How should a rational MRA respond to the statement, "Men's rights activism is a hate group"?

humankin · 2014-09-09T08:14:18+00:00

Don't. Or more precisely, respond by changing the direction of discourse. Remember not to be reactive or you're a sucker! Anyway:

They're poisoning the well:

Poisoning the well (or attempting to poison the well) is a rhetorical device where adverse information about a target is pre-emptively presented to an audience, with the intention of discrediting or ridiculing everything that the target person is about to say.

Poisoning the well is exploiting anchoring:

Anchoring or focalism is a cognitive bias that describes the common human tendency to rely too heavily on the first piece of information offered (the "anchor") when making decisions.

I couldn't find anything online about how to combat this tactic so I'll recommend the general defense against fallacious argument: reframe.

Calling MRAs a hate group is framing any argument critical of feminism or supportive of men as hateful. The simple damage is done as soon as they say it and you can't defend against that*. It's just like advertisement: the meme spreads even if you don't want it to. Your goal in these discussions isn't to undo this damage because you simply can't. Your goal is to minimize the damage and promote other pro-MRA memes**. Both positive and negative memes will propagate but eventually some die out and others spread yet again, colloquially "viral" or "by word of mouth". Prefer to win wars over battles and battles over bouts.

If you argue against MRAs being a hate group then you will get bogged down in arguments with an opponent thoroughly disinterested in changing her mind. Observers may cede to your rightness but by then they will have heard "MRAs are a hate group" a dozen or so times. That will stick despite any intent or rationality training. Again, this is how ads work and they work extremely well.

Instead, move to another topic where MRAs will be subconsciously perceived as favorable. You could bring up feminist hate actions like the Toronto protests of a boyhood suicide discussion by a fairly well-known egalitarian feminist activist and author. You could bring up massive court (both family and criminal) bias. You're an MRA so you know the topics but keep in mind that discussions should be on points that observers will dwell on that will make them more MRA-friendly.

I recommend against discrediting the wage gap unless it's a buildup to discrediting feminist lies in general. By discussing the wage gap, you make it into something people think about. Even if they think it false, they're dwelling on the idea so they can be swayed by other convincing (or convincing-sounding) arguments. Which is bad for you because feminists have something like 20 times the voice as does the entire manosphere of which MRAs are only a part so the next argument they hear has an average change greater than 95% of being from a feminist.

* Actually you can: censorship. This is precisely the reason feminists are censorious: they frequently control the media of communication (means) and have a tenuous monopoly on the zeitgeist's consideration of gender issues (motive).

** I'm framing this as MRA rhetoric. If your goal is egalitarianism or rationalism or whatever else then generate rhetoric to those ends.

kizzan · 2014-09-09T05:38:44+00:00

I am curious to see the replies. I have always agreed and said, "yeah we hate to see men's rights get marginalized."

DavidByron2 · 2014-09-09T06:21:46+00:00

Ask them to define "hate group". Here are seven qualities of hate groups. Note that feminism qualifies for all of them.

lobbies for laws discriminating against the target group
lobbies for institutional practices and societal norms that discriminate against the target group
denigrates the target group as a threat
denigrates the target group as immoral
tells lies (especially historical revisionism) about the target group
advocates or tolerates violence against the target group
advocates segregationism against the target group

(and the target group is a birth group of some kind, not eg a political group)

inc0gn3gr0 · 2014-09-09T06:13:46+00:00

I don't know what you should say if you are assumed to be from a "privelaged" position.

But overall, I tend to explain to people that currently under law, there is nothing that a man can do that a woman can't do.

On the other hand, there is 1 things that woman CAN do that men can't do. That is the right to chose parenthood. There is no legal way for a man to opt out of fatherhood. Women currently have the right to have abortions in all 50 states, though to varying degrees.

Obviously they will say something like "Rape, women's pay, rape, domestic violence, rape".

To which you reply, all of those things are ILLEGAL, and just because outcomes of certain situation are not to your liking doesn't mean individual are oppressed. Women have legally protected equal opportunity, in all of those situations.

They will say rape rape right to feel safe.

Too which you explain that in the U.S violent crime has consistently decreased for 25 years, according to the FBI. But thanks to global media, sensationalism and proganda, people just think and feel things are getting worse.

And then she will call you a rape apologist.

I have been working on my feminist impression, I hope I got enough rapes in there. /s

ARedthorn · 2014-09-09T11:53:09+00:00

As far as I can tell, much of this mentality/assumption comes about because the media's done a brilliant job confusing us with TRP and vice-versa (and PUA, and a couple other radical anti-feminist groups).

My response would be to tell them to lurk here for a couple weeks... They'll see that we police our own (as opposed to letting them steer the ship like the RadFems and feminists), actually care about and discuss legal and societal issues that harm men (as opposed to how fixated TRP and PUA are on whining and trying to get laid), and actively trying to fix things where we can and provide support and encouragement elsewhere (as opposed to fixating on who to blame for the problems, like TRP and the feminists often do).

notacrackheadofficer · 2014-09-09T13:21:02+00:00

Being held back to every other weekend with my daughter was very sad for both of us. Her mom had plenty of opportunity to allow us to spend more time together and went out of her way to negate our attempts. For no reason except quote ''I resent how close the 2 of you are getting''.
I admittedly really hated not being allowed to be there for my child more. My ex had a bookshelf full of feminist books.
I remember the most popular feminist book of the 80s was ''The Politics of Women's Spirituality'', a hilarious title.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Politics-Womens-Spirituality-Founding/dp/0385172419
It instructed young women that choosing to be a feminist made one a spiritual goddess leader of eternal infallability. It is one of the most influential books in the history of feminism.
Not one reader realized that they were conflating ''spirituality'' with politics, as they derided anyone else who conflated the 2. Good times. The book told them what to believe, and also told them that any culture that was told what to believe was pure shitlord culture.
I highly recommend it to all interested in the 80s mutation of the feminist realm.
''From the Publisher: Rather than codifying a religion exclusively for women, the authors address a range of contemporary issues that are informed by spirituality, our attitudes toward life on Earth. The values and perceptions presented in this essay collection constitute a holistic paradigm, a dynamic model for the postpatriarchal era.''
....And people thought I was exaggerating. LOL

Leinadro · 2014-09-09T09:50:31+00:00

Ask them for proof and then respond accordingly.

Masterwallabee · 2014-09-09T05:40:48+00:00

[permanently deleted]

Goat-headed-boy · 2014-09-09T14:06:01+00:00

I have posted this before regarding my views on feminism. I steadfastly believe that feminism is a hate group. While I would entertain discussion on this topic, I am unlikely to change my mind.

I am here because I am passionate about fathers rights but major policy changes by feminists (ie: campaign/lobby for equal custody and visitation consideration, equal penalties/enforcement of visitation and child support payments for women, eliminate alimony, etc.) are needed to change my point of view.

It is likely that a person who would claim that the MHRM is a hate movement will feel just as strongly, albeit without proof.

So, what has feminism done for women?

Legislation passed by the Federal Government of the United States in 1963 made it illegal to pay men and women different wage rates for equal work on jobs that require equal skill, effort, and responsibility and are performed under similar working conditions.[21] One year after passing the Equal Pay Act, Congress passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Title VII of this act, makes it unlawful to discriminate based on a person’s race, religion, color, or sex.[22] Title VII attacks sex discrimination more broadly than the Equal Pay Act extending not only to wages but to compensation, terms, conditions or privileges of employment. Thus with the Equal Pay Act and Title VII, an employer cannot deny women equal pay for equal work; deny women transfers, promotions, or wage increases; manipulate job evaluations to relegate women’s pay; or intentionally segregate men and women into jobs according to their gender.

That was 50 years ago and while feminism had a hand in it, to what extent is not clear.

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court on the issue of abortion.

That was 40 years ago. I'm pretty sure that half the population had an interest in this one, but we can say feminism if that's what you're into.

The Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (VAWA) is a United States federal law (Title IV, sec. 40001-40703 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, H.R. 3355) signed as Pub.L. 103–322 by President Bill Clinton on September 13, 1994 (codified in part at 42 U.S.C. sections 13701 through 14040). The Act provides $1.6 billion toward investigation and prosecution of violent crimes against women, imposes automatic and mandatory restitution on those convicted, and allows civil redress in cases prosecutors chose to leave un-prosecuted. The Act also establishes the Office on Violence Against Women within the Department of Justice. (emphasis mine)

This was 20 years ago. It was a major turning point for feminists when they were able to extract funding from all taxpayers, men and women alike, using only an 'all men are bad' platform to further their ideological goals.

For women? More like against everyone.

Violence against women was already illegal; this was a political ploy to dip into the federal fund bucket, nothing more.

I'm drawing a blank on the last two decades; anyone offering insight is welcome, as well as adding to my list. I have limited it to only what has transpired in my lifetime.

tl;dr: You can't argue with an indoctrinated cult member.

GenderNeutralLanguag · 2014-09-09T18:57:56+00:00

First and foremost never argue, don't discuss, debate. Debate people like this because they are far to gone into feminist delusions for anything including the very hand of GOD to change their minds. In a debate you are not trying to convince them, but the audience.

To convince the audience ask her questions like "What is hateful about gender equality?" "Do you not think that victims of domestic violence should have shelters and support to break the cycle of violence?" "So trying to stop rape is hateful?"

You will either get them to agree with MRA positions and the audience will see the benifits of MRA or they will go bat shit crazy and the audience will see the horrors of feminism. (Horrors of Feminism being much more likely)

One of the goals is poking the bear so don't try to phrase things in a way to keep her calm. Try to phrase things in a way that will really piss her off.

Sir_Fancy_Pants · 2014-09-09T10:33:34+00:00

Rolling eyes and walking away, don't waste your time on these people.

I dont approve of the MRA movement in many spheres and don't consider myself an mra at all, but "hate group" is just ridiculous.

Feminists are not a hate group either, they are just many retarded morons.

smile4thecamera · 2014-09-09T05:50:18+00:00

Rad-fem: "MRA HATE GROUP CASTRATE AND PUT ON TERROR LIST"

Me(ignoring her grammatical errors): "What specifically about the Men's Rights movement do you disagree with?"

Rad-fem: "MISOGYNIST ALERT!!!"

Rad-fem's lesbian separatist blog co-editor: "CIS BIGOT PENIS PRIVILEGE"

Me: "Okay then, thanks for the chat."

GunOfSod · 2014-09-09T05:58:09+00:00

A rational person would ask for proof.

englishradio · 2014-09-09T10:59:14+00:00

isn't there a law going through the European parliament effectively making anti-feminism a crime? I read about this somewhere a while back. Ofcourse they will say MRA are a hate group. When you can't win the argument the only course is to shut your adversary down by law.

Deansdale · 2014-09-09T12:07:20+00:00

You can't engage people like that on an intellectual level. If they can't hurt you (complain to your boss, doxx you, etc.) make fun of them - if they have the means to hurt you, you should possess the f_cking common sense to not talk to them about anything, ever. Just let them rot in their own hatred.

2014-09-09T14:07:02+00:00

Turn around and walk away. Everything is hate and oppression to these people.

YESmovement · 2014-09-09T17:04:10+00:00

Tell them the SPLC has outright said MRAs are not a hate group.

AtomicBLB · 2014-09-09T17:43:04+00:00

I find the simplest way to avoid real confrontation and sometimes an even effective reply is "Then you clearly have never looked into it" in a calm manner and just mind your own business after. You can't talk to people like that. Usually if other people are around they will start to question the person making the claim for you. It's a win/win, because you aren't being attacked and flat out dismissed. They are also less likely to blow up in a rage at their friend or a neutral person making an inquiry.

deejaweej · 2014-09-09T19:41:28+00:00

In most arguments like these, it only works when it's in person. You just can't get the basic human respect you need from people otherwise.

What I do is I ask them to explain why they think that. Once they provide reasons, you have something to counter. They'll shift between reasons frequently, but you should be able to beat them all. When they revisit a reason, be sure to give the same counter argument you did the first time. Don't let them conflate the whole thing to a stalemate. Just pin down each reason until they run out.

Once you've done that, you should encounter the "I still think you're wrong but I can't provide a good argument" look. That's their pride talking. If you can appease their pride without sacrificing your stance (how differs by the person), then you'll start to convince them. Don't expect a full 180. You'll know when they've let go of the argument. Be satisfied with that and revisit the discussion later.

warspite88 · 2014-09-10T13:15:07+00:00

"what makes MRA a hate group and feminism not a hate group?" would be my response.

the answer to that would be telling of the persons rationality and bias.

Captaincastle · 2014-09-09T05:45:47+00:00

I'd just ask them to defend their viewpoint until it fell apart, I'd never bring up bring an MRA.

TRPACC · 2014-09-09T07:52:10+00:00

You can use it as an opportunity to demonstrate how feminists make false accusations, or you could demonstrate that feminism's actions are far worse.

avantvernacular · 2014-09-09T16:53:29+00:00

"Yeah, I don't like discrimination against men. I hate it in fact, so maybe that makes me part of a hate group...but I can't help but wonder, why don't you feel the same?"

ScienceAteMyKid · 2014-09-09T17:13:02+00:00

"I thought so too, until I actually read up on it and learned about the actual issues that the movement addresses."

Juan_Golt · 2014-09-09T20:03:15+00:00

Stick to the issues. Don't get bogged down in definitions of what the MRM is or isn't. Similarly don't get bogged down in what feminism is or isn't.

A productive discussion centers on the issue and the values involved. People that spout stuff like this are trying to put you on the defensive. Simply they want the discussion to center around that rather than the issue at hand.

Frontierguy · 2014-09-09T20:47:06+00:00

I am a MRA and I hate hypocrites and liars, and that covers most feminists and politicians.

timoppenheimer · 2014-09-09T21:23:22+00:00

"What does that mean to you? Why do you say that? Is Feminism a hate group, and what's the difference?"

Ransom_Stoddard · 2014-09-10T01:31:21+00:00

By asking, "How is equality under the law and equal application of the laws determined as hate?"

anonlymouse · 2014-09-10T06:56:35+00:00

"Keep saying that, the more people that criticise us, the more people join. Thanks for the free advertising."

waves_of_ignerence · 2014-09-10T08:30:15+00:00

"That's some nice projection you've got there". "IF men don't deserve rights then no one does." "Since when is bigotry ok?"

ShitlordAndProud · 2014-09-10T09:04:47+00:00

Point out that calling something a hate group constitutes hatred for that group.

SilencingNarrative · 2014-09-10T13:04:39+00:00

MRAs constitute a hate group? Really?

MRAs vary widely in their views. I can never figure out exactly what people have in mind when they use it, except I've noticed that whenever I express concern for the well-being of men and boys, people look at me funny and then say,"Hey! (eyes narrow) You aren't one of those nasty MRAs are you?"

For example, most people don't know that the Obama administration, when counting the casualities from drone strikes in Afghanistan, classifies any male (but not female) 18 or older as an enemy combatant so they can claim lower civilian death estimates. Even if they know nothing else about the man killed than that he looked to be over 18.

Could you imagine the firestorm of protest that would ensue if they tried to classify women 18 or older as enemy combatants?

When I bring this up, people look at me funny, then change the subject.

Did you know about that policy?

BudgeUp · 2014-09-10T15:54:03+00:00

I think there's a lot of misconceptions on both sides about what feminism / MRA actually means and that's sad because they both are similar in many ways.

I see them as both fighting for equality (or what they perceive as equality) but they are coming at it from different angles: ie. MRAs believe men don't have equal rights. Feminists believe women don't .

Anyway, in answer to your question I would draw the person in question to a particular aspect of MRA thinking that they think is hateful, (eg. custody rights), ask them to elaborate on their opinions and hopefully see that there is actually a lot of common ground. Maybe that is too optmistic of me!

anobaith · 2014-09-15T04:43:19+00:00

Learn about Agent Orange files, and the incident that followed. The MRM has not taken advantage of the Agent Orange files. Granted the existence the files shut down radfem.

blumeaniandglove · 2014-09-15T22:51:50+00:00

How should a rational FRA respond to the statement, "Female rights activism is a deluded cult?"

MRSPArchiver · 2014-09-09T05:36:46+00:00

Post text automatically copied here. (Why?) (Report a problem.)

trudatness · 2014-09-09T05:38:34+00:00

Start quoting Dworkin

Nomenimion · 2014-09-09T06:01:52+00:00

What of it? We hate lying scum, and there is nothing wrong with hating lying scum. And who is a feminist to call anyone else a hater?

2014-09-09T10:42:32+00:00

shrug

SirT6 · 2014-09-09T15:26:54+00:00

Actions speak louder than words. The best approach would be to tone down the misogyny on sites like this one. Then less people would accuse the movement of hate speech. Use forums like this to discuss and promote activism on true MR issues; work with feminists to dismantle traditional and societal expectations of gender performativity; don't make women the enemy. These all seem like good first steps to me. Gender equality isn't a zero sum game, stop acting like it is.

Karissa36 · 2014-09-10T11:44:18+00:00

http://www.salon.com/2014/09/09/it_wasnt_ray_rices_fault_the_sick_twisted_logic_of_mens_rights_activists_on_domestic_violence/

You can go through all kinds of contortions to duck bullets, but it would be much easier and more productive to stop giving them so much easy ammunition.

Title	How should a rational MRA respond to the statement, "Men's rights activism is a hate group"?
Author	Masterwallabee
Upvotes	67
Comments	128
Date	September 9, 2014 5:36 AM UTC (11 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/2fvs91/how_should_a_rational_mra_respond_to_the/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/how-should-a-rational-mra-respond-to-the-statement.995984 https://theredarchive.com/post/995984

Comments