[Discussion] Do you have to be antifeminist to be an MRA?

Targren · 2015-06-13T05:15:15+00:00

It's more accurate (though technically equivalent) to say that you cannot be a feminist and an MRA, because the core of feminism is the school of thought (and I use that term generously) that society is controlled by men and systemically and systematically oppresses women (Patriarchy Theory) - besides being completely at odds with reality, this is, for reasons that should be obvious, incompatible with the vast majority of concerns of the MRM.

And if you're going to respond with the "dictionary definition defense", read this first, and then don't bother.

Unconfidence · 2015-06-13T05:14:12+00:00

Doesn't this come down to specifically what you mean by "feminist" and "men's rights advocate"?

I doubt many men here are against equality for women; want women to be subordinate to men. So, in that regard we're all feminists.

iainmf · 2015-06-13T08:26:04+00:00

There's a bunch of feminist ideas that are bad. For example:

Gender is entirely a social construct and differences between males and females are due to oppression. For example, they claim that there are fewer female scientist because, not because females generally don't enjoy scientific careers, but because they are being held back somehow. Never mind that women are more likely to be hired in STEM.

Violence and sexual violence against women is a form of patriarchal control. This has corrupted domestic violence research, and preventing real solutions being found. Instead there is the Duluth model and campaigns targeted only at men stopping violence.

I'd say most MRAs disagree with those ideas, and so could be called anti-feminist.

atheist4thecause · 2015-06-13T05:26:16+00:00

It depends how you define feminism really. If you define feminism as equality for women then there is nothing inherently anti-feminist about the MRM. The issue is that's not how most Men's Rights Activists define feminism. Most MRA's see the Feminist Movement as a movement that fights for extra rights for women, whether those rights bring equality or not.

Really, considering yourself an MRA and a feminist will you put you in the middle of a battle about the word feminism. Extreme feminists have proven to want more than equality for women, and MRA's see that. MRA's also know that those extreme feminists are the ones in power driving policy, and that it's the moderates (as in the ones who believe in equality for women and not more than equality for women) that create a shield for the extremists. Most MRA's would consider someone who believe in equality for women to be a Women's Rights Activist, not a Feminist. So it's a battle of verbiage.

If we get away from the labels, can you believe in fighting for women to have equal rights and believe in fighting for men to have equal rights at the same time? Yes, you can. There is nothing inherently opposite about those goals. But using the terms MRA and Feminist will create problems with labeling.

InBaggingArea · 2015-06-13T10:13:31+00:00

I offer the thought that the ideals of the second wave are consistent with the aims of the MRM: full human agency, within the constraints of biology, for women and men, and a rejection of traditional sex-role stereotyping, and an overcoming of the dimorphism in our nature, so far as possible, to create real conditions of equality of opportunity for all to live as full human beings, treated as such, and entitled to pursue happiness for themselves.

Note I said "ideals".

Even the theory contains the seeds of concessions to woman's half of this balance that lead directly to the present state of women's freedom without responsibility that so enchains men.

Sanguifer · 2015-06-13T09:33:27+00:00

But... why would You support feminism?

I mean, seriously. I am an MRA because I advocate for the rights of men. In a similar fashion, I would call myself a WRA - I do advocate for the rights of women (specifically - because anyone can just make that general claim - abortion and sex workers). There's just nothing else I can call myself, it's the descriptive noun for what I do.

But I wouldn't call myself, say, "manospherist", if that was a thing. I wouldn't want to be lumped in with Return of Kings or Manhood Academy.

I'm sorry, I have to get to work, but I really wanted to pose that question: Why feminism in particular?

Tedesche · 2015-06-13T10:01:02+00:00

I certainly don't think so. A lot of feminists I talk to seem to equate the two, but I identify as an MRA, while not an antifeminist. I do have plenty of criticisms of Feminism though—but then again, I have lot of criticism for the MRM too. I think the loudest voices in both movements tend to be those of extremists, and they're doing the most to fuel the gender "war." I tend to feel moderate feminists and MRAs need to do more to work together and build bridges.

L0gic1o1 · 2015-06-13T13:51:53+00:00

You forget that even though men are in positions of power, we live in a democracy. Men are voted in by women.

ZimbaZumba · 2015-06-13T14:12:16+00:00

MRA are pro-Human Rights and not by definition anti anything; apart from ideas that are against Human Rights.

EvolvingRedneck · 2015-06-13T17:07:05+00:00

I could be anti-feminist by default. I just don't believe in ideologies. Anytime you have a belief system that ignores logic, reason and evidence, thats an ideology. I have seen how feminists react to evidence that contradicts their narrative. They ignore it or change the subject.

I used to consider myself a feminist. However, I like to have numbers and evidence to back up my arguments. I researched the primary topics such as the "1 in 4 women will be raped" and the "wage gap idea". Once I found information (numerous sources are out there) I realized some people are treating feminism like a religion.

As far as I am concerned, I am an anti-radical feminist. Not anti-feminist. But I don't consider myself an MRA (official). I just post here because my content will be deleted in feminism.

augustfell · 2015-06-14T09:55:57+00:00

Because just because some men are primarily in control of society doesn't mean that all men benefit as a result of every action they take

Based on the reasonable principles you stated, you are correct. You should be able to be both a feminist and an MRA.

But in practice, the answer is no. This is simply because most feminists have a zero-sum view of gender. They believe any compassion directed towards men is a threat to the feminist movement.

This is partly because feminists have framed the issues in such a way that men simply exercising their rights is precisely what is holding back women (therefore, men's rights need to be curtailed, which conflicts with the MRM). But it's also due to the "biggest victim" mentality.

If you don't believe me, go to a place populated by feminists and say, "Hey, I'm a feminist, but I also think there are lots of men who suffer from unfairness or neglect. Shouldn't society do something about those issues, also?"

See how that goes.

At the heart of this zero-sum attitude is the premise that pretty much all feminists have (and many/most MRAs, too) -- the belief that the other gender has more power. I think this is an unnecessary, unprovable, and crude premise that we would all be better without. For most issues, it actually doesn't matter. But that's for another thread.

KrisK_lvin · 2015-06-13T08:25:26+00:00

Is the MRM inherently antifeminist, or can you be a feminist (or pro-feminist) and an MRA?

Feminism isn't a single coherent philosophy though, which makes it difficult to answer your question. For example, I absolutely believe that men and women should have the same legal rights and opportunities, which is more or less the equity feminist position so in that sense it would be possible to say I'm a feminist.

However, the Feminisms which I am strongly opposed to are all those branches of it that understand gender relations in terms of a colonial occupation, with men as oppressive colonists and women as the exploited colonised.

The latter hysterical and preposterous conception is the dominating ideology on Women's and Gender studies courses and also in much of mainstream media (Laura Bates's Everyday Sexism project falls into exactly this category). Because those forms are the dominant ones, for convenience's sake I tend to talk about Feminism (capital 'F') to cover it.

That's the form of Feminism I am inherently opposed to. I am not at all opposed to equal rights for women and am in fact fiercely against anything or any movement that would want to see those rights removed.

I've always considered myself a feminist … So is the wage gap. So is the restriction of abortion access, and the perseverance of both toxic traits associated with gender roles, and the negative associations with gender roles, and the oversexualized representation of women in the media. All these things are pertinent issues to me

I find it interesting that a lot of modern mainstream Feminisms grew out of radical far Left politics and so it still retains a lot of the features of those origins.

So for example, when the greater part of the public are up in arms at the obscene amounts of money some city financiers are awarded each year, the far Left step forward and behave as if it was they that had fostered this resentment to the world of finance and that, finally, the people have seen the light and decided to follow them. Likewise the invasion of Iraq in 2003 - when huge numbers of people objected to this, the far Left saw this as a victory for their ideas and proof that the majority of people stood behind their vision of the world.

It's a complete fantasy - it's magical thinking of the kind a Shaman enjoys when rain follows 3 weeks after he performed a rain dance ceremony. The contribution of his rain dance on precipitation amounts to exactly zero.

I see much the same magical thinking at work with the kind of Feminisms I oppose. You don't have to be a feminist at all to have concerns about restriction to abortion access or the overt sexualisation of women in the media. Yet, the oppressor/oppressed models of Feminism will claim anyone with a concern about such issues as one of their own in the same way as the Shaman thought he caused the rains to come.

The big difference - and this always surprises me - is that all those people who objected to the invasion of Iraq who did not belong to the far Left did not go around telling people they were Trotskyite Internationalists.

Yet, in women's issues lots of women (and men) who I would not consider to be oppressor/oppressed model Feminists do self-describe as feminists and defend the word feminism from even any suggestion that it could be wrong.

And again this surprises me because these are people who - in my experience - often haven't even heard of the concept of oppressor/oppressed and so on. It's equivalent to someone saying they are a Socialist but who also thinks the free market is a good thing because they like Starbucks lattes.

Mitchell78 · 2015-06-13T08:50:24+00:00

Feminism is anti-men so i better hope MRA's are also anti-feminist.

MaestroLogical · 2015-06-14T07:48:52+00:00

Regardless of how you started learning about Men Rights issues, once you stick around long enough the hate will start to flow through you.

The more you learn, the more you'll realize what kind of enemy we're fighting and how conditioned the world, including you, truly are with regards to rose colored feminism.

DevilishRogue · 2015-06-15T12:41:01+00:00

You can advocate for both men's and women's rights. But both movements hold that the gender they represent is discriminated against more, so you cannot avoid taking a side (and it is ludicrous to pretend that men and women are discriminated against equally).

Feminism attempts to portray examples of female privilege and male discrimination as examples of patriarchy working "against men too!" but this is an attempt to distort reality to fit an inadequate narrative.

ThePigmanAgain · 2015-06-13T08:13:24+00:00

This again?

GivingAF · 2015-06-13T05:54:24+00:00

Like religion, pick and choose your ideology. I personally think MRA's are a bit extreme, but they think Feminists are extreme as well. Whatever. Equality.
Also, I don't know how much research you've done. Part of my Women's Studies courses.. aka "Training to Become a Scary Feminist" was to learn and critically think about the societal pressures men and boys experience to be 'a man'. "Real Boys: Rescuing Our Sons from the Myths of Boyhood" by William Pollack was part of the curriculum. Read it. mic drop

Title	[Discussion] Do you have to be antifeminist to be an MRA?
Author	Unconfidence
Upvotes	8
Comments	53
Date	June 13, 2015 5:10 AM UTC (11 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/39obdr/discussion_do_you_have_to_be_antifeminist_to_be/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/discussion-do-you-have-to-be-antifeminist-to-be-an.977708 https://theredarchive.com/post/977708

Comments