This post reminded me of something that I've been noticing a lot lately. We are better served by avoiding the same type of dishonest conduct/"cherry picking" of comments that /r/SRS thrive on. I think /r/feminism set a pretty good example here of how to deal with this kind of behavior. The majority's response makes it clear that /r/feminism does not endorse a rogue member's lack of integrity.

I know that people have differing views on feminism here. I think this divergence of opinions often stems from the way in which the concept of feminism has evolved. This in itself is a complex issue, which is made apparent by the varying perspectives on what the term means even among feminists themselves. It helps to remember that at its core, the term is defined as representing the same goals as the MRM. From Merriam-Webster;

Feminism: 1) the theory of political, economic and social equality of the sexes 2) organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests.

In my opinion, it is unfortunate that the success achieved within this traditional context, encompassing the efforts of very early feminists up through the resurgence of the women's rights movement in the 70's and into the 80's, has been used to advance the goals of ideologies less focused on the advancement of equality. I believe that certain groups have re-purposed the term, utilizing the hard-earned successes of these "traditional" feminists to further objectives distinct from the noble goal of gender equality. My opinion is obviously not revolutionary. From my understanding, the term radical feminist is representative of this modern take on feminism. It seems as if some of the individuals who would otherwise relate to the traditional emphasis on gender equality, have distanced themselves from the term feminism altogether in favor of the term humanist; though the historical meaning of this term entails a broader context.

I apologize for the diatribe regarding my views on modern feminism, but I promise I'm going to relate this to MRA. Despite the evolution of the term feminism over recent decades, it's clear that at it's core feminism and the MRM share the common goal of gender equality. I think that MRA's are well served to keep this in mind when dealing with individuals claiming to be "feminists." The numerous ideologies claiming the term as their own make it important to avoid lumping all feminists into a single group. Doing so creates animosity between the MRM and the significant number of feminists that support true gender equality--without the desire for men to held to perceived injustices of the past, hiding behind the phrase "male privilege," or any of the other clear indicators that an individual "feminist" does not actually seek equality. Don't allow the views of one outspoken "subgroup" of feminists to forge your perspective on the group as a whole.

The consensus in MRA seems to clearly indicate that we understand that equality implies that both genders can enjoy the benefits of equality; however, this means that both genders must be willing to accept the burdens that accompany these benefits.

We have many allies among the feminist cause, but it's easy for us to alienate each other based on the views of vocal minorities within each group. Keep in mind that there are "feminists" that primarily seek to discriminate against men, as well as discredit MRA. However, I believe that they're far outnumbered by the true feminists that truly seek equality.

Similarly, we have those among us in MRA that have bought into the misconceptions that we are group engaged in hatred towards women, often such misinformation is spread by these "pseudofeminists" that are primarily concerned with discrediting MRA and finding validation in their hatred of men. SRS seems to be the most obvious example of such self righteous "feminists" that are obviously more concerned with focusing their hatred than anything the true feminists are concerned with. This creates a self perpetuating cycle for both groups, where the hateful, unrepresentative minority's of each group thrive off each-other. The true representatives of these causes are eclipsed by the hatred, drama, and blatant sexism, derived from the cherry picked comments of individuals that don't belong among the group in the first place.

I'm just trying to highlight what most of us already know. Many people feel threatened/offended by MRA. It can be tempting to get caught up in the drama (I'm certainly guilty), but let's try remember that we're here to discuss/advance issues that impact men. If you see someone engaging in this type of behavior make sure to point out that the opinion of an individual does not represent MRA as a whole (and it can be effective to remind the audience that this is the fallacy of hasty generalization).

I apologize that this isn't directly related to the advancement of a specific Men's Rights issue, but I didn't know where else to post it. However, I do feel it is pertinent to the advancement of the MRM as a whole. Especially during a time where we have been the target of so many attacks and smear campaigns. This is an extension of the sentiment "don't feed the trolls" that has been relevant lately. I wanted to provide my belief that as a group that has to fight for mainstream acceptance we should go a step further. Perhaps a something such as "Don't feed the trolls, Don't be the trolls, and Point out opinions that don't represent the ideals of MRA." It sucks that we have to take such an approach, but it seems we're being examined under a magnifying glass lately. The less opportunity we give people to misrepresent our ideals, the more successful we will be in accomplishing our goals.

Note: It wasn't my intention to discredit feminism as it pertains to gender equality. In fact, I hope I've made it clear that I think that gender equality would be more easily obtained upon finding common ground.