Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 23 of 23

Thread: A Challenge for MRA's and Anti-Fems

  1. #21
    Senior Member mr_e's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Eastern USA
    Posts
    7,514
    Blog Entries
    6
    Rep Power
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by voidspawn View Post
    I don't see it as being about what the good folks do, most people know full well how to get along. Men and women know how to get along have done for 100's of k's years. People also know that they need to various levels keep bad behaviour in check. This is where the dividing line is I think, good men keep bad men in check and more so they do it through a system of justice which is in both parts respectful of a person's freedom to be an arsehole and need to protect the innocent. However good women don't keep bad women in check, they expect men to do it then disable them from having the approaches and support to do it. Men on threat of jail time and social destruction have to step back when a woman behaves appallingly, and the number of good women stepping forward to deal with bad behaviour is way too few to deal with the problem.

    I'm not talking about bad behaviour like insulting, rowdiness, drunken anti-social behaviour, though women get a clear message they can get away with that, most men with sense step back let that woman self destruct. Where men can protect themselves and others by pulling back they will and won't complain about it. Personal responsibility is something men learn. But when the behaviour is false accusations, parental alienation, lying and manipulation and the motives are greed and vindictiveness and males are stripped from using the law, evidence is ignored and blocked, and their voice gets dismissed as microaggressions, mansplaining and verbal assault, good women need to step up. It's called fairness, they want a society where women are safe from men so they've pushed the system to ban men from even defending themselves. In that case the fair thing for women to do is either you step up and defend them or change the rules to fair ones where people get equal say and can defend themselves. If not that then society needs to fall apart fully, good men would be better off without it and ultimately so would good women.

    I don't disagree with you. And we should definitely continue to have a wing of our MHRM organization which continues to point out and hammer home these truths. But the point that I was hoping to make here, admittedly somewhat by way of inverted example, is to consider how Feminism makes us (as in, goes out of its way and works to make us) feel. And then they claim they want us to be Feminists too-- of course they do. That just makes their job of indoctrination and take-over that much easier. Even though there isn't a sane person on the planet who could rationally and with a straight face, assert that Feminism has anything good in it for men at all. Ironically-- (and thankfully)-- part of what makes Feminism so unpalatable for men is the "Feminism" part, not to mention the generally repulsive aspect of the Feminists themselves.

    But if we are being honest and truthful with ourselves, we should consider the message that we, in the MHRM, are inadvertently sending to women (and men) as we confront, battle, and pick apart the hateful Feminist narrative and its mountain of insidious lies. There is of course the *TRUTH* aspect of our message-- and that isn't nothing. But many of our audience are (self-designated) "Feminists", of the "Ordinary Woman" / "Feminist-Lite" variety who don't particularly agree (or are even much aware) with the full-on radical Feminist doctrine and ideology. And yet as we take on the Feminists and blast them head-on with truth bombs and antiseptic sunshine, these other "Feminist-Lite" women are kind of the moral casualties of the exchange. Additionally-- and of no direct fault of our own-- is the "stigma" that "Men's Rights" / "MRA's" / "Anti-Feminism" and the rest has accumulated in the mainstream media, and throughout the mainstream society which follows (and swallows) all of the malignant effluvium they produce. So if you are one of those off-to-the-sides "Feminist-Lite" sort of women (or men) you can imagine the sort of message that *THEY* believe they are being besieged with from us-- whether rightfully as we actually take on (and take down) the Feminist lies and myths-- and indirectly as a result of the misinformation and slander campaigns by the Feminist and the mainstream media cronies.

    So my thinking is that if you are one of those "Feminist-Lite" women (or men) who isn't really hard-core but just going through the motions since those seem to be the motions-- what does the MHRM have in it for you? If all we say is "Equality", that's of course true, but it's also the same thing that the Feminists have been selling them all along. And if they have TWO versions of equality to pick, one that seems to GIVE THEM STUFF even though it might seem a little smarmy at times, versus the other which is telling them what they know in their hearts has got to be true (but they just don't want to admit it to themselves, or out loud)-- and they don't even get a cookie for following along... where is the incentive for them to switch? Seeing as how not everybody is imbued with moral character or personal integrity...

    So I think we need to figure out a way to make "Truth" and "Righteousness" more palatable alternatives. If we can't change what they *mean* or provide, maybe at the very least we can sex them up a bit and make them more fun to adhere to. Give 'em a pat on the back and some good ole social recognition when they do it. You know, feed them what they're *really* hungry for-- what they've always been hungry for-- and what it is that Feminism (or the Lite version of it) has always been claiming to do for them-- recognition. A pat on the head and telling them that they're special and that they matter. We don't have to be so obvious about it that we think *everybody* is special and *everybody* matters... right? They can figure that out later for themselves when they open the package and smell the bouquet. Everybody wants to be on the "winning team" and that's one of the reasons why Feminism is so appealing to them. It gives them stuff and they get to think to themselves that they're morally justified in their beliefs and their attitudes about (and passive dismissal of) men. And what are we doing to counter that? Nothing really, IMO. Simply laying it on harder and thicker and making it harder for them to allow themselves to hear our message, because in the process, it requires them to admit to themselves that they were at least a little bit complicit in its propager, if not personally more culpable in its origin.

    Nobody (I think) *wants* to be a bigot. And what is Feminism if not bigotry taken to a rarefied extreme?

    So we, in the MHRM, have the stick. And we've been using it to "Fuck Their Shit Up" (FTSU) for some time now. We also need to have a softer side. A gentler side. One that appeals more to their basic nature and gives them the ego strokes they're so desperate for, and helps them and encourages them to *want* to be on the *righteous* side, the *moral* side-- and the ethical side. Instead of just being on the side that gives them free stuff. One of the ways that Feminism works its insidious magic is that it immediately entitles the beholder as a member of the club-- if she's *female* that is. And what better enticement than "free stuff" plus membership in an exclusive club could there be for weak ethically-challenged narcissistic minds? M was right really when he said it boils down to marketing. We need to figure out how to make it "cool" to be for Men and their issues-- give ourselves a face and a voice, apart from Paul Elam and A Voice For Men. I am not knocking either one-- please don't hear me saying that. I simply mean that we need to give the MHRM a "sexier" look that women can feel more comfortable in identifying with. One that shows them in a positive light AND gives them the extra added advantage of being on the side of truth. Figure out a way to give them the MHRM version of the "Members-Only" jacket...
    FEMINISM is a HATE GROUP - Feminists are HATEFUL PEOPLE
    It's time to call it out for what it is.



    The World of Men - Men's Rights / MGTOW / Sites of Interest to Men

    http://forums.avoiceformen.com/showt...nterest-to-Men

  2. #22
    Senior Member Manalysis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    4,661
    Rep Power
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by mr_e View Post
    So we, in the MHRM, have the stick. And we've been using it to "Fuck Their Shit Up" (FTSU) for some time now. We also need to have a softer side. A gentler side. One that appeals more to their basic nature and gives them the ego strokes they're so desperate for, and helps them and encourages them to *want* to be on the *righteous* side, the *moral* side-- and the ethical side. Instead of just being on the side that gives them free stuff. One of the ways that Feminism works its insidious magic is that it immediately entitles the beholder as a member of the club-- if she's *female* that is. And what better enticement than "free stuff" plus membership in an exclusive club could there be for weak ethically-challenged narcissistic minds? M was right really when he said it boils down to marketing. We need to figure out how to make it "cool" to be for Men and their issues-- give ourselves a face and a voice, apart from Paul Elam and A Voice For Men. I am not knocking either one-- please don't hear me saying that. I simply mean that we need to give the MHRM a "sexier" look that women can feel more comfortable in identifying with. One that shows them in a positive light AND gives them the extra added advantage of being on the side of truth. Figure out a way to give them the MHRM version of the "Members-Only" jacket...
    But that requires rebranding (I tried to write you up a bi'nis filosofy back there ...), and rebranding requires knowing the values of the target group.
    So, what do all these women feel about men? How do they feel about themselves, and how would they like men and women to feel about each other?
    Idk, but I assume one would be looking at some kind of complementarianism, "different, but equal", with men appreciating women for being women, and vice versa. Formal equality before the law, i.e. equality of opportunity, etc. etc.

    My problem with this is the question which of these branches should be activist, the MRA, or the GetAlongs. As was pointed out, MRA victories consist in "honourable mention", and not so much actual action, either pro-men, or antifeminist, i.e. roll-back of discriminatory laws.
    I doubt you'll get many women enthusiastic over giving up privileges, so that can't be written in too bold letters on the GetAlong flyer.
    And MRAs will still be a far too easily overlooked, minuscule inority.

    But by all means, good luck.

    M

  3. #23
    Senior Member Manalysis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    4,661
    Rep Power
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by mr_e View Post
    Yes, you're right all the way down the line in every one of your points-- and that's why you're wrong ;-)

    What I mean is that there are a lot of people who are followers and don't do much of their own thinking. They're the ones who are always looking for "mysticism", or the "magic circles", or the "pyramid power"-- or whatever the latest voodoo fad is. Doesn't matter how outlandish, unscientific or downright stupid it is-- logic doesn't just fail them, it flees before their mighty new age mojo. For people like that-- particularly female people-- Feminism provides them a "buffet of goodness" from which to snack. A little of this, a pinch of that, and a dash of that other stuff-- and voila, they have an instant "philosophy" they can use to club everybody else over the head with.

    We usually talk about the Male Feminists (along with the White Knights and Manginas) as our main opponents-- and of course in a way they are, they certainly represent the "Hard Power" (by proxy) that Feminism generally has to wield-- but its "Mystical Girl", along with her sassy sisters, who make up the vast bulk of the "Feminist horde" who, with all their baubles and beads, are down with "the struggle" to "end female oppression" as they sip their double-lattes and don their pink pussy hats and go marching down the street so they can "fight for their rights". Those are the ones that the radicals write their slogans for. Those are the ones who believe in the "wage gap" and "rape culture" and "The Patriarchy". Those are the ones who so casually inflict damage onto the men in their vicinity with their pre-formulated views, their canned feminist maxims, and their smarmy platitudes, all carefully-crafted into 240 characters bites that they can regurgitate without a second (or first) thought. These are the ones who are swayed by social trends who don't really have any actual grief or gripe with men-- it's just trendy to be "anti-man" / feminist / tragically-hip / sjw victim-- and to attend all the rallies and speeches, and go shopping for new outfits so they can impress the boy in the black shirt with the baseball bat...

    The problem for us is that they have a purse full of dollars. It doesn't matter where the money comes from, only that it's in their hands to spend it. And that's how and why they get all the attention-- not that they are cognizant enough to realize it, or savvy enough to figure out what to do with it if it ever occurred to them. They are the sheeple, the Feminist cannon fodder-- and the target du jur for the big multi-national conglomerates who are busy raping our planet in their never-ending zeal to acquire it all, rule it all, and hold sway over every rock and living thing in all of known creation. They have all but broken the back of traditional society, just about vanquished the "real men", and are now laser-focused on this trendy lot as their key to ultimate victory.

    But even as their mystical vapidity offers the mega-corporations their greatest toehold to glory, so too is it also their biggest weakness-- and they are well aware of it. That is why they work so very hard to control the sights and sounds so as to constantly apprise and influence these weak thinkers in their attitudes, thoughts and beliefs. They are busy leading them around by their nose rings as they spoon feed (or force-feed as needed) whatever "News" and "Information" has the most beneficial effect. Of course they have to do it in little doses and dollops in order to keep the few who remain capable of independent thought from seeing too much of the big picture or for too long-- and they sprinkle little diversions throughout the system to keep them busy and distracted so its harder for them to rally any support or muster up any serious resistance.

    And of course the men don't much matter in this social democracy-- whose rules and modes shift this way and that, in accordance to the trends and attitudes pushed down through the corporate media. They have been broken-- cultured and cowed into submission-- not to the women directly, but to the Almighty State which the women control indirectly-- though they don't consciously know it or realize it through their thick lenses of personal "victim-hood". The only concern for the men is that they keep toiling away and producing, and are kept impotent through constant strife, shaming and blaming, and of course ineffective diversions such as gaming, whacking off, and engaged in other trivial pursuits. It doesn't matter much what as long as it doesn't permit them to come together and compare notes, or develop any sort of common understanding or ability to act collectively.

    And they can have all the "Free Speech" they can eat-- as it doesn't really matter at the end of the day. They are so beaten down and ineffective that it doesn't matter what they say. Or who they say it to. As long as the corporate-controlled media is able to inject their element of "shame and blame" and cast their dispersions so that the men are kept in a state of constant unrest and incapable of coherent action. It even works to their advantage after a fashion when a percentage of the men act to reinforce the bullshit they're feeding the women and become the White Knights and Manginas, and thus help "police" their own ranks-- effectively for free-- in a veritable ideological "twofer".

    The upshot is that in order to "drain that swamp" and siphon away the mystical masses, it is necessary to construct a counter-narrative for them to follow-- and then figure out how to make it trendy and hip so that the "savvy sisters" will pick it up and parrot it throughout the fickle forest of feminine frivolity. In other words, give them something new to do-- think about, believe. Wrest them away from their corporate overlords and inject them with new 240-character platitudes to propagate. We are talking about a "hive-mind" here, the center of the herd-- where they don't think or react like you and I do. Simple maxims rule the day. And anything that spooks them, they run for their "man"-- who has now become the State. So while it is necessary to target the State, and by extension, the power it wields in the form of "men"-- it is also necessary to target the herd and inject new some maxims, and work to reshape their 50+ year instinct to rely on the State instead of their individual men. We have to work on the Men too, because as weak and disrupted as they are, they are not likely to be seen as "viable" candidates for "husbands" (protectors / provisioners) in their current beaten-down state. So the problem is ultimately several-fold, and its response needs to be considered and specifically constructed to target the specific stratum of the social order which needs to be affected. There are already a number of plans and challenges underway to address other various aspects of this overall situation. My point in this post / thread is that we *also* need to develop a strategy for relieving the proponents of hateful Feminism from their easily-swayed, easily-led-- easily-duped band of followers. Because *THAT* is what Feminism offers them. And at the very small price of simply "tossing your man under the bus"-- a cost which we've seen all too often and to our own detriment, that women seem quite willing and prepared to pay.
    Seriously, the only slightly facetious ad copy talk was meant to be a serious rival to outright bashing. Here it is again:

    I give you one word: "holistic". Add local seasoning and dilute to taste:

    "We need to transcend the ruling divisive gender discourse paradigm, and embrace a more enlightened, a kinder, and truly holistic and intuitive insight into the essential complementarity of the natural dyadic of this our ever creative spark if we want to be able to weave a sustainable human ecology that will nurture our children,and our children's children, in a bid for a truly spiritual future for all humanity."

    The whole premise of Feminism is the gender divide, that we belong to different and, to them, competing sexes; and if you are an etymology afficionado, you'll of course already know that "sex" is from the latin "sexus", i.e. "cut", which we find in other words like "section" and "sector" ("that which is cut off"), "disect" ("cut in two"), etc.

    Hence, the counter-premise must be that which is not cut apart, i.e. the whole, the intact, the, well, uncut.
    And "holistic" is such a nice word for that.

    And if there are "parts", they supply each other, support each other, are there for each other; that is, instead of competing with each other, they are complementary, they "complete" the other, like a good gin and tonic.

    The rest is buzzwords from this weird part "spiritual", part "ecofriendly" university hipster poet talk; unusable as-is, but I think it points in the direction one might go to find something appealing to the general public.

    M
    Last edited by Manalysis; 09-12-2017 at 04:30 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •