Men's Rights Activists

  • Thread starter Thread starter QI 541
  • Start date Start date
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
The only area in which I agree with mras it that women often get shorter sentences for crimes, usually when the crime is sex or violence based. I can only recall one case in Australia where a women was charged with rape. I do believe that as society gets more gender equal we will see more of these types of crimes committed by women because if you believe that women are equally capable of achieving as much as a man then you have to accept that they are equally capable of being as "evil" as a man and society is yet to wrap their heads around that fact.

Fun fact, discovering that women commit rape almost as much as men (by the feminist definition of rape, but not the current legal one) is something that was discovered by a study conducted by feminists and is almost never mentioned by mars.

edit: to clarify, the feminist definition of rape includes when a man is forced of coerced to penetrate a women or another man. finding the original study on where they got that statistic is difficult (but I will keep looking and link to it when I do find it) but if that was made law, women would make up around 45% (some sources go as low as 40% others go as high as 47%) of rape cases. A group tried to make it law at one point but it was rejected on the grounds that it will give male rapists the perfect defence in court. if you google 'forced to penetrate' you can see multiple sources (both official news and blogs) that reference the study. The problem is that people still tend to think of rapists as being people who stalk strangers in dark alleyways but the truth is that is very rare these days. Most rapes are committed by someone who knows the victim and by abusing soft power or taking advantage of someone who is not able to consent at the time (e.g. drunk, mentally retarded, on drugs, asleep/passed out)

Although even if they do have the occasional point there insistence on blaming everything that goes wrong in their lives on a femanazi conspiracy theory and their casual misogyny makes them look like insane retards.

Also the majority of mras are not men who are genuinely persecuted (black men, gay men ect) but men who their maleness doesn't allow them to get away with as much as they used to (they took their wives for granted and she dumped his neglectful ass as soon as no fault Devorce laws were passed, you reap what you sow)

Before the mansphere "love shy" forum was created I was unsure if mras were considered lolcowish enough to warrant their own thread so I created an "mra debate thread in deep thoughts. The results were mixed but mostly that you should judge each of them individually and being an mra alone does not make you a lolcow. Also most people hate mras and didn't want to discuss them
 
Last edited:
Dudeofteenage said:
Isn't that basically correct?
Click to expand...
While it is factually correct, it is not currently implemented in law I'm America or Australia

The only location where a women received jail time for doing this is in Russia (say what you want about that country but they have been ahead of the west in terms of gender equality since the second would war with WW2 female soldiers and even an elite all-female WW2 bomber team called the night witches)
 
observer said:
While it is factually correct, it is not currently implemented in law I'm America or Australia

The only location where a women received jail time for doing this is in Russia (say what you want about that country but they have been ahead of the west in terms of gender equality since the second would war with WW2 female soldiers and even an elite all-female WW2 bomber team called the night witches)
Click to expand...

Are you saying America doesn't prosecute female rapists?

http://fox4kc.com/2015/05/17/woman-convicted-of-breaking-into-apartment-raping-man-headed-to-prison/

http://mobile.wnd.com/2014/08/39783/

http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news...-Raping-Child-Faces-Sentencing-330667101.html

Dang dirty feminazis getting away with everything in pussified America.
 
Last edited:
Dudeofteenage said:
Yes but when a feminist says 'X is rape' they are usually not describing current laws, but rather describing an ideal definition that current laws may or may not meet.
Click to expand...

Their definition of rape usually seems to exclude any of their favored groups, so women are literally incapable of it, especially lesbians who take advantage of children.
 
There is definitely a war on men,men's rights,masculinity,and young boys going on in the world today.

It's very obvious and plain to see.

Men's rights and Men's rights activism are certainly a legitimate issue.

The big problem is that advocates of the above do not campaign aggressively like the feminists do and also they cannot stand united.

They are just as likely to bicker with one another as they with their "opponents".

But if a great leader can arise who can unite the men in mass opposition it will be huge.

Lets put it this way.

The big problem with alot of the response from men to modern women and the resulting culture that it developed was that it was reactive.

It was addressing the symptoms instead of the root issue.

For example say women start becoming bitchy and hostile towards men.

The response is instead of taking a stand together against this bad behavior and bringing it under control men instead developed a whole system to navigate the bad behavior and still succeed with women regardless.

Then they competed with each other to see who was best at it and turned against each other instead of against poor female behavior.They became enablers.

Instead of just forcing women to stop acting like that by removing themselves until they got their act together.

Which trust me they would have if the massive majority of men had stood firm and all rejected it until women came back with a better attitude towards them.

But they didn't do that.

And the few men who did do it wouldn't matter since the massive majority would still enable the bad behavior.

It'd be like if starbucks started charging $10 for a cup of coffee and 99% of their business complained but still kept coming back and buying the coffee regardless.

That 1% who stopped coming and took a stand wouldn't matter since 99% are still enabling the absurd prices.

But if 99% of starbucks customer base protested and stood together and boycotted starbucks and refused to come buy their coffee anymore until they returned it to the original price,they would be forced to drop the prices to keep their business running and the prices would become fair again.

In the same way men became enablers of bad female behavior.They failed to be leaders and thus they had to keep finding coping strategies for bad female behavior instead of stopping the bad behavior in the first place.

That's what PUA,etc was.It didn't stop bad female behavior.It was just a coping mechanism instead of addressing the root issue.

This is also why no positive change is happening for men or mens rights.Because men won't stand together and keep stabbing each other in the back.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
SlayerOfTyranny said:
There is definitely a war on men,men's rights,masculinity,and young boys going on in the world today.

It's very obvious and plain to see.

Men's rights and Men's rights activism are certainly a legitimate issue.

The big problem is that advocates of the above do not campaign aggressively like the feminists do and also they cannot stand united.

They are just as likely to bicker with one another as they with their "opponents".

But if a great leader can arise who can unite the men in mass opposition it will be huge.

Lets put it this way.

The big problem with alot of the response from men to modern women and the resulting culture that it developed was that it was reactive.

It was addressing the symptoms instead of the root issue.

For example say women start becoming bitchy and hostile towards men.

The response is instead of taking a stand together against this bad behavior and bringing it under control men instead developed a whole system to navigate the bad behavior and still succeed with women regardless.

Then they competed with each other to see who was best at it and turned against each other instead of against poor female behavior.They became enablers.

Instead of just forcing women to stop acting like that by removing themselves until they got their act together.

Which trust me they would have if the massive majority of men had stood firm and all rejected it until women came back with a better attitude towards them.

But they didn't do that.

And the few men who did do it wouldn't matter since the massive majority would still enable the bad behavior.

It'd be like if starbucks started charging $10 for a cup of coffee and 99% of their business complained but still kept coming back and buying the coffee regardless.

That 1% who stopped coming and took a stand wouldn't matter since 99% are still enabling the absurd prices.

But if 99% of starbucks customer base protested and stood together and boycotted starbucks and refused to come buy their coffee anymore until they returned it to the original price,they would be forced to drop the prices to keep their business running and the prices would become fair again.

In the same way men became enablers of bad female behavior.They failed to be leaders and thus they had to keep finding coping strategies for bad female behavior instead of stopping the bad behavior in the first place.

That's what PUA,etc was.It didn't stop bad female behavior.It was just a coping mechanism instead of addressing the root issue.

This is also why no positive change is happening for men or mens rights.Because men won't stand together and keep stabbing each other in the back.
Click to expand...
This is ridiculous hyperbole worthy of the loveshy forum- there is no war on men and feminists don't control the world.

There are a handful of areas men are disadvantaged in and a handful women are disadvantaged in.

The reason most men aren't United into some grand patriarchal restoration movement is most men are perfectly happy with the status quo and not disadvantaged in their day to day lives.

PUA isn't coping- its just people preying on a certain type of insecure women. They have existed since long before feminism: see the Georgian Dandy or venetian duelling class.
 
Short version:

Men and women do not have the same nature.When you try to make women like men and men like women (what is currently happening) it results in a dysfunctional relationship between the two.Thus the interaction between the two stops being symbiotic and instead becomes antagonistic.Men and women must compete with one another instead of support one another.This leads to unhappiness and dissatisfaction for both parties.

Long version:

This is ridiculous hyperbole worthy of the loveshy forum- there is no war on men and feminists don't control the world.
Click to expand...

The war on men is all around you.It's not hard to see.

I didn't claim that feminists control the world.

But they are the dominant ideology in the modern world.They are not a authority of their own merit but they are supported by the actual authorities who support the ideology and enforce it.

Do you not believe that feminism reaches as far as the government and the courts?

There are a handful of areas men are disadvantaged in and a handful women are disadvantaged in.
Click to expand...

I can tell you plenty of areas where men are disadvantaged.

What areas can you tell me where women are disadvantaged?

The reason most men aren't United into some grand patriarchal restoration movement is most men are perfectly happy with the status quo and not disadvantaged in their day to day lives.
Click to expand...

Are you sure that you speak for all men?

I think there might be alot more male dissatisfaction than you think and it is only growing.

Additionally just because men are not acting in unified open revolt does not indicate satisfaction.

It indicates tolerance which is not the same thing.

The general population usually has to be pushed extremely far before they will band together and actively revolt against authority.But they might have been very dissatisfied long before that.

Alot of men I don't think even intellectually understand the problem nor are they even aware that there is an alternative.They might intuitively feel that something is off but don't know what exactly.

Many of them probably don't even realize that there is an alternative and that this is not normal or how things are supposed to be.They just it accept it as how things are without realizing that things could be different.

They accept it not because it's good but because they've never known any different.

Kind of like a isolated person who was born a slave and raised to believe that was what they are because that's all they've been exposed to.

The thought that they could be the same as their slave masters never occurred to them.

It is far more powerful to control a person's mind than to control their physical body.

Additionally I dislike the use of the word "patriarchal" here because that is a misrepresentation of what I was talking about.

I wasn't talking about men establishing control and subjugation of women.I was simply talking about men expecting respect and fair treatment from women.

I'm sure you wouldn't be against women demanding to be treated respectfully by men.So what's wrong with men expecting women to treat them with respect as well?

PUA isn't coping- its just people preying on a certain type of insecure women. They have existed since long before feminism: see the Georgian Dandy or venetian duelling class.
Click to expand...

PUA is very natural in a hookup culture which is what we have.

Additionally "preying" I think is a convenient simplification of a much much larger issue/subject that has far more depth and complexity than what you are trying to reduce it to here.

I also dislike the seeming one sidedness you are creating here because you are ignoring the modern reality of female-male interaction.You are making it sound like only men can be the predators in this environment whereas the predation is two sided and many men are forced to resort to it in self protection or so it seems to them.

Preying would presume that women are following a functional correct model while PUA is abusing and manipulating that model for it's own selfish purposes.

But the truth is women are following a dysfunctional model as well so PUA becomes the male counter dysfunctional model.

Men and women become subverted from their normal symbiotic mutually beneficiary relationship into one of conflict and competition.

The thing you must understand is that the dynamic between men and women now is less of a necessity with a higher purpose but rather a selfish endeavor with no higher purpose.

The purpose is self oriented rather than responsibility oriented.

Under extreme feminism women no longer need men and functionally speaking they are men.

Therefore things become a sport rather than a necessity with obligations on both sides.The end goal of the sport is hedonism and self indulgence.It serves no other function.

Although on the surface this may seem liberating and freeing it is ultimately a recipe for hollow existence devoid of purpose and meaning which is ultimately unsatisfying and unhappy.

For whatever reason that is just how humans and the world works.Hedonism is seductive and enticing but ultimately rots and destroys your soul and will consume all those who fall into it's lure.

Men need a purpose.They need to be needed.When you take that from them as extreme feminism does they invent a whole new dysfunctional system to deal with the void.

The new system is all about being a irresponsible douchebag and fucking as many girls as you can.The more and the hotter they are the better.This is the new source of meaning and purpose.This is the new masculinity.

Remember too that many men no longer have masculine male role models or mentors.They do not have men who they look up to and respect who guide them in a appropriate direction.Many no longer have a father or if they do he is not strong.They have nothing and no one setting them on the right path so they fall prey to false masculinity.

Since men have no purpose and meaning in a modern society they must develop an artificial one.

The new purpose becomes women.Everything revolves around them under the new system.Mens identity becomes tied to women and success with them or lack thereof.There is no personal integrity.There is no higher purpose or meaning than women.Women become the definition of a man and his life.

This is anti masculinity and it is also anti male leadership.

Women are always wondering what is wrong with men these days.But they don't realize that they cannot have their cake and eat it too.They can't say they want to be treated like a woman if they want to be and act and fill the role of a man.Women want to be men but they also want to be women simultaneously but it does not work that way.They can only have one or the other but not both simultaneously.

The attempt to do so only leads to great frustration and overall dissatisfaction for both parties.
 
SlayerOfTyranny said:
The new purpose becomes women.Everything revolves around them under the new system.Mens identity becomes tied to women and success with them or lack thereof.There is no personal integrity.There is no higher purpose or meaning than women.Women become the definition of a man and his life.

This is anti masculinity and it is also anti male leadership.
Click to expand...
:story:
 
SlayerOfTyranny said:
Short version:

Men and women do not have the same nature.When you try to make women like men and men like women (what is currently happening) it results in a dysfunctional relationship between the two.Thus the interaction between the two stops being symbiotic and instead becomes antagonistic.Men and women must compete with one another instead of support one another.This leads to unhappiness and dissatisfaction for both parties.

Long version:



The war on men is all around you.It's not hard to see.

I didn't claim that feminists control the world.

But they are the dominant ideology in the modern world.They are not a authority of their own merit but they are supported by the actual authorities who support the ideology and enforce it.

Do you not believe that feminism reaches as far as the government and the courts?



I can tell you plenty of areas where men are disadvantaged.

What areas can you tell me where women are disadvantaged?



Are you sure that you speak for all men?

I think there might be alot more male dissatisfaction than you think and it is only growing.

Additionally just because men are not acting in unified open revolt does not indicate satisfaction.

It indicates tolerance which is not the same thing.

The general population usually has to be pushed extremely far before they will band together and actively revolt against authority.But they might have been very dissatisfied long before that.

Alot of men I don't think even intellectually understand the problem nor are they even aware that there is an alternative.They might intuitively feel that something is off but don't know what exactly.

Many of them probably don't even realize that there is an alternative and that this is not normal or how things are supposed to be.They just it accept it as how things are without realizing that things could be different.

They accept it not because it's good but because they've never known any different.

Kind of like a isolated person who was born a slave and raised to believe that was what they are because that's all they've been exposed to.

The thought that they could be the same as their slave masters never occurred to them.

It is far more powerful to control a person's mind than to control their physical body.

Additionally I dislike the use of the word "patriarchal" here because that is a misrepresentation of what I was talking about.

I wasn't talking about men establishing control and subjugation of women.I was simply talking about men expecting respect and fair treatment from women.

I'm sure you wouldn't be against women demanding to be treated respectfully by men.So what's wrong with men expecting women to treat them with respect as well?



PUA is very natural in a hookup culture which is what we have.

Additionally "preying" I think is a convenient simplification of a much much larger issue/subject that has far more depth and complexity than what you are trying to reduce it to here.

I also dislike the seeming one sidedness you are creating here because you are ignoring the modern reality of female-male interaction.You are making it sound like only men can be the predators in this environment whereas the predation is two sided and many men are forced to resort to it in self protection or so it seems to them.

Preying would presume that women are following a functional correct model while PUA is abusing and manipulating that model for it's own selfish purposes.

But the truth is women are following a dysfunctional model as well so PUA becomes the male counter dysfunctional model.

Men and women become subverted from their normal symbiotic mutually beneficiary relationship into one of conflict and competition.

The thing you must understand is that the dynamic between men and women now is less of a necessity with a higher purpose but rather a selfish endeavor with no higher purpose.

The purpose is self oriented rather than responsibility oriented.

Under extreme feminism women no longer need men and functionally speaking they are men.

Therefore things become a sport rather than a necessity with obligations on both sides.The end goal of the sport is hedonism and self indulgence.It serves no other function.

Although on the surface this may seem liberating and freeing it is ultimately a recipe for hollow existence devoid of purpose and meaning which is ultimately unsatisfying and unhappy.

For whatever reason that is just how humans and the world works.Hedonism is seductive and enticing but ultimately rots and destroys your soul and will consume all those who fall into it's lure.

Men need a purpose.They need to be needed.When you take that from them as extreme feminism does they invent a whole new dysfunctional system to deal with the void.

The new system is all about being a irresponsible douchebag and fucking as many girls as you can.The more and the hotter they are the better.This is the new source of meaning and purpose.This is the new masculinity.

Remember too that many men no longer have masculine male role models or mentors.They do not have men who they look up to and respect who guide them in a appropriate direction.Many no longer have a father or if they do he is not strong.They have nothing and no one setting them on the right path so they fall prey to false masculinity.

Since men have no purpose and meaning in a modern society they must develop an artificial one.

The new purpose becomes women.Everything revolves around them under the new system.Mens identity becomes tied to women and success with them or lack thereof.There is no personal integrity.There is no higher purpose or meaning than women.Women become the definition of a man and his life.

This is anti masculinity and it is also anti male leadership.

Women are always wondering what is wrong with men these days.But they don't realize that they cannot have their cake and eat it too.They can't say they want to be treated like a woman if they want to be and act and fill the role of a man.Women want to be men but they also want to be women simultaneously but it does not work that way.They can only have one or the other but not both simultaneously.

The attempt to do so only leads to great frustration and overall dissatisfaction for both parties.
Click to expand...

You would have a much better chance of losing your virginity if you did something more productive than autistic shitposting about how evil women are.

Also why are the guys who have the least experience with women (I mean in all contexts) the ones who claim to know the most about them?
 
SlayerOfTyranny said:
The war on men is all around you.It's not hard to see.

I didn't claim that feminists control the world.

But they are the dominant ideology in the modern world.They are not a authority of their own merit but they are supported by the actual authorities who support the ideology and enforce it.

Do you not believe that feminism reaches as far as the government and the courts?
Click to expand...
Having worked in both I can fundamentally say no. The concept that women are equal to men certainly does but concepts of an oppresive patriarchy and collectivist male privilege which need balanced out certainly don't. These concepts along with challenging conventional families are central to modern feminist doctrine and are rejected by courts and govts across the West, indeed most western countries actively encourage traditional families with tax breaks etc.

SlayerOfTyranny said:
What
Click to expand...
The vast majority of workplace sexual harassment cases I have taken were for female clients, violent rapes likewise.

And I realise this is not the case in the US but here divorce laws will often leave a woman in poverty and relying on govt hand outs.

Thats not to say men dont suffer disproportionately for other things and lose out oncustody rulings as opposed to financial settlement but nonetheless two disadvantages off the top of my head. I'm sure our female users can give you more.

SlayerOfTyranny said:
PUA is very natural in a hookup culture which is what we have.

Additionally "preying" I think is a convenient simplification of a much much larger issue/subject that has far more depth and complexity than what you are trying to reduce it to here.

I also dislike the seeming one sidedness you are creating here because you are ignoring the modern reality of female-male interaction.You are making it sound like only men can be the predators in this environment whereas the predation is two sided and many men are forced to resort to it in self protection or so it seems to them.

Preying would presume that women are following a functional correct model while PUA is abusing and manipulating that model for it's own selfish purposes.

But the truth is women are following a dysfunctional model as well so PUA becomes the male counter dysfunctional model.

Men and women become subverted from their normal symbiotic mutually beneficiary relationship into one of conflict and competition.
Click to expand...
You're projecting here; I said PUA are arseholes whose MO of preying on insecure women long predates the rise of feminism and the 'dysfunctional model' of our culture . What you've written there is essentially summed up as claiming PUA is a natural reaction to modern culture. It clearly isn't when they existed in Georgian London, Renaissance Italy, bourbon France etc etc.

I wasn't implying anything about womans behavior that was pure invention on your part. Female equivalents to PUA have also existed throughout history. In both sexes its predatory individuals taking advantage of insecurities of weaker people.

It cannot be a reaction to modern culture because it is not a modern phenomenon and has existed as long as people have.

SlayerOfTyranny said:
I'm sure you wouldn't be against women demanding to be treated respectfully by men.So what's wrong with men expecting women to treat them with respect as well?
Click to expand...

Men do get equal respect from women though- or rather strong men and strong women alike are respected whereas those who are weaker in both sexes are susceptible to being bullied and disrespected.

SlayerOfTyranny said:
Under extreme feminism women no longer need men and functionally speaking they are men.
Click to expand...

I think answering this part succinctly dismisses all your latter analysis.

Extreme feminists are not in control so whatever your theories are on such a society is irrelevant.

The vast majority of men and women need and rely on each other and women do not become 'functionally male' hence why the very misleading pay gap argument exists and why the vast majority of out of court custody battles go to the mother.

Women when offered the choice often still pick what would once have been considered feminine roles- even when it is to their detriment financially- the vast majority of stay at hone parents are mums.

And even if your theory about a masculine 'need' to be relied upon was accurate, and I see no evidence it is, men are still relied on in the modern family. Where the burden is shared across too parents being successful in that supposed need becomes easier.

It is true however that with women freer to chose their husbands in the past men who through toxic personality or unfortunate genetics will find it far harder to find an attractive wife or partner. They then typically seem to retreat to the Internet, congregate and complain that the problem is with women and not with themselves.

Likewise having freedom to pick a partner I don't date fat women or attention whores, I have no doubt this isn't an unusual bias for successful young professionals and I also don't doubt there is a corresponding link to so many extreme feminists fitting that bill. You know people who retreat to the Internet, congregate and then blame men for all their problems when really the source of their difficulties are their own failings.


I was serious when I said your hyperbole is better suited to the loveshy sub, this sub was intended as a place where kiwis could discuss issues between friends without the extreme views of cows making normal discussion impossible.
I'm no SJW and you can read what I think of feminist theory of maleness further up the thread but I am considering sending you back to that subforum as the argument you are advancing seems to match with the ones there and is therefore imo better suited to that sub.
 
Last edited:
Marvin said:
Your whole post hinges on this point.

In what ways do men and women have different natures? How can this be quantified?
Click to expand...

Without commenting on the other points @SlayerOfTyranny made, I would agree that it's reasonable to expect there would be quantifiable differences observable in large enough groups. It's difficult to imagine that evolutionary pressures wouldn't have lead something a bit more than differences in muscle mass and reproductive organs. Drives that are selected for reproduction aren't ring-fenced to that particular area - they will spill over in to other areas. Why do women, in countries where equality is rated highly, have less of an interest in STEM fields? Is mating for life more advantage for women than it is for men and, if so, would this not influence other aspects of life outside of mating? Autism is more prevalent in men than women, and the evolutionary decision to make less of an investment in physical strength for women is presumably compensated for somewhere.

Differences in nature inevitable for the genders. We need to quantify these attributes and accept that group-level differences aren't set in stone for individuals. There is a biological war, because that's how we find fit mates. This doesn't mean we're in some kind of bizarre war for domination - if anything men and women are fighting together to try to avoid creating generation of Chris Chans. The differences create conflicts, as it does in conflicts between intellect and strength in how society values and rewards these traits. Where there is a field that women are less drawn to, whether by nature or nurture, there will be conflicts when that field is particularly prestigious. Feminists are not calling for parity in unpleasant or dangerous yet well paid jobs. Equality of opportunity seems the only solution, but applied without the expectation that we'd see gender parity in uptake. This is where I'd agree that quotas and affirmative action are bullshit.

I've read Red Pill and saw there the other side of the radical feminist coin. The majority of men and women get along fine. It's the fringe nutters that need to be tackled, on both sides, and occasionally milked. There are differences, and most men and women quite enjoy those differences without needing to fetishise them or condemn an entire gender as being toxic or emotionally unstable.
 
there are many men (and women) doing excellent work like setting up shelters and hotlines for male victims of domestic and sexual violence, campaigning for male suicide to be given broader coverage and pushing legislators to view the family unit as inclusive of men's roles.

One of the writers/ campaigners I follow is Ally Fogg of the Guardian and FtB, who (as part of a wider group) recently forced the Director of Public Prosecutions to admit in the figures for "sexual violence against women and girls", approx 12% of the overall number was made up of reported crimes against men and boys. Although the DPP Alison Saunders finally admitted the inclusion she did not change the title of the report, and I believe became only the second DPP to ever be censured.

The thing is , the title MRA has become so poisoned by loveshys and PUAs who blame women (or more likely their mothers) for all their problems, that decent campaigners that want to work alongside feminists as allies wont touch it with a barge pole.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom