Until enough people who normally are on the side of the feminists see our point of view on these issues, we're not going to make progress.

It is one reason we spend more time defining our enemy than "being real activists" -our biggest issue is convincing people we have problems and are being oppressed (and not by the invisible boogey-man patriarchy). So pointing out how feminism in some ways is oppressing men is our activism.

actanonverba8 · 2012-11-04T03:20:16+00:00

Of course. I suspect that tactic is just about as old as humans' ability to be political animals. In some cases this tactic (regardles of the players) it's pretty disrespectful (don't really like them but want a few tokens) in some cases it's not like that but in all cases their is a political aspect (at least to people who think like that).

Please bear with me if reading this cause I'm not great with words. I have deep concerns about females in MRA type areas and that it will destroy the little solidarity males are able to build and cause the men to lose focus.

I have four bases for these concerns. 1) Female sexuality. It is well known how men have a desire for women sexuality and how this has a habit of making men baby females and betray one another. 2) Lost men and their self hate. Our culture is clearly feminized and misandric. From what I understand about studies in in-group preference, both men and women think more highly of women than men (like 99% of women like women more than men and 75% of men feel the same way). Clearly this has implications for how men behave and where the focus goes in mixed company (IRL or on the internet). 3) Praise Addiction. Most men spend their early years dominated by women....mom, female teachers, female babysitters, female daycare workers. As discussed in "The Manipulated Man" and other books, women, for lack of a better word, brainwash young males. Young boys become addicted to the praise of females and infected by their memes. It takes an awful lot of work (and MRA type education) later in life to undo some of that brainwashing. I feel this praise addiction and early brainwashing is actually a stronger force (and this is saying quite a lot) than the sexual impulse in terms of men allowing women to run us over. In any case, all three of the above put together makes it really, really hard for men to ever stand up for themselves or stand together.

These are the reasons "popular" females in MRA areas concerns me. How did they get "popular" to begin with? Could it be just more of the same as numbers 1-3 I discussed above? I think so. I've seen many, many males in MRA-land white knighting and mangina'ing to females that come and give them some attention. In fact, I've seen some a couple of the more well known men in MRA-land doing it. It's amazing how fast that courageous "red-pill" person goes away when a woman starts giving him attention.

I say all this (rambling) not to suggest banning females or doing anything against female allies. I say it to fellow men. We need to keep each other honest. As the feminists like to say, we all need "safe spaces". As a man who likes to discuss men's rights related issues, areas like this are some of the only safe spaces I have to express myself (because the entire culture is misandric and feminized). I'm sure many men feel the same way.

2012-11-04T10:55:38+00:00

GirlWritesWhat has a ton going for her besides being a woman. She's level-headed, logical, good at explaining her points, doesn't get angry but is as unapologetic as her Canadian blood can manage, and her videos are single-minded. There's never an aside about economics or politics or other divisive, big-picture issues. She's about men's rights and only men's rights, which means no one's getting turned off because they're anti-socialist or anti-libertarian or whatever. It'd be interesting to see what would happen if a man had started blogging under the same circumstances as she did, but barring a time machine, a sex-change operation, and an extremely credible 2010 version of GirlWritesWhat, we aren't going to see that happen.

2012-11-04T13:10:20+00:00

Typhon Blue is a woman, too.

2012-11-04T00:44:14+00:00

I dont think its a good idea at all, not that there would be anything wrong with having a women's spokesperson or representative but if thats the only way we will get people to listen to us as men by using a women then we have a bigger problem then I thought.

Here you can see a mens right activist (probably it will get flagged) but it seems incredibly hostile and will make us look like lunatics. I think its somewhat useless at the micro level (they have grown up with that as the status quo) it has to be done at the macro level and that requires raising a new generation of women. http://toronto.en.craigslist.ca/tor/w4m/3384971542.html

ThugLife2012 · 2012-11-04T01:12:43+00:00

Here's a theory, could be wrong, could be right.

One of the characteristics of modern day liberalism is that you're supposed to hate whomever you are, no matter who you are. If you are a woman defending women, or a black person defending black people, you're being selfish. Of course, the worse possible thing to be is a white man. So a lot of liberals think its their duty to stand up for people that are "not them" even if those people's interests are actually opposed to theirs. I went to a very liberal college and I saw people constantly the opposite side of conversations - women arguing the anti-feminist position, men arguing the feminist position. It might be because everybody wanted to look open minded, or it might have been because of self-hatred. Dunno.

2012-11-04T01:22:04+00:00

I don't know what you're talking about. I watch GWW because I agree with her for the most part and I think her video's are very well made.

I don't think she's the most popular person in the MRM. Barbarossaaaa makes some pretty great video's too.

stemgang · 2012-11-04T02:08:02+00:00

"Only Nixon could re-open China."

mikesteane · 2012-11-04T08:07:29+00:00

White knights are minions who do the bidding for feminists who will then walk all over them. Hugo Schwyzer is an obvious example.

Girl Writes What is respected by us for what she says and how she says it. Even your header doesn't equate the two things: most popular is not the same thing as biggest defender.

This kind of comparison serves only to create the illusion that feminism and the MRM are somehow similar, just on opposite sides of the fence. In reality, the MRM is a push for some kind of gender balance while the feminist movement is a collective mental illness driven by entitled females who openly express their pathological hatred for half the human race.

wrez · 2012-11-04T20:47:54+00:00

I think she is the most eloquent, with the best logic, and the strongest arguments. She is also quite prolific. Her message resonates.

That she happens to be a woman, and attractive, is secondary to that.

While I think we could have better spokesmen, none has emerged thus far.

We men toil silently; whether it is supporting our families, or being the supporter of freedom when the Nanny-state in various incarnations threatens to demolish personal freedoms (communism/socialism/etc).

rightsbot · 2012-11-03T20:30:20+00:00

Post text automatically copied here. (Why?) (Report a problem.)

junkeee999 · 2012-11-03T21:52:05+00:00

The white knight label is chronically overused. I'm not saying the phenomenon doesn't exist, but only around 5% of the time when the label gets slapped on someone is it justified.

Most often it is used towards someone who has simply displayed a modicum of decency towards women, and is perceived to be ruining it for men who want to act like pigs and still get laid.

It reveals more the social ineptness and laziness of the accuser than it does anything about the so-called 'white knight'.

Comments