Economist writes hit-piece on the men's movement. Also mentions r/mensrights

mikesteane · 2016-06-17T03:54:58+00:00

The article mentions a 63% sentencing gap, as if it were nothing, and then wonders why the MRM exists.

baserace · 2016-06-17T08:47:25+00:00

The rebalancing of the sexes has spawned 21st-century misogyny

Go fuck yourself.

BDMR_lurker · 2016-06-17T08:54:22+00:00

There will be more pieces like this, and it's a good thing.

They confuse MRA, Red Pillers, PUA, ... which is to be expected.

As of now, the views of people such as Turd-Flinging Monkey are outrageous to society at large, and to be honest, he may be aiming for the outrage factor.

And yet, the article does mention, admittedly not discuss, but not disclaim either, the sentencing gap, college enrolment, false rape accusations. It even finishes with the absence of "woman up" rally cries, and a quote taht reminds us that marriage is a personal choice for men also.

What these articles actually do, purposefully or not, is tell many (young) men out there that they are not alone.

My own youth was neither in the US nor in this century. But I do pity young men of the G20 countries: I had it a lot better than them.

And so did my wife.

We had it equal.

Men's rights movements are outrageous because they're so tiny. But I do believe there's a silent majority of men who, in many ways, feel that they're contributing a lot more to society than they get out of it. Or that they get less out of it than the average woman. Regardless of the truth in these thoughts.

Most men are not leaders, because most people are not leaders. The majority of the discontented tend to look for something to aggregate around. Mr Trump being an exemple, to my opinion: he's loudly unPC, and thus attracts the silent majority of those fed up with political correctness.

I do think articles like this one will attract more people to the MRM, which is a good thing.

Then again, and feel free to downvote, I do also think that MRM are mostly useless.

Various "social justice" activists will continue to promote self-serving agendas, and their victimhood culture, which strongly opposes the "getting shite done" culture that built the West.

Nihilism will continue to increase, especially among young men, be it apathetic (herbivore men), hedonistic (take the red pill and enjoy the decline) or destructive (homegrown terrorists in Europe).

People being lazy as fuck, and greedy to the same extent, the idea that this system is unsustainable will be accepted far too late.

It has happened before, it's happening right now in other parts of the world, and it will happen to us.

C'esst la vie, I guess.

Rockbottom503 · 2016-06-17T11:09:47+00:00

"Observers of the manosphere disagree over exactly what fuels it. Barbara Risman, the head of the sociology department at the University of Illinois at Chicago, attributes its rise to a fear that as women become more liberated, men are struggling with feeling dispensable. “Previous men’s movements dealt with an expansion of the idea of what men could be. This is different. This is about men feeling as though they’ve lost dominance.”

What a bullshit statement - it's arisen because the powers that be have bought into the ideas that feminism presents. To empower women men are demonised in every way possible.

double-happiness · 2016-06-17T12:21:39+00:00

Barbara Risman, the head of the sociology department at the University of Illinois at Chicago, attributes its rise to a fear that as women become more liberated, men are struggling with feeling dispensable. “Previous men’s movements dealt with an expansion of the idea of what men could be. This is different. This is about men feeling as though they’ve lost dominance.”

She seems to me to be at least ten years out of the loop on that one. When I was studying sociology of masculinity at uni. in the early 2000s all the talk was of a 'crisis of masculinity'. And the mythopoetic men's movement of the 1980s onwards was also talking about a loss of male power, I believe. It's easy for critics to try to contrast an earlier, supposedly pro-feminist men's liberation movement with a later 'reactionary' MRM, but there has always been an element of backlash and counter-narrative, especially in terms of the concept of patriarchy, even the wiki says so...

"Men were suffering further emotional damage due to feminist accusations about sexism. Men should celebrate their differences from women, rather than feeling guilty about them."

dungone · 2016-06-17T12:34:36+00:00

Yet another issue besides economics that The Economist can't be trusted on.

The funny thing is, they don't understand that the propaganda doesn't work in their favor. This article basically reads like this: "The court's tailor wonders why the silly boy is shouting that the emperor has no clothes after emperor was seen naked in the parade. Such a stupid boy..." The only problem is that everyone else has also seen that the emperor was naked. And now they know that there's someone else who has noticed it too.

sillymod · 2016-06-17T13:33:51+00:00

As far as articles go, that one was more fair and balanced than most.

At least it ended with Elam's response, rather than leaving the accusation of misogyny unchallenged.

Lrellok · 2016-06-17T05:29:42+00:00

I am sitting in a truck stop and people are staring at be because i am laughing so hard.

Consilio_et_Animis · 2016-06-17T02:33:55+00:00

Well, we are on their radar at least.

Lethn · 2016-06-17T11:35:45+00:00

If it makes you feel any better guys, the commenters are calling them out on their bullshit.

Simmarillin · 2016-06-17T14:48:49+00:00

The article brings up all the most salient points of each part of the manosphere (MRA, PUA, TRP and MGTOW). With only a single weak rebuke near the end, immediately followed by, and closing with, a strong counterargument.

This is not a hit piece, it's propaganda. The only thing out of place is the title and subtitle. (Maybe the editor wrote those?)

But I can't find the author attribution. So I can't be sure if he's an MRA or not.

Lobstermansunion · 2016-06-17T15:14:34+00:00

I'm wondering if the author is a crypto-mra or mgtow.

They fairly quoted Elam and the "criticisms" were from simpering traditionalist Wilcox and a "you go grrrrrl" professor saying things we've heard a million times before.

absoluteposition · 2016-06-18T22:39:11+00:00

In defence of The Economist, they seem to be largely anti-SJW most of the time.

I don't even really mind shitty virtue signalling hitjobs that much if the counter is presented by the same people occasionally. One writer and one article does not make a publication. It's a consistent tone and view that should be opposed. Not everyone is Salon...

Title	Economist writes hit-piece on the men's movement. Also mentions r/mensrights
Author	JohnKimble111
Upvotes	16
Comments	21
Date	June 17, 2016 2:13 AM UTC (10 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/4oh143/economist_writes_hitpiece_on_the_mens_movement/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/economist-writes-hit-piece-on-the-mens-movement.947238 https://theredarchive.com/post/947238

Comments