Saturday, January 20, 2007

Some thoughts about MRAs
Since someone mentioned MRA's, in the sense that I was being unfair to them, in the comments on my last post I'm going to go ahead and lay out my position here, just so that everyone is clear. In my opinion MRAs do not have any legitimate political positions. None. Zero. The whole "divorce is so unfair because men don't get custody" thing? Dude, please...the job of the judge in a custody case is to put the child/children in whatever situation will be best FOR THE CHILD. They don't care about the feelings of the father. They don't care about the feelings of the mother, either. That's not what they're there for. The only person whose welfare they're worried about is the child, and that's exactly the way it should be.And all the "American women are so mean" crap, give me a break. Just because some woman spurned you at some point in your history that doesn't mean that all women are evil bitches. We've all had crappy relationships that ended badly. Get over it. You are not entitled to an unpaid domestic servant just because you have a dick. So sure, go get youself a mail order bride if you think that will make you happy, but just remember that the moment she enters the USA American laws apply to her too, and she just might take a look around and realise that she doesn't have to take your shit forever. And another thing...I've actually lived on every continent except Antarctica and Australia, and women in other parts of the world are just like women here. Some are great, some are not so great, they all have actual individual personalities of their own. They're not the Borg in an apron. Assuming that they're all just dying to be your devoted little woman is a very foolish thing to do.And before you even start on the draft...we currently do not have a draft. I don't think we're going to any time soon, because even Chimpy Mc Flight Suit isn't that enthusiastic about committing political suicide. If we did have a draft I would have no particular philosopshical objection to it including women (Israel's been doing it that way for years), BUT I think the draft is wrong, period. Remind me why we're talking about this even though it doesn't actually exist again? So, yeah, not a fan of the MRAs. Being angry and bitter because you went through a rough divorce is not a great basis for a political movement.And no, feminist aren't criticising MRAs because we don't like men. We just don't like you, because we're generally not big fans of either sexism or stupidity.
And if you think I'm being a bitch and don't want to talk to me any more? The door's right over there. Don't let it smack you in the ass on the way out.

15 comments:

am i a bodyfascist? said...

looks like you just proved my point of some feminists generalising without bothering to look closer re: mras.

re: 'interesting that you're so willing to listen to criticism of feminists but not of MRAs', obviously you didn't actually digest what i wrote in my original comment:

'what i disliked was your lumping all mra's together, frankly reminds me of plenty mra's doing just the same re: feminists, which i don't approve of either, same as i'm opposed to anyone being judged/labeled by their sex, general political views etc. instead of by their individual views and actions.'

'while i can understand men for such reasons being mad at women just like i can understand women being mad at men for other reasons, still 'doesn't make it alright', in case you know song by the specials'

this adressed limited perception of hypocrite mras btw is the reason why i don't label myself as one either and have arguments with and am called names by plenty of them. however, flat out statements like 'In my opinion MRAs do not have any legitimate political positions. None. Zero.' cause actually everything is aaa ok except for every man feeling different just being another patriarchal asshole spurned by women at some point and therefore thinking all women being evil bitches like you so eloquently point out, in my opinion isn't open minded nor unbiased either but rather 'file under typical' as well.

Cassandra Says said...

I have looked very closely. I spent about a year attempting to engage with MRAs, and I stand behind my statement. The movement is nonsense. It is founded on a false premise. It is the KKK for men. The current social system does indeed suck for men in many ways, but MRAs do not have the answer because they are placing the blame for the ways in which the system is fucked up on the wrong people.
Oh, and other thing? I am not inclined to take seriously arguments from people who are incapable of mastering the basics of spelling and grammar. A few typos are one thing, generalised incoherency is another.
And by the way, there is a difference between judging someone on their sex (or race, or sexual orientation) and judging them on their political views. Political views are something one chooses. It behooves one to choose carefully.

am i a bodyfascist? said...

btw. i wrote 'general political views', meaning i'm not into subtleties like 'all dems/reps/whatever are just the same'. re: 'KKK for men', find it as substantial as eg. 'feminazi'. anyway, sorry if i upset you, hit a sore spot, conjured unpleasant memories or whatever.

as for my typos, in case you didn't notice, english isn't my 1st language, and who knows, being in my shoes rsp. having to write in my 1st language, perhaps you'd fare even worse. however, having to rub my nose into it as an 'argument', file under guess what.

Cassandra Says said...

bodyfascist - I actually was not aware that English wasn't your first language, and I apologise for that particular dig. I would not have said it if I realised that you were writing in your second language. I have had to communicate in a foreign language (see sidebar - I grew up mostly in the Middle East and Asia), and it's hard, no doubt about that. I was assuming that you were either American or British, since every MRA I've encountered so far has been one or the other.
As to the other part, though...I still don't buy the basic premise of the MRA worldview. I agree that there are some things that suck for men (most notably the way society treats men who don't fit the masculine stereotype - gay bashing is not a joke-and the way it teaches men to ignore physical and emotional pain - there's a reason why so many men die of prostate cancer, which is highly treatable and should not be the killer it is). What I don't agree with is the idea that feminists are responsible for those problems. I also don't agree that there is some terrible fundamental thing wrong with Western women and that women in the Third World are somehow fundamentally different - again, I've actually lived in other parts on the world, and in my observation people are pretty much just people wherever you go (both men and women).

am i a bodyfascist? said...

hey, also in uk and us many are esl and constantly learning (though i'm aware others refuse doing so), but thanks for apologising and changing your tone.

as said, i wouldn't label myself as an mra, cause some of the things you mention just keep bugging me too. like e.g. the blanket blaming of feminism. on the other hand i have to agree that many things going down under the label of 'feminism' are not really about equal rights but about special rights, giving women the rights they deserve but sparing them from the liabilities that (at least for men) go with them. having the right to vote but being exempt from the draft (as long as there is one, btw don't like it either) is one example, and though atm there's no draft in the us, it's not impossible it might be back in effect sooner or later, and i doubt the actual regulations would include women.

one other example, i don't get it why after a divorce (assumed the woman gets custody, which would be another topic yet) a man should be obliged to fully pay for her till the last of the kids is of age (and jail him if he doesn't), so she can be full time housewife and refuse getting a job herself too, even if the kids are going to school or even working themselves. I don't think it's fair defining women as / reducing them to breeders and housewifes, but how about men as beasts of burden and sole breadwinners?

i don't know how close you followed the thread over at http://renegadeevolution.blogspot.com/2007/01/ah-yes-three-hours-of-sleep-later.html re: paternity fraud / men having to pay for kids despite they're not their own, which is just one more related example (and never mind byrdie's lack of style, unrational argumentation and general misses, which i'm also criticising myself there), also for women often being oblivious of it cause of not being at the receiving end. also re: this new trend in the uk and some states declaring pre-nups invalid at divorce or making living together the same as being married legally incl. shared assets (not exactly pro-choice imho). when i was married in switzerland, we could choose whether each to his/hers own financially, or keep each what we brought in and share everything after marriage, or share everything at all, a range which i still find sound. also in our case having chosen the first option and no kids involved, made divorce rather painless, though i have to say my ex-wife was fair and square as well (unlike many other cases i know of).

re: mra's and foreign women, just another mystery to me atm, same as many mra's on the one hand opting for traditional gender roles and declaring 'before feminism everything was better', but not wanting to play wage slaves or living in the fifties or 19th century either.

appreciated you mentioned the pressure to fit into the male stereotype, which btw also (see above) still includes being rich and the main breadwinner, also in the eyes of probly most women. in my perception patriarchy benefits only rich males anyway and opresses all others, but i learned better as to just mention this to an average 'feminist'. still wouldn't label myself marxist just the same. and wouldn't prefer matriarchy either.

as said, for me it kinda boils down to honesty, loyalty (in the sense of being true to your words), equal opportunities and shared responsabilities, that's what i judge others by and also would like being judged by myself, regardless of gender, race, *general* political views and all the rest.

byrdeye said...

The movement is nonsense. It is founded on a false premise. It is the KKK for men.

That's funny, cuz I came to the same conclusion about feminism. The 2nd wave was funded by elite interests and founded on a pack of lies designed to tool women against Men and families.

By contrast, MRAs are a very fact-based GRASSROOTS movement...that spontaneously arose out of the systematic abuse of fed-up Men. Yes, some are more radical than others (just like in feminism), but at the core we do have a lot of common ground and some VERY legit issues.

Particular travesties of injustice against Men now currently include devastating false rape charges (where the accusers are shielded but the accused can be publically tarred without evidence), widespread paternity fraud, egregious child support demands (even for kids that aren't yours) and horrendously biased "no fault" divorce laws that give desperate housewives a financial incentive to take their hubbies to the cleaners.

The system now is designed to chew Men up and spit us out with every romantic interaction with women.

am i a bodyfascist? - I think we actually share a lot of the same views - that feminists will dismiss no matter what beccause they refuse to ever see us as human beings worthy of fair treatment. We are the enemy in their eyes, by virtue of our bait & tackle. End of story.

So, the real question you should be asking yourself is "am i an mra-in-denial still seeking female approval?" And if so, realize that you will never get it, regardless of how much you kowtow to them.

byrdeye said...

Don't be a sucka, am i a bodyfascist?. You are only shooting yourself in the foot by continuing to grovel at the sharp heels of these feminists.

am i a bodyfascist? said...

dear mr byrd

i know i am a mangina. and a male chauvinist pig. and a dirty communist. and a nazi skinhead. and a closet homosexual. and a hetero-fascist. and a filthy hippie. and an anal retentive square. and about every other name in the book. heard it all before. just depends whom i'm talking to. strange world, isn't it?

clue: it's not about approval by others. it's about being true to oneself.

think about it. (though personally reckon i wouldn't gamble on that.)

and re: my opinion of e.g. your lumping all feminists together or your grandiose style, guess you've heard it by now ...

byrdeye said...

^ Yet, as apologetic as you are for your views...feminists do not return the same extension of civil understanding...and instead stonewall us as "nonsense" and "the KKK for men."

Think about this - you are bending over backwards to sugarcoat your message with sensitivity to feminists...yet they return that with hostile hyperboles intended to offend. You are caring for them more than you care about yourself...yet they could care less about you. All because you have XY chromosomes.

I'm guessing you're probably around 25-26...and have started to awaken to the truth...but are still in the midst of deprogramming yourself from your default misandrism and female sympathizing. It's an evolutionary process that's a function of time and consistent feedback from reality.

Give yourself another 5 years or so and you'll be a full-fledged MRA...and not ashamed of it.

am i a bodyfascist? said...

byrd: since i was divorced about 20 yrs ago i'm hardly mid-20ies ... closed-minded people like you domineering on both sides is why i'm neither mra nor pro-feminist ... and don't think here is the place for us to discuss, so won't reply no more

Cassandra Says said...

byrdeye - This blog is not the MRA recruiting forum. If you wish to attempt to convert the masses to your viewpoint, please do it somewhere else. I've heard everything you're saying a thousand times before, and it's boring.

belledame222 said...

oh god, he found you, too? my condolences. he's quite the busy little character.

i gotta say, pretty much all of the men calling themselves MRA's have resemble byrdeye there far more than y'know, not.

There are some men who seem sympathetic to some of their concerns, and have problems with feminism, or have found it not addressing their concerns, who, like aiab here, don't call themselves MRA's.

the area where i'm most sympathetic is wrt abuse. as you noted, below, there are some appallingly ignorant things being said about male rape victims by self-Id'd feminists; I just came from somewhere where the speaker wasn't nearly as hostile/vile but did say she (?) didn't believe that rape of males was all that common outside of the prison system. This is an issue, and I am totally sympathetic to men wanting/needing to take this up among themselves. i think that if this is not part and parcel of feminism, then at minimum feminists ought to be allies to any such work.

actually, you know, i don't really see the MRA's talking about this as such at all; i think y'know they tend to be a little too invested in being "manly" to admit such vulnerability themselves.

mostly what i see them going on about are things like father's rights and divorce cases, which, well, doesn't interest me a whole lot, since i'm not married, don't have kids, and hetero legal things aren't something i know a lot about. in general however i am not impressed with people who are more concerned with -their own- "rights" as a -father- than with what's best for the actual, you know, kid.

that said, i expect there are some cases wherein the woman is indeed abusive, and it isn't really noticed or believed. from reading some of the bigger sites, i get the impression that a fair number of MRA's of this ilk had probably been partnered with borderline woman, judging from the way they talk about them. i also think a lot of them sound like abusers/narcissists themselves, or at minimum deeply unconscious.

oh, and the draft. well, y'know, pacifist activism's over that way; i've got plenty of respect for that. No? oh, and you're not into women soldiers either? so, you're still upholding the basic assumptions that lead to men being drafted for wars, you just want to bitch about -you- maybe having to register? buh bye.

as far as the stuff where it bleeds over into "PickUp Artist" and "muscular Christianity" territory, i just think, oh, -brother-. pull my finger, you pathetic dweebs, that gag's got whiskers on it. so not interested.

so yeah, i do think that men need -something,- but i also think it really needs to be connected to a much deeper examination of traditional gender roles, and how they affect & hurt men, specifically, and what -else- they might do about it besides retreat to the basement for a pity party.

i also think if a lot of straight men could get the fuck over their homophobia, they could learn a lot from gay men, in terms of activism, support, even theory to some degree.

Cassandra Says said...

Yep, he found me...hopefully it's temporary and he'll go away soon.
Speaking off...is there any way in Blogger to actually block someone I just don't want to hear from?
You echoed my point. There really are some things that suck for men, but are MRAs interested in talking about those? Noooo. That would conflict with one's self-image as a manly man. Much more fun to sit around pissing and moaning about how the women are being mean to them.
The custody thing drives me nuts. How hard is it to grasp the idea that what the legal system is concerned with is the welfare of the child? For a movement with so many people who call themselves Christains they seem to have forgotten the story about how you can tell who the REAL parent is because they're the one who would rather give up the child than harm them. Selfish brats.

belledame222 said...

if you mean like banning IP addresses or logins and so on, not that i'm aware of, alas. personally i just delete their posts without responding. they get bored and go away pretty quick. thus far.

belledame222 said...

but yeah, so meanwhile i just encountered some i guess woman spouting the radfem boilerplate whilst simultaneously using the opportunity of some guy mentioning his own experience as a survivor, no stats or any MRA shit whatsoever, just some well-meant (if i didn't necessarily agree with all of it) mostly gender-neutral advice for self-protection, to say, she doesn't believe "male rape" happens all that often outside of prisons. and this guy sounds like an MRA, and proceeds to argue as though he had said a bunch of shit he actually hadn't. then, when i respond, i am apparently "defending MRA's." great! thanks for stopping by and sharing! asshole. i let her have it after that.