attack misandry not feminism for strategy

Punder_man · 2022-10-04T09:17:37+00:00

Feminism is the safe harbor which allows misandry to thrive.
Criticizing feminism IS criticizing misandry.

Its simple equality.. if Feminists expect MRA's to hold men accountable for their Misogyny (as we should) then equally we should expect feminists to hold women accountable for their Misandry.

But when you bring up the fact that both sides should police their movements it ALWAYS devolves into "Rules for thee, not for me" with claims like "Misandry doesn't exist! Or, if it does it is in no way on the same level as Misogyny!!"

Also, Feminism ENABLES misandry by providing a platform and shield that people can use to voice their misandrist hate speech while being protected from criticism / retaliation under the shield of "Feminism" and "Freedom of Speech"

Finally, There are MANY things that we should criticize about Feminism, like the fact that despite the blatant biases that went into the design and pushing of the Duluth Model of Domestic Violence and its bias towards the assumed conclusion that Men are always the aggressors in any / all cases of Domestic Violence (A point one of the creators of the model has stated)

This model is STILL in use today as the default model of Domestic Violence prevention! And why's that? because the model benefits women and so there is no chance in hell that feminists are going to rock the boat and push for a new more accurate model which takes into account the fact that YES men can be victims of domestic violence at the hands of women too!

Because that would destroy the narrative they've been pushing for years, worse, people might wake up and realize that its not the only thing that feminism has lied about / obfuscated..

So no, until feminists can stop being hypocrites with double standards, I will continue to criticize them as required.

EmirikolWoker · 2022-10-04T08:46:35+00:00

The foundational principles of all flavours of feminism (class warfare between men and women with men winning, shorthanded as "Patriarchy") are inherrently anti-male when you examine what needs to be true for it to accurately describe reality. Feminists can claim that it's "just about equality", but it's equality based on bigotted assumptions, presuming psychopathy on the part of men as a class. This was true right from the start - have a look at the Declaration of Sentiments from the first wave.

Mens rights advocacy, and Egalitarian values in general, are innately anti-feminist.

Lionheart27778 · 2022-10-04T13:47:00+00:00

While I get what you are saying.

I think it's naive. The second you start standing up against misandry they will poke their heads out....They will make it into an attack against Feminism, regardless of how you phrase it.

IronJohnMRA · 2022-10-04T11:43:33+00:00

Also feminism has SOME good points dotted here and there.

No, it doesn't.

crz8956 · 2022-10-04T09:02:30+00:00

But if you attak misandry, wich is, like in 90% perpetuated mlby feminists, they just go Reeee, and accuse you in attacking feminism, so effectively it results in same reaction from casual folk.

c. Saying no hating men is wrong is impossible to counter.

It Is NoT WrOnG tO pUnCh uP! Wemenz very oprezzed fut centurrriezzz!!!!(c)

Also feminism has SOME good points dotted here and there.

It has not. Well, not that could not be achieved without feminism.

Proof: I am from a post USSR country.

There was a women's rights movement (WRA), much like modern men's rights movement.

Wich, essentially, was caring about women's problems. Undereducation (women were not allowed to universities) , medical care, abuse report - things that should be done for any social group. Mind you Russian, Empire was kinda seeing women as grown-up children. Much some like Muslim countries today.

But WRA were distinct from feminists, that they had not some agenda like Patriarchy Theory, nor did they had any problems with men, as long, as men treated women as equal. (Not queens on a pedesrltal, just equal. Period). And they were much more effective and hundred times less annoying, than modern feminists. They were totally pacifists, unlike White Feather. Overall they seem like have been pretty decent ladies, who did highlited up real problems, did something to fix it, and were just silently working on their cause.

In 1917 New government, under pressure from WRA gave all basic rights to anyone (with basic responsibilites) and ....that was that. WRA was disbanded, because it fulfilled its role.

Right to education? Check.
Right to work? Check.
Right to divorce? Check.
Right to vote (mostly local unions and such. It was a communistic dystopia after all, not much place for democracy)? Check.
Legal abortion? Check.

Like most things feminism stood for in the West, yea? But WRA were not feminists.The only "feminism" was western feminism that sipped from abroad much later.

Edit. Okay, disregard that, I got kinda derailed. Problem, they think that when you attak misandry you attak feminism, even when you don't (though it deserves to be attacked with anti-warship missle and sunken like "Moscow" cruiser. F-ism, I mean).

Digital_Demon7 · 2022-10-04T09:56:12+00:00

Feminism and misandry are the same thing.

Raining_Hope · 2022-10-04T12:30:36+00:00

Until feminism gives up the keys and stops driving misandry around in feminism's car, fighting both is how I approach it. I don't care about strategy, I'm not here for an cause against women. But I'm not going to stop being honest about the issue. It is knee deep in feminism that it needs to ba addressed within feminism instead of hoping they recognize that you were talking about them when you said misandry instead of feminist.

johnnygluebag · 2022-10-04T16:08:40+00:00

Misandry isn't even a valid word according to Google spell check.

Misogyny works okay though.

Imagine that.

KissMyAsthma-99 · 2022-10-04T16:47:17+00:00

Ever been in a boss fight where the boss deploys drones or clones or minor enemies while it regroups? Your suggestion is akin to only attacking those additional enemies while ignoring the boss.

DavidByron2 · 2022-10-04T14:37:06+00:00

attacking feminism in any form is total suicide strategically

It's a great strategy that has worked well.

we should focus on is misandry not feminism

That's like saying a peace movement should focus on peace and not criticizing the US empire. You can't "focus" on something by ignoring 90% of it.

Why? Feminism has control

You just said young men are waking up. It's working.

Attacking feminism will be seen as attacking women

Which means that feminism responding will be seen as attacking men - which is what we want people to see/understand. It's working.

Attacking misandry is the way to go. You cannot twist that

Of course you can twist it and feminists will always twist it. These are people who say with a straight face that all men are rapists and that saying "kill all men" isn't sexist.

Misogyny has had unbelievably good success as a buzzword

That's because feminism is backed by billions of dollars in funding and support by the ruling class. It's not because oh geez it's a cool word.

By attacking misandry you attack feminism by proxy anyway, ppl will work it out

Sure. They'll see you as anti-feminist anyway but too much of a pussy to actually admit you are. So why do it if it's the same but makes you look cowardly?

Also feminism has SOME good points dotted here and there

They don't. If you think they do please feel free to mention one.

Yeah I know, unlikely.

Let's stick with likely and good strategies that have worked.

Lalulale · 2022-10-04T15:12:11+00:00

As long as feminism is working against equality and only ever sees men as bad I will attack both.

Input_output_error · 2022-10-04T09:08:35+00:00

The big one we should focus on is misandry not feminism.

The problem is that most of the misandry of society comes directly from feminist dogma. The moment that you point out misandry you have to point to where it originates from, if that isn't done it looks as if you're just being unstable and see misandry everywhere.

Misogyny has had unbelievably good success as a buzzword. Everyday
misogyny casual etc. We can do same with misandry. And it needs to
happen because it is every single day (in the West anyway).

We really can't do that for multiple reasons, first and foremost, feminism has decreed that misandry doesn't exist. Most feminist will tune out as soon as they hear 'misandry' as in their minds it simply doesn't exist.

Secondly, for people to care about misandry they first have to care about the well being of men in general.

Thirdly, 'men' don't have the same platform as women have with feminism.

Also feminism has SOME good points dotted here and there.

So name one, one single good point feminism has had. The right to vote had very little to do with feminism, they only thing they managed is that women are excused from drafts. Even that is an American thing and not something 'feminism' has done.

It wasn't feminism that sexually liberated women, that was done by men inventing anti-conception. If there are any good points that came from feminism, i have not seen them.

Normal women will see anyone criticising anti misandry is obvs a bigot.
As I said good women may may see women who hate the anti feminists as
having legit points. They cannot for misandry.

I'm a bit puzzled by what this is trying to say. But if i'm correct you mean to say that women will think that criticising anti misandry would be wrong. I think that this is a very big leap to take and really has no basis in reality. They first would need to consider that misandry is a thing, and after that they need to decide that if what you are saying should fall under misandry.

It is a bit like asking a racist if what they say is racist, a racist won't say that they're racist, they'll just say that they aren't racist, they're stating facts1!11!!1! This is done by feminist all the time, they say that they aren't sexist but rather just stating facts!1!!1!!11!

Reddit1984Censorship · 2022-10-04T12:39:34+00:00

Problem is that if we dont keep feminism away from us they will eat us up like a fungy.
If feminism enters the mens rights movement, before you know it will become an impotent sterile basal mvoement for feminism that is virtually dead in practice and only cares about women.

CawlinAlcarz · 2022-10-04T14:27:27+00:00

The only issue with this strategy is that so-called "feminists" get to call themselves "feminists" when they practice and legislate for misandrist policies.

As a result, they get away with calling anyone advocating AGAINST their misandrist policies misogynists because obviously, the policies are "feminist" first, and if you're against anything "feminist" you're a misogynist.

Blauwpetje · 2022-10-04T15:18:18+00:00

It will only result in ‘ooh no we don’t hate men, we just want them to toe our line and give up their toxic masculinity, patriarchy hurts men too blah blah.’ At best it will lead to damage control and feminism with the same despotic power and a better image than now.

patxiku93 · 2022-10-04T20:50:43+00:00

That's not posible . Misandry uses feminism as cover. The moment you attack misandry they'll clame you're attacking feminism, and since they have the power, they'll turn public opinion against you anyways. We would be wasting time and effort by being so nit-picky

Affectionate-School3 · 2022-10-04T19:51:06+00:00

Interesting thoughts. I would also add that one’s delivery style is important to strategy. I don’t believe in showing anger to misandrists or their audience. I think it both validates their position and feeds their ego because to make men angry makes them feel powerful.

In fact, I would argue that a mature, stable, flexible, informative, thought provoking, taking-the-higher-road-response is the ONLY thing that’s neutralized and informed misandrists in my experience. I would have to agree with some here that the semantics themselves don’t matter that much.

_BlueShark87 · 2022-10-04T22:29:01+00:00

Uh what. It’s clearly working and young men like me are waking up to this.

IronJohnMRA · 2022-10-04T11:42:46+00:00

No. Do not tell us how to run our movement.

tomowudi · 2022-10-04T17:11:09+00:00

This is a good post with some good insights. I think it's also arrived at the correct conclusion for reasons that haven't been explicitly stated by Op.

First of all, as was excellently explained to me by a feminist, feminism isn't a monolith, nor are feminists. Neither are MRA's.

It is possible to be a feminist and a mysandrist. It is possible to be an MRA and a misogynist. To pretend that affiliation with either is definitive of an individual's character or intentions is to be intellectually dishonest. There are good feminist arguments which is why some MRA arguments use them.

There are also good arguments regarding why feminism is necessary which support why the MRA movement should be considered legitimately analogous. There is a core argument within feminism (again, not monolithic so I wouldn't begin to suggest how popular this argument is) that feminism exists as a means for women to define their existence and their experiences absent the influence of men. And this makes sense as historically most scholarship has been male-dominated and has thus made claims about women that are clearly biased by a male perspective (Freud is an excellent example of this - as is anything related to how to properly treat "hysteria"). Because of this history, it would make sense that feminism historically and today should eschew the masculine perspective entirely, because to have men authoritatively shape feminism would be inherently counter-productive. As a movement that is focused on the "feminine gaze," there isn't really room for the "masculine gaze" to gain purchase.

While historically MRA's don't have the same basis for the need to establish the masculine experience absent the influence of the "female gaze" - that doesn't mean that it isn't necessary for our present circumstances. Indeed there is a better opportunity for humanity as a whole to benefit from having an analog to feminism that is entirely focused on describing the masculine experience absent the biases inherent in the feminine gaze precisely because of the health and social benefits that occur when any group is studied, their experience is catalogued to academic standards, and then intermixed with independent lines of inquiry within an academic setting.

Yes, women's issues are deserving of attention, as are men's issues. And what is and isn't a man is as confusing as determining what is and isn't a woman because of the socially constructed nature of gender in general. And feminism alone is inadequate for both holding space for the male perspective as was academia absent a more representative body of scholars.

Being solutions focused by focusing on misandry in particular is valuable, because it allows us to use the same approach put forth by critical theorists, which is a valuable organizing lens for advocacy. Rather than getting bogged down in the "us versus them" rhetoric we could instead take the approach that worked well in apartheid that would also be lauded by feminists who speak of kyriearchy - everyone is a victim of the system, and so it is the systems in place that are being tried, not the folks who had no choice but to participate in them.

That is how issues regarding emotional abuse by women against men can get the time and attention they deserve, as these abuses contribute to wider systemic problems, increasing male violence, etc.

_Denzo · 2022-10-04T13:56:59+00:00

Is it even feminism if they encourage hate based on being male? Isnt feminism a fight for equality? If you fight for hate you’re not a feminist

BlvckSkin · 2022-10-04T13:14:56+00:00

Good point, I'm behind this strategy

valspare · 2022-10-04T20:33:10+00:00

Why is it that many posts on r/Mensrights start off with a decent topic to discuss, then end with a lot of commenters sounding like whinny little bitches?

Its ruining this sub for me.

EDIT: Case in point, the down votes with no reply to why they disagree with my statement.

Syndocloud · 2022-10-04T17:15:21+00:00

Na a big par of American conservative now is being anti war and pro Russia things change.

And new popular culture has some anti establishment elements many of them anti feminist.

Tapping into that can be valuable

ChiroAdjustmint · 2022-10-04T08:45:12+00:00

You're assuming people care more about advancing this movement than whining about feminism. Whining about feminism is what people care about most.

2022-10-11T23:18:15+00:00

Feminism and misandry are basically the exact same. If you call out one than you call out both.

Title	attack misandry not feminism for strategy
Author	rochesterslim
Upvotes	93
Comments	56
Date	October 4, 2022 8:07 AM UTC (1 year ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/xv94f3/attack_misandry_not_feminism_for_strategy/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/attack-misandry-not-feminism-for-strategy.1135163 https://theredarchive.com/post/1135163