Observations on the MRM.

Navel-gazing self-congratulatory bullshit time everybody! Let's go!

EDIT: I'd like to point out that I didn't want this to be a thread about my observations, but about everyones. I like commentary on my stuff, but please add your own observations! It'll be interesting to see what we all think. /EDIT:

What have you noticed about the MRM and it's tendencies? Any that bother you? Any quirks? Might not be popular, but my wall of text:

A. I've noticed there are bronies here (Not a majority, not close. But yeh, quite a few). The reasoning is obvious in my opinion. The Brony fandom phenomanae caused a large number of men to come into contact with misandry and such as a united front as opposed to individually where they could be shamed into submission, in addition to feminist hit pieces on the brony fandom and blatant double standards. Coupled, importantly perhaps, with Corporate Interests. It was in Hasbros interest to encourage the phenomanae rather than crush it. I think bronies largely won that part of the culture war on the stereotyping issue, but probably lost the battle of being taken seriously as bronies due to spaghetti. "It is acceptable for men to like MLP, but Bronies man..." (I'm a brony, just expressing what seems to be the sentiment on the whole phemonanae) Make of that what you will. I think there is a degree of cross-pollination going on. Because of their experience, Bronies will naturally align with some MRM talking points, and because of that, some MRAs will be exposed to the Brony fandom and the show.

B. The MRM really does divide on the liberal/libertarian line, and we get along just fine anyway. We are consistent in our demands for equality, but differ on our interpretations on how that should look. And that's fine. We can all discuss the injustice of the government shoveling money toward womens issues while ignoring mens, and disagree on whether the solution is money towards mens issues, or the private sector taking over. In this sense, we are not tribal. However:

C. The degree of arguable misogyny (I think it's misogyny. Not going into it here.) a small minority in the mens movement expresses is correlated to their defeatism, cynicism, despair, and bewilderment at why mens issues are not being taken seriously. As they grasp around for an answer as to why progress is stalled, models which argue that most women are just inherently selfish, or incapable of love or proper empathy, provide an answer, since this is consistent with the evidence. (Unfortunately. Though there are better explanations such as indoctrination into gynocentrism and discouragement from empathy for men, in my opinion.). And that too many men are unwilling to show solidarity for varying reasons while knowing we are right. This would be the more extreme minority of MGTOW, and some elements of some TRP persons. I've also noticed that some posters will indulge in entertaining and expressing these sentiments during particularly disturbing or sensitive events, but otherwise will argue against them (I keep track!). I think it's an emotional reaction, and probably a tribalist element of human beings in general causing it. I don't think these are legitimate views held by the MRM, rather, they are an attempt to console ourselves and eachother that the reason men are oppressed is that people are just evil fucks. A reassurance that we're good people and they are not. This is tribalism. It might serve a purpose psychologically, emotionally, and in community building, but I think it should be pointed out, and kept away from more official statements and such, as well as keeping us aware of the problems it can cause. It can perhaps be tempting for women in the movement to accept these lines, as it casts them as uniquely moral and upright compared to others, or it may come as a bit of an awkward moment. The only thing I can say is that the MRM is supposed to be a space for men to express their opinions on gender. I think the result of that is that sexism is sometimes going to appear, even if it is immediately pointed out why the person is wrong. Creating an atmosphere where men in the MRM are afraid to say their opinion in case women are offended would be very counter productive. Not only that, I would say the overwhelming majority of the discussion is egalitarian. The best we can hope for is a gradual progression and discussion with eachother, and to keep such sentiments out of any official support and materials, as well as to try and treat women MRAs better than the feminists treat their men, and not to stifle or silence their input. A suggestion which may curb the defeatism, and thus expressions of these sentiments, could be to pin a "Daily progress" thread where something got done right or whatever. (Clarification: https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/3lt3wu/observations_on_the_mrm/cvalc0h )

D. We're pretty sarcastic and laconic. It's a laugh or cry scenario. A lot of jokes are made about the situation and upvoted. Routinely, the highly upvoted posts are either mocking the establishment position, or quick and to the point explanations of why they are fundamentally flawed. More verbose posts can be upvoted, but typically are not to the extent as a good one liner.

E. We shitpost, nitpick, start bullshit arguments with eachother, and troll just as much as anybody else, and that makes me proud to be human.

F. There seems to be a divide over whether the feminist narrative is wrong as in it's flat out wrong about sexism, or whether it's wrong as in it's excluding an androcentric counterbalance, and has a part to play in understanding how women perceive and experience sexism, but that each issue should be analyzed from both perspectives. That's a rough divide. It's more of a spectrum really.

G. There is a well earned sense of paranoia about anyone outside of our movement deciding to evaluate us or talk about us and our positions.

H. Nobody is off limits, and people are not pariahs. I've seen our major figures denounced quite often on specific issues and statements, but broadly otherwise supported when they get shit right, without the type of shenanigans feminists pull. ("Why would you listen to X? He's a Y!" "But he's not discussing Y...") I think most of Paul Elams stuff is crap. But he does some really good work, and he is a viable method to get us attention, as an example.

I. We do not take a stance on nature or nurture for gender roles as a movement, and are tolerant of other positions. I think this is the mature stance to take. I personally lean heavily toward nurture, but i'm not about to say someone who takes the nature stance is sexist provided they agree that stereotypes and discrimination against men/women doing certain things should end, I don't care if they think 70% of STEM will always be men or whatever then. It's an empirical matter either way, and the evidence is inconclusive (Though suggesting of at least some nature being involved in terms of trends, even if the majority of it is nurture, in my opinion.)

J. We're not afraid to call out disingenuous arguments, titles, etc, from our own side (If we notice/catch them.), and accept some people arguing that an issue is petty while also not being "Shut up, this issue is petty!" and more "I don't care about this and don't see why people would. But you go for it.". We also do not argue for women to suffer just as much as men. As an example, quite a few times i've seen people be very explicit that men (boys really) of 16 shouldn't be jailed for sex with a 15 year old, but that neither should women. (Sure to be the prevailing opinion in posts about this subject, while also commenting on the sentence disparity.) This is something I like about our movement, and it reveals our motivations are not as our opponents say, about harming women rather than helping men.

K. We're broadly pro-trans. Those that feminists would consider anti-trans doubt the scientific basis, and I think are a minority, but they tend to be liberal/libertarian in their "Why the fuck would I care what somebody does with their own life? Go for it." way, as opposed to the more typical fire and brimstone Westboro kind (Or, indeed, the "MENZ SNEAKING INTO WIMMINZ PLACES!" kind). This is acceptable to me as a trans person, even if I sorely disagree with their evaluation of the science. When the more typical anti-trans person statements appear, they are pounced upon. (As is, come to think of it, most things inaccurate or hateful.)

That'll do for now I guess. Go ahead, what have you noticed? Think i'm wrong?