Feminism is based on the idea that women are worse off and the reason is patriarchy and men's entitled and oppressive behavior.

Unfortunately for the feminists, the world doesn't look anything like that (not in the west, at least). So, they have to fabricate evidence.

Feminists argue, for example, that there is an unfair wage gap when in reality there is an earnings gap which is almost totally - or totally - caused by the difference in the working hours. Feminists argue that men use violence to uphold the power imbalance within families when in reality studies tell that it's women who have the power in families and are more prone to violence. The list could go on.

All political and ideological activism tends to cherry-pick their "truths", no doubt about that (feminism is just much worse than any other important political movement because they get so little right and don't seem to care plus many concentrate on demonizing people, groups and crucial social ties).

So, how is it with MRAs?

Most people here and elsewhere seem to concentrate on refuting "feminist ideas" - which, unfortunately, are not only feminist but often pretty much the same as the ideas of the political elite: politicians, mainstream media and so on. So, here it's not about "creating a different reality" but correcting with studies, statistics, and pure facts the feminist - and often mainstream - picture of the reality.

Nevertheless, there must be, if not totally false arguments, at least half-truths here, too. Perhaps certain reframings are correct in themselves but leave out at least equally important perspectives.

Take safety. Feminists stress how women face a lot of violence when they go to public places. An MRA would probably say that women just feel unsafe but actually face little violence and, in any case, much less than what men face. And that's true (on average in most places in the world). But it does leave out at least two important perspectives: 1) it's totally relevant that women FEEL unsafe and they should, too, because most of them wouldn't have a chance if they were attacked and 2) often men end up in violent situations because they act way too aggressively in potentially dangerous situations which is something women seldom do.

What about the infamous wage gap? Yeah, it's a lie. But isn't it unfair that, for example, women's pensions are so much smaller because they took care of the children when they were small?

The echo-chamber effect from which the feminists so much suffer is a danger to everybody unless we are ready to see the world from other perspectives. But that's not something activists can do because it waters down their main arguments, the Cause.

But if we forget that for a moment: which are the biggest flaws in the MRA arguments? Are we leaving out important viewpoints, perhaps female viewpoints? Would I be a better and happier person if I understood better the other important perspectives instead of contracting on the ones that make me angry?

(PS. By the way, I'd be glad to hear about any grammatical mistakes or particularly clumsy language.)