So dud reply then.
It is true and I have.
The key word was "exclusively".
The third sentence in your OP is "feminism is anti-male".
It wasn't a cop-out, it was a statement of fact. The working class are disposable in a way which "men", as a category, has never been. When people used to say "rich man's war, poor man's fight", the part they were drawing attention to wasn't "man".
MRAism is much more than anti-feminism. It is about exposing the way our society treats men and boys, and all the problems that you face being a man. It only criticizes feminism where feminist ideas harm or shame men and boys.
I don't get it. Feminism is also "exclusively" pro-woman. What's the difference?
It is a cop out because you're not actually addressing what I brought up: that men's lives and emotional well being are not considered as important as women's.
???
That is one theory of the draft, I provided an alternative. What's your point?
There's no way you actually believe this, lol. This is pure feminist propaganda. Rape is taken very seriously and will land you years in prison.
Hu, no, it's not baseless.
Somewhat.
Bullcrap. Putting men in the military has nothing to do with some sort of nefarious plan to prevent women getting power. It has to do with an ingrained worldview that women are unable to be fighters and that's the exclusive "role" of men.
I can't agree with that. MRAs have no critique of gender roles, or even the seed of one, only a laundry-list of specific and most usually incoherent grievances, and the line of argument is overwhelmingly less concerned with the grievances than with the perception that they are being ignored or obscured by the malign influence of The Feminists. MRAs have nothing constructive or insightful to say about mental illness or poverty or domestic abuse, nothing which they haven't pilfered from people who would be repulsed by the association, only feverish accusations that feminists are responsible for perpetuating these conditions.
I'm not really convinced that feminism is exclusively pro-woman, to be honest. Being brought up by and around feminists has made me a better, happier man, if only as a happy side-effect of women becoming better, happier women. But even if feminism was narrowly pro-woman, that would make sense in the context of a society which has historical favoured men to an overwhelming extent. As long as feminism is placed within a broader progressive politics, and the extent to which contemporary feminists bend over backwards to show that they're not merely feminists is by now a well-worn cliché, it takes care of itself. It's not women's responsibility to iron out whatever inequities men have inflicted on themselves.
I addressed it by pointing out that, in a system which systematically objectifies and degrades the greater mass of the population, it seems awfully goddam petty to start worrying that women aren't being as objectified and degraded as men are. Some bizarre, drunken paranoia that you might be sent to Vietnam doesn't really tip the balance, for me.
Of course they do. They criticize the idea that men are supposed to hide their emotions, that they're supposed to set aside their own happiness for the sake of their female partners, that they're supposed to do all the hard, dangerous work, etc. Where did you get this idea from? These are the kinds of comments that make me think you haven't really looked into the MRM.
Completely false. MRAs often bring attention to the fact that women abuse their males partners just as much males abuse their female partners. Or the fact that male victims of domestic violence are usually not believed. Or that there's hardly any domestic violence shelters for men.
Lol, how do you know you wouldn't have been happier otherwise? And how do you women who are brought up by and around MRAs aren't "better, happier women"? Not that these anecdotes mean anything. As you know I provided my own anecdote of living with a feminist, and it was an abusive hell.
See, this is why the idea of male privilege is so harmful to men, it allows for these ridiculous double standards. One of the biggest ideas behind MRAism is that society doesn't favor men, you can't just dismiss the movement without addressing this claim.
But of course it's ok when women do this.
Over 600,000 US males were sent against their will to Vietnam, that's not a "drunken paranoia".
This is ridiculous.
Complaints do not amount to criticism. Simply stating that certain expectations exist and that you disagree with them is not a criticism. There's a widespread assumption that men should go clean-shaven or at least closely trimmed, and reject this emphatically, but I don't build a theory out of it.
As I said, "nothing constructive or insightful to say about mental illness or poverty or domestic abuse [...] which they haven't pilfered from people who would be repulsed by the association". I don't disagree that MRAs occasionally saying something true or even useful, but I don't believe that hey have arrived at these points by their own effort, or that they understand their significance. These points are ammunition, nothing more, else they'd by now have produced at least the bare-bones of a program.
MRAs are, by their own nearly uniform testament, lonely and troubled people. That doesn't seem like a healthy environment for a child.
I don't really buy into privilege theory. Marxist, remember? I'm just observing that feminism is an historical project, and the historical legacy its dealing with is one of male power over women. "Men's Rights Activists" aren't dealing with that same weight of historical inertia, and that necessarily changes the terms of engagement.
Is it? I don't know. Don't have a great deal of context.
Aye, in the nineteen-sixties. These people are grandparents, at this point. The draft board is not coming for the twenty-year-olds of today, so it's either disingenuous or deluded to cite this as an issue for young men in America today.
Uhm yes they do? Why is it "complaining" when MRAs do it but "criticism" when feminists do it? This sounds like yet another double standard.
So what would the "criticism" version of this be?
I think you're just prejudiced against them. When they are angry about stuff they're "attacking" but when it is feminists they are engaging in "criticism".
This is an incredibly hurtful thing to say, especially considering many of these people are dealing with having their children ripped from their lives and being falsely accused of abuse.
Uhm, you said it yourself:
They absolutely do analyze historical issues. I strongly encourage you to look into the MRM more. I think, at a minimum, you would find it interesting.
I had to register for the draft. If there is a WW3 or some other major war I could be sent to die. Only men are in this predicament.
To be a bit of the Devil's Advocate, if we're ignoring past inequalities to talk only of today's issues, there isn't a lot of the old-school feminism which is still up to debate, equality under the law is more than won and people's mentalities have changed a ton.
Not quite sure it was 100% bragging as he also talked about trying to cheat on his wife & being rejected in the same tape. He was just revealing himself, revealing himself as someone without sexual boundaries. Clearly he has self-esteem issues & feels that he needs money & power for women to put up with him.
