>
The Good Men Project Magazine is running a bunch of articles on the Men’s Rights Movement this week. My contribution to the discussion, looking at misogyny in the Men’s Rights movement, will be going up tomorrow. But in the meantime, check out what they’ve got up now, including pieces from Amanda Marcotte, Hugo Schwyzer, and, at the other end of the spectrum, Paul Elam, who seems to be trying to tone it down a bit, at least for this audience. (More thoughts on that later.) Rocking panda will be waiting here for you when you get back.
Categories
>I'm not generally a fan of the fair and balanced approach when "fair and balanced" means pretending that nutcases like Elam have something valuable to contribute to the conversation. But whatevs. I'll read the articles.
>I just saw The Good Men Project article and found your site as a result. I'm working on a project where I look at dads and their changing role in society. The intention is to highlight the greater involvement of dads with their kids. The fact is that economonic and societal factors have changed how dads approach parenting and we are finding that most dads are there more often and are participating with greater involvement. We've been conducting a survey and have over 400 responses but would like to get to 500 by the end of the month. Please come over to the http://TheDADvocateProject.com/Survey participate and let your voice be heard as a dad.
>Well, I feel left out:Hugo Schwyzer: How Men’s Rights Activists Get Feminism WrongPaul Elam: On Misandry: What’s Wrong With Men?Tom Matlack: Adultery’s Double StandardAmanda Marcotte: The Solution to MRA Problems? More FeminismZeta Male: The Top 10 Goals of Men’s RightsHow about one more:ScareCrow: Feminist Trapped in Circular Debate: Eats own Foot!
>ScareCrow-I think I see why you were not asked to join in.
>@ScareCrow I feel you, man. My article I wrote entitled "Why feminists are nothing but a bunch of dirty poop heads who poop" was denied as well.
>I haven't read any of the articles yet, but from the outset I think they've managed to mischaracterize the movement. The introduction lists three main MRM groups: (1) Iron John types, (2) Men's Studies students, and (3) serious father's rights advocates.But what of the hateful, masturbating misogynists? The MGTOWers? The John Galts? The omega virgins? The men who pretty much hate everyone who isn't a scared, paranoid man with a mommy complex? Yes indeed–what about Scarecrow?It's almost like they're trying to ignore them or something. Can't imagine why.
>@Nymeria – can you please provide a link.I am delighted to know that somebody out there is finally writing something that is mature and intelligent…
>The Good Men Project is revolting. Vomit.
>I'm not generally a fan of the fair and balanced approach when "fair and balanced" means pretending that nutcases like Elam have something valuable to contribute to the conversation.How, exactly, is Paul Elam a nutcase? Oh wait, I forgot, you just talk out of your ass and think you are above ever having to provide evidence for any claim you make. Meanwhile the man you call a nutcase actually provides sources. You could learn something from him.
>"The Good Men Project is revolting. Vomit."—magdelynHell, I thought I could be caustic. But then again, look the gaggle and throng of fools, jesters, clowns, and hatemongers galore here.
>OK, let's see . . . Bee's comment pegs her as a congenital idiot.Elizabeth contributes nothing.Triplanetary gives new meaning to the word "vapid."Very informed group you have here.