As I’ve pointed out before, the vast majority of Men’s Rights Activists aren’t really activists at all, if by “activists” you mean people who occasionally get off their asses and try to engage in political activity in the real world. As I put in in my piece for the Good Men Project on misogyny in the Men’s Rights movement,
Men’s rights activists aren’t much like any other activists I’ve ever run across. For one thing, for supposed activists they are almost completely inactive. Sure, they complain endlessly about things they see as terrible injustices against men. They just don’t do anything about them. While some of those who consider themselves fathers’ rights activists—a slightly different breed from your garden-variety MRAs—try to influence laws and legislatures, MRAs do little more than cultivate their resentments.
MRAs seem to be good at one thing, and one thing only: posting angry comments on websites, whether their own or on those of their many enemies – whether that’s on blogs like this one or in the comments section on various mainstream media sites they consider “misandrist.” (Actually: that’s not entirely fair – on a few occasions, MRAs have been moved to make threatening phone calls as well.) They don’t raise money for anything but their own web sites and their pet projects. They don’t organize demonstrations that involve more than a tiny handful of people. Like, for example, this one, involving one dude dressed like Batman who climbed up onto a highway sign:
Or this one, which involved a dude dressed up as Batman and a dude dressed up as Robin, climbing up on a bridge.
If your protests typically involve fewer people than, say, the line of people waiting to use the Redbox video rental kiosk outside your local supermarket on a Friday night, I think it’s safe to say that yours is not a mass movement, at least not yet.
Am I being unfair in demanding MRAs actually, literally,get off their asses before I consider them to be activists? Perhaps.
But, as it turns out, MRAs aren’t much good at sitting-on-your-ass activism either. Case in point: For quite some time – weeks? months? — MRA elder Paul Elam has been urging readers of his blog A Voice For Men to sign a petition to disbar a District Attorney he and other MRAs have decided is corrupt. But despite his repeated pleas to his readers to sign the thing, it has not yet garnered the required 1000 signatures, even though at least a few of his readers have talked about signing it more than once. [Edited to add: it has now gotten more than 1000 signaturesd.]
Today, this particular example of internet inactivism prompted Elam to lash out at his non-signing readers. Declaring himself “tired and frustrated” and “sick of this shit,” he once again begged his readers to sign. Then he went a step further, suggesting that he might limit commenting on his site to “activists that are contributing to this site in one way or another” as a way of encouraging activism and discouraging those who are “sucking up air and doing little else.”
I don’t think further exhortation on his part – or limiting the comments there to “real” activists only – is likely to make much difference. [Edited to add: Nagging a few more people to spend two minutes signing an online petition is one thing. Actually transforming them into real activists is another.] Elam is running up against the inherent paradox of Men’s Rights “activism” – the fact that most of those complaining the most about alleged injustices against men are not in fact interested in changing anything. Their “activism,” as it were, is little more than an excuse to wallow in their own bitterness, and to blame others for their own problems.
If MRAs really cared about domestic violence against men – as opposed to using the issue as a rhetorical weapon against feminists – they would be raising money and devoting their time to actually building shelters, like the (mostly) women who built the first shelters decades ago, and the (mostly) women who keep these shelters going today. If MRAs were really interested in stopping prison rape, instead of simply complaining about it, they’d be donating money to or working with the advocacy group Just Detention or other groups concerned about the treatment of prisoners. If they were really interested in helping those falsely accused of rape or other crimes, they’d be working with The Innocence Project or some other group fighting for the falsely accused or convicted. Or they would be starting real organizations of their own.
But that’s not, at heart, what the MRM is about. For all but a tiny handful of real activists, it’s not about changing the world. It’s about creating a space where men can kvetch and blame and cultivate their own sense of martyrdom. Actually trying to change the real world would involve , well, going out into the real world, a place where their assertions about the alleged oppression of men are seen as the nonsense they are, a place where their bitterness and hatred of women is seen as bitterness and hatred rather than the righteous anger they like to imagine that it is.
When MRAs do venture out of their self-created bubble they tend to either make fools of themselves – like Batman on the highway sign in the video above – or to reveal themselves to be the angry fanatics they are. Elam, for his part, sometimes even has trouble making his case in the relatively sympathetic environment of the Men’s Rights subreddit on Reddit, and is quickly reduced to sputtering rage when anyone disagrees with him. In the end, sputtering rage seems to be what the MRM is really all about.
He has New World Order in his name
Oh, is THAT what that means? I thought he’d just screwd up trying to type NOW…
screwed up, also, too… (Effing typing, how does that work?)
Women’s work has traditionally been cooking, sewing, cleaning and small crafts, like making lace, candles or weaving. Nowadays, when we have gas stoves, electric ovens, food processors, sewing machines, Teflon cookware, dish washers, laundry machines and all the rest, it takes far less time to keep a household clean, fed and clothed.
But just imagine, just for a few minutes, how much work would go into making a pair of pants or baking a loaf of bread or doing a load of laundry.
Then tell me women didn’t work before feminism. They might not have gotten paid for it, but goddamn if that sort of work didn’t keep civilization going, far more than the wars the men kept getting themselves into.
No links for articles, half-read and barely understood, that prove that heat-packing IRS agents are taking out tax evaders in scenarios resembling the end of Scarface, huh? I didn’t think so.
And, once again, more fucking excuses. Elam can’t get 1,000 signatures because men are too afraid of women and our control of every single world institution and don’t want to sign it out of cowardice. What’s next? Writer’s cramp? Carpal Tunnel? Right now men and women all over the Middle East are risking their lives – their lives- for their freedom. In some cases they’re being gunned down in the streets. MRA’s like you are decrying the futility of organizing protest marches because the imaginary Women’s World Cabal might… I don’t even know what you think will happen. I really don’t care. It’s all very convenient that you don’t even have to try. It’s a shame my parents didn’t have sons.
Insist, all you want to that government and nonprofit work solely for women. Your delusions are not my concern. If you actually give your money to people to help them in tough situations, then good for you. I don’t know many people who have never gone out of their way to help someone, regardless of gender.
@Bee…Heres a link to womens news on the haiti relief. Read the article.
http://womensenews.org/story/international-policyunited-nations/100129/un-delivers-relief-directly-haitian-women
After reading this heartfelt article answer me this.
Did any men die from the earthquake?
Did any men suffer injuries?
Did any men need food?
Did any men need medical assistance?
Did any men do anything but fucking rape, murder and steal?
Now perhaps I’m not seeing things in the proper context, but as far back as history goes it seems to me that men have gone out of their way to ensure that women and children were the first to be helped in any crisis. They did this on their own. As far as this article is concerned it would appear as if men are devils. None died, none suffered, in fact they only caused more suffering to women and children. The women of course are angels of mercy. Or did I “misinterpret” the article? Please forgive any spelling fopahs, I’m only a man.
Now perhaps I’m not seeing things in the proper context
No shit! Ya think?
And if you’re unsure on how to spell “faux pas” just stick with “errors.”
So men should be given the right to shove women aside and no one should care? Or in your own demented way are you saying that all men should not suffer for the actions of a few? Because *that* would make sense.
What you are going on about now says “if men want to starve women, they should. Women have no right to have access to food until men are fed. Therefore feminism is bad.”
@Sam L…The Rothchild family owns every federal bank in the world, the IMF, World Bank, theres no conspiracy, it’s a fact. When you see Geithner strutting around in every Guv building in the world, at the UN, ect. Well who is he that he has access to every Guv building in the world? Hes not an official of any state. Did you vote for him? I can’t strut around in the UN/US state buildings but he can. Do a search on Rothchild Assets, they exceed 500 trillion. All the banks of every Government answer to them.
First of all, the word is “faux-pas”. Stop being so fucking lazy.
Secondly, I’ve noticed among self proclaimed MRA’s that they tend to view nearly everything through the binary of gender. It’s why so many of you do that use that trite-ass man = bad, woman = good thing, right? So ridiculous. But I digress.
What, if any, impact do you think attitudes towards race, colonoliasm and the historical animosity towards Haiti and its citizens had on how news about the aftermath of this disaster was covered?
Some impact? No impact? Very little impact? I’m genuinely curious about your answer.
Wow, you’re right, NWOslave. An article was written for a website called Women’s eNews, and it was primarily focused on women and women’s issues — except for that Marcus guy. That totally proves that men everywhere are far too put upon and ignored even to do anything about how unprivileged they are in today’s society.
“Fopahs” — now you’re just messin’ with me.
@PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth…
So women should be given the right to shove men aside and no one should care? Or in your own demented way are you saying that all women should not suffer for the actions of a few? Because *that* would make sense.
I just replaced man with woman in your paragraph. Or don’t women shove and push to get food, or trample others to death for a walmart sale?
fopahs? Is that some sort of middle eastern food? As an aside, looks as though the petition has reached it’s goal of 1000. Of course, how many are duplicates and invalid?
Not really NWOslave if you bothered to learn any history…that infamous example of women and children first to the lifeboats from the Titanic had about a fifty year history.
Prior to that it was every man for himself.
The worse part of this conversation is you can’t even bring yourselves to say that a starving man deserves not to die. Of course if all women were the angels of mercy you claim, no men would have died of starvation. Sadly that wasn’t the case in Haiti, only men dies of starvation, only men suffered malnutrition, only men were incarcerated for attacking food convoys and/or women who had food.
You can’t even admit this is a horrible policy. You apparently can’t even deduce that every time this policy is used it will result in the exact same situation. Starving men will attack and kill in order to stay alive. I’m guessing starving women would do the same. Yet this policy is endorsed by YOU.
NWOslave-then apparently you want to believe that every man in Haiti was innocent and pure and being forcibly starved for no reason other then because all of the rest of the world likes to make men go hungry.
Guess what? No.
So then NWOslave, you believe anyone who is starving has the right to attack another.
only men dies of starvation, only men suffered malnutrition
That’s some of the most AMAZING shit I’ve seen in a long, long time. Link? Of course not. 10 cubic miles of butthurt? You betcha.
I think it’s time to put some of our trolls on a diet.
Seriously, this is getting out of hand.
@PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth…I answer questions, when I ask questions I get excuses or more questions, strawman answers, ect.
So now I’ll ask you a question. Do you believe its any womans “right” to starve a man to death with food she was “given?”
A man who is starving should not be allowed to die of starvation if it can be prevented. In a group of starving people, aid workers should be able to determine who should be fed first. Every relatively healthy person, man or woman, should have to wait until the elderly (some of whom are men, by the way) children (some of whom will be boys) and nursing women receive food.
If gangs of men, or women, are attacking people with food or food trucks and stealing, then they should be stopped. In areas of extraordinary disasters and relief efforts, best practices are often cobbled together, hastily and on the spot. Doesn’t necessarily mean a “policy” has been made. Sometimes it’s just a decision.
And all the deflections to UNICEF, the Rothschilds, Haiti – none of it changes the post’s original premise.
You’re right here doing a very good job of whining and bitching on the internet. It will not produce anything of value. What are the chances that you or any other MRA are going to work to put together an organization that aids/supports disaster relief efforts and works to ensure equity of food and supply distribution? What are the chances that any MRAs will even work for such an organization so they could help actively?
Keep in mind, such work often does not pay $19 an hour.
Link, link, link, I’ve given you loads of them. What do I get? Excuses. Non answers. Strawman. More questions.
So heres the question. The policy of women only food and disaster relief which is now standard policy of the UN/UNICEF. Is this a good idea?
Since I have no power, if a man cries foul he has to man up. If a woman cries foul the UN/US, corporate, mass media complex will stampede to assist. As I’ve provided you your precious links to all these. So, to those who are in a position of power, which is what you are, what are you going to do? Will you continue to allow men to die of starvation? Or don’t you care?
Captain Bathrobe was right.
@Nobinayamu…Ahhh, but we do get together and pool our meager resources. If I give a dollar to reverse default womens custody after divorce, the Rockefeller Foundation gives a million dollars to fight against it. They give to the womens lawyers association, NOW, ect, ect. The State fights against it, The media mocks it. YOU fight against it.
> Will you continue to allow men to die of starvation?
Hey, NWO, have you stopped beating your wife?
Maybe we should only feed the women trolls like in Haiti