So here’s an interesting chart. Guess what it represents?
A) The membership of the David Duke Fan Club
B) The racial breakdown of the most successful Liberace impersonators
C) The demographics of the Men’s Rights subreddit
Well, ok, that was too easy. It is of course all of the above. I’m guessing. It’s definitely C, at least, as this chart was prepared to show the results of the 2013 Men’s Rights subreddit demographic survey.
Now, you might say, well, isn’t Reddit itself a pretty white place? And you would be right. But the Men’s Rights subreddit seems to be a bit whiter — and a lot less black — than Reddit as a whole, if Quantcast’s estimates of Reddit’s overall ethnic breakdown are accurate.
In other completely non-surprising news, 89% of Men’s Rights Redditors are men. And a lot of them are libertarians. MRAs complain endlessly that we pigeonhole them as a bunch of entitled white dudes. They’re really not doing much to challenge that assumption.
The most important issue to these fellas (and the small minority that aren’t fellas)? Survey says: False rape accusations.
Other critical issues to the Men’s Rightsers include “custody rights” (which is a bit odd because 92% of those surveyed have no kids), “legal discrimination” (whatever that means), “education discrimination” (this is a thing?), and “male disposability.”
“Male birth control” and “paper abortion,” while relatively less important to the Men’s Rightsers, each got hundreds of votes.
I’m surprised “friendzoning” isn’t at the top of the list, but unfortunately it wasn’t one of the choices. I blame misandry.
You really must be fucking with us, because no one could be that stupid. Right? Or are you just in that much denial about your little movement? Much like the FeMRAs, once they tire of you or can’t use you, you’re out.
No, you could argue that at the advent of second-wave feminism the inclusion of women of color was neglected (a charitable interpretation) or dismissed out of hand (not necessarily an opinion with which I would disagree.) What you cannot argue -especially because you
specifically are wholly unwiling to do even the most rudimentary research on the demographics- is that the current feminist movement is ignores/doesn’t care about Women of Color.
Issues of kyriarchy, intersectionality, poverty, class-based discrimination are met and discussed with way more forthrightness then anything the MRM even approaches and only a lying asshat would try to claim otherwise. I’m not claiming that there is perfection, not by any stretch, but there is a real attempt to have dialogue, to address issues, to call otu privilege, to be more inclusive.
Hell, there are plenty of Women of Color writing specifically about feminism and being cited by the mainstream, “Whiter” femisphere.
What’s the MRMS equivalent? You and Typhonblue?
Please.
@Drst:
“Whether or not those sites are overwhelmingly white does not change the fact that the MRM is overwhelmingly white. You’re attempting to redirect from the problem by pointing to something else that isn’t actually the subject here.”
O: Not at all; what I am saying is that neither “party” has a lot to be proud of in this regard. It should put things into a more proper perspective.
“Even if those sites were overwhelmingly white, this isn’t a blog about the problems of racism in white feminism, it’s a blog about how awful the MRM is. David doesn’t have to make the blog all about racism in all spaces just to satisfy you, random person online. It’s his blog, he gets to do what he wants with it.”
O: Of course; but again, why be concerned about the speck in someone else’s eye when you’ve got a plank of plywood in yours?
O.
Yes. Search his name on this site.
Access to domestic abuse services across the board could certainly be improved.
However, the MRM’s assertions that such services are virtually non-existent are maliciously harming men.
@Nobinayamu:
“No, you could argue that at the advent of second-wave feminism the inclusion of women of color was neglected (a charitable interpretation) or dismissed out of hand (not necessarily an opinion with which I would disagree.) What you cannot argue -especially because you
specifically are wholly unwiling to do even the most rudimentary research on the demographics- is that the current feminist movement is ignores/doesn’t care about Women of Color.”
O: That’s not what many Black Feminists themselves say/have said – again, I cite what happened to Audrey Lourde as one case in point, among many.
“Issues of kyriarchy, intersectionality, poverty, class-based discrimination are met and discussed with way more forthrightness then anything the MRM even approaches and only a lying asshat would try to claim otherwise. I’m not claiming that there is perfection, not by any stretch, but there is a real attempt to have dialogue, to address issues, to call otu privilege, to be more inclusive.”
O: I’m not seeing much evidence of this among the better known and more popular Feminist websites, such as Jezebel, or Feministing or Feministe, and so forth.
“Hell, there are plenty of Women of Color writing specifically about feminism and being cited by the mainstream, “Whiter” femisphere.”
O: And there are indeed Black writers in the Manosphere as well. I am one of them.
“What’s the MRMS equivalent? You and Typhonblue?”
O: I am not familiar with this name. Could you please tell me more about him?
“Please.”
O: Give it time; the Feminists have had quite a headstart on the Manosphere…
O.
Files: I could argue just as strongly that the (White) Feminist community don’t particularly care about Black Women or Women of Color in general.
Then do it. You said you wanted a spirited discussion, so far you are bobbing and weaving and tossing out weak jabs to make space, but you aren’t actually engaging.
Step up and try to land some body blows, not this weak-shit, “I could” crap.
“3)”But MRA’s are totally allowed to have racist opinions, that’s their right””
O: As outlined in the Bill of Rights…
Ooh… Freeze Peach.
It’s our right to point out they are doucecanoes because what they want hurts people.
Yes.
Which is why you came here? Because the MRM is so perfect you can afford to be lecturing us?
Physician heal thyself.
@Ugh:
“Access to domestic abuse services across the board could certainly be improved.”
O: Especially when it comes to Men getting fair and equal access…
“However, the MRM’s assertions that such services are virtually non-existent are maliciously harming men.”
O: How so? How has Glenn Sacks’ work in this regard, “maliciously harming men”?
Please explain?
O.
“Please spoonfeed me, I’m helpless.” Damn, you’re pathetic. Google finger busted?
I don’t believe for a second he doesn’t know who Typhonblue is.
Blockquote monster
Um, if you want men’s services to get equal funding, but violence against intimate partners is mostly directed against women, then that’s not “equal.” We need more women’s services because people like the MRM like to normalize and promote violence against women.
Um, if you want to help a male victim who you’re talking to, you tell him who he can call to get help. If you want to hurt a male victim who you’re talking to, you tell him that there is no help because society hates him.
Which does the MRM do more of, do you think?
Yeah, you could cite Audre Lourde (please, if you’re going to reference her, spell her name right, lest I think you’re just a poseur who probably hasn’t actually read any of her work). And I could cite, Angela Davis, Sojourner Truth, What About Our Daughters, Alice Walker, bell hooks… I mean, I can go on and on, and endlessly on. What’s your fucking point?
I’m not claiming that feminism is perfect when it comes to acknowledging and including women of color. I’m only claiming that:1) many, many, many women of color are writing critically, importantly, and prolifically about feminism 2) not only are men of color woefully underrepresented in the MRM there is no productive dialogue going on between the mainstream of the movement and the few who are.
If the only counter example you can provide is yourself, I’m obliged to tell you that I think you’re kind of a clown. You talk about dialogue and discussion and you’ve presented nothing but “I could say,” without evidence or citation.
Prime example; do you not know how search engines work?
1) Nobody is talking about Gleen Sacks. Nobody even mentioned him. Your knowledge base is appallingly shallow for someone holding themselves out as some kind of activist/bringer of truth.
2) You can search this very site for examples of MRAs falsely claiming that there a no services for men. There are services for men. If men are directed away from them by temper tantrum throwing children, then those services will lose funding and support and cease to exist. Telling men that there are no services when what you really mean is that there aren’t as many services for men as there are for women is not only lying, it’s counterproductive.
Not that I expect a group that has no idea how you even build a program/shelter to understand this.
Getting into feminism was what made me realize my own racism and white privilege, actually. It got me thinking about how, say, if my parents hadn’t been respected white people, it would’ve been a lot harder for them to get the way-over-living-wage jobs they have now, I probably wouldn’t have the access to the information and technology that has become a way of life for me (for better or for worse), and without their good health insurance, who’s to know if I would’ve gotten treatment for my own psychological issues? It also got me thinking about the racism I’d absorbed over the years, such as not liking school dances because they “only seemed to play music that black people liked,” and how even those seemingly little biases serve to prop up the sucky status quo.
Can anybody getting into the MRM say that much?
Also, Sacks deliberately organized a harassment campaign at a shelter that provided men’s services, in the attempt to prevent them from being able to take any calls, just to make a political point.
So, on behalf of any man who might have been unable to leave an unsafe situation because MRAs were playing politics with his life, fuck Glenn Sacks, fuck the MRM, and fuck you.
So, Obsidian doesn’t really have a problem associating with racists, and he doesn’t see why telling men who need DV shelters that such shelters don’t exist, when in reality they do, is harmful. Looks like the interests of black men are in safe hands with this guy!
@Pecunium:
“Which is why you came here? Because the MRM is so perfect you can afford to be lecturing us?”
O: Nobody made any such claim; moreover, I’m not the one with an holier than thou attitude of moral rectitude and piety; the Left has much soul searching to do in this regard.
“Physician heal thyself.”
O: Ladies (and gents) first…
O.
I apologize in advance Wall of Text Response to OF:
Male gender roles generally advocate for men to be “traditionally masculine”. This has positive effects, such as men being more often associated with things like bravery, strength, intelligence, ect, as well as negative effects, such as men being on the draft, men being the primary breadwinner, and men being considered only good for STEM jobs. It reduces the availability of jobs for men by decreasing the acceptability of men going into jobs like teaching, nursing, counselling, and art. Similarly, it sets up stereotypes in the media of men having to be “tough” or they are considered not manly enough and portrayed as baffoons or overly emotional. Often, men are compared with women and feminine traits negatively, as if it is “bad” to be a woman and therefore you are “less” of a man if you do so.
By tearing down gender roles, and reducing the idea that toxic masculinity is the only way for men to be, feminists help to remove the stigma for men of being unable to share their emotions and removes the barriers put up to encourage negative portrayals of men in media as true of men as a whole, instead of as true of only that one character. Many jokes in sitcoms use this negative stereotype as the punchline, and have been for years: see Big Bang Theory, Friends.
This is where my tangential part of that comes in. If women are considered by default to be best possible parents because of female gender roles, then women are often considered default caregivers to their own children. By removing that stereotype of female gender roles, it is less likely that women will be considered the default for children and therefore more likely that men will be considered as an option.
By the way, when men ask for it they get custody 50% of the time. Men are not asking for custody, more often than not, and that’s the reason that women most often get the kids in court. Finally, it’s never just a default, at least in my country, the judge is legally mandated to ask the dad in family court whether he wants shared custody of his children. This is true of all court cases where abuse charges haven’t been laid. Please note, I said where abuse charges haven’t been laid, and not where abuse hasn’t been accused.
I’m assuming you already know that most violence against women is perpetrated by men. I’m assuming you also already know that 3:4 women will experience some form of sexual assault in their lives, and that 1:4 women experience completed or attempted forcible penetration. I’m assuming you know most of these assaults are committed by someone close to the victim. Overwhelmingly, these assaults are done by men. Unsurprisingly, there is still a culture that ties women’s self-worth to their sexual availability and the madonna/whore complex still very much exists. Rape is a sensitive and shame-laden topic, and yet it’s also normalized through rape culture by the prevalence of rape jokes where the victim is the punchline, through people victim blaming, and through shaming the victim, among others. By reducing the all-depressingly-too-common experience of sexual assault, and by combating rape culture, feminists work to reduce the number of perpetrators. Reduce the number of perpetrators and the amount of times this happens, you’ll reduce the perception that women have to watch out for themselves whenever they leave the house in anything less than a skisuit. Reducing that will also reduce the perception that men they know might rape them.
It’s bullshit. It focuses on the wrong thing. I believe you when you say it’s a grave issue for the MRA agenda, but it’s not a grave issue for society. Men commit most of the violence in the world. If it was so important, then why isn’t it trumped by the fact that men are also falsely accused of other violent crimes in far higher numbers? Why aren’t those false accusations even on the MRA radar? The only reason is because it’s women doing the primary accusations in this category, where it’s both men and women (primarily men) doing the accusing in other false violence crime accusations.
I’d like to see stats on that. And I’d like to see you address the intersection of class and race inherent in this problem first, before I’m able to address it in any meaningful way. You need to first provide examples that feminists who work closely with black communities on this issue are doing it only for the women and not the men.
Lmao, no. There’s no such thing as Roe for Men. Roe had to do with a medical procedure. So does abortion. Unfortunately, this is one area where I will say that the world is not fair. People with uteruses get to decide what organisms get to camp out for 9 months. It’s their organ they are donating. It’d be ideal if the court system could do inquiries into claims that men do not want the child and could provide some dispensation to a mother who does want to keep it; that way the men hold no responsibility and the women still get help for raising the child. It also would cut back on the ability of a man to financially blackmail the mother into getting an abortion, since men on average earn a hell of a lot more, and child support payments are pitiful in amount and are often walked away from with little consequence. But that’s unlikely. Best solution is to take care in birth control and to provide effective birth control and sex education to all people – which is why a birth control option for men is so important.
hahahahahahahahaha
You mean the Left that voted this year to extend domestic violence protections to gay and immigrant men? Even though the Right wanted to strip those protections?
Does it grate on you that while Sacks is out preventing men from calling shelters, the Left is out actually doing something to help men?
Damn, I hadn’t gotten to the Spearhead thing. Now I feel like I wasted my time. OF, Spearhead is racist and misogynistic filth. They promote pretty much everything you say you’re against. So does AFVM, MRA subreddit, and pretty much every other MRA blog on the planet. If you’re truly trying to get these issues worked on and looked at, I’d try associating with a more positive movement, or make your own. Because the one you’ve got is pretty much just angry white dudes on the internet yelling about how their privilege is being eroded and “it’s just not fair!!! *cry*”. And they truly don’t give a shit about racial issues, or any real issues, any further than it can be used to promote their agenda of preserving their privilege and allowing an expression for their hatred against women.
@Ugh:
“Also, Sacks deliberately organized a harassment campaign at a shelter that provided men’s services, in the attempt to prevent them from being able to take any calls, just to make a political point.”
O: Links, please? I’d like to read that for myself. Thanks!
“So, on behalf of any man who might have been unable to leave an unsafe situation because MRAs were playing politics with his life, fuck Glenn Sacks, fuck the MRM, and fuck you.”
O: Your passion is noted – as well as your phrasing “any man who MIGHT have been…”
O.
http://www.amptoons.com/blog/2008/12/04/domestic-violence-shelter-targeted-by-anti-feminists-some-of-the-vile-language-and-verbal-abuse-we-took-on-the-phone-was-horrific/
There you go.
Obsidian: can you do anything for yourself?
This guy isn’t even bothering to set the goalposts down any more.