Can’t We All Just Get Along?

Authors Note: This article started as a post in the comment section of an article named “Why I Changed My Mind on International Men’s Day” on a UK pro-feminist blog called “InsideMAN”. For those who would prefer the TL;DR version, the premise of the article was that, although the author used to oppose IMD (because, hey, every day is men’s day, right?), he now thinks it’s important for feminists to consider that it may have some limited value. How very kind of him. He describes this in typical gender studies word-salad style…
“…critical studies of men and masculinities continually demands the acknowledgement of differing and nuanced masculine experiences, yet does not do a great job of acknowledging such difference and nuance among those groups—such as IMD—it identifies as regressive.”
Or, put into plain English, Not All MRAs Are Like That.
He went on to express the opinion that Feminists and MRAs should work together in a “Big Tent” approach rather than oppose each other. It was not the specifics of his article that got me thinking though. What struck me was that I realised that, over the past couple of months, this had to be at least the 7th or 8th time I had seen an article written by a Feminist that asked the question, “Can’t we all just get along?”. After some thought, I penned the following response and left it as a comment which, in true Feminist style, he deleted shortly before closing all comments. Coward.

You know what? I’ve noticed something…

For decades, between about 1970 and 2005, MRAs asked feminists politely and respectfully to help us address men’s issues and waited patiently for them to get around to it. Where did this get us? It got us 45 years of zero action on men’s problems while feminism dealt with the really big issues like microagressions and manspreading.

Then, around 2008, something happened. That something was Paul Elam and his web site, A Voice for Men. MRAs had gotten sick of waiting for action that would never come and started to fight for men’s issues on their own using an evidence-based approach outside of the narrow lens of ideological feminism and, just as importantly, completely regardless of the way that feminists felt about it. Of course feminists opposed that (because feminism is all about equality, right? Totally not a dogmatic cult) and what was their response? “There’s no need for the MRM because Feminism is taking care of it”.

When MRAs pointed out that in the past 40 years of feminist activism they had done exactly NOTHING for men and had actually made things worse by introducing discriminatory policies like the Duluth model, Title IX, The “Dear Colleague” letter, and VAWA (to name just a few) that actively harm men, Feminists replied derisively, “MRAs don’t care about men, they are just angry men who hate women. If they really cared about men they’d forget about trying to stop men killing themselves at wholesale rates and lobbying for men’s DV shelters and help Feminism rid the world of Patriarchy instead because that’s the real cause of all their so-called ‘problems'” (even though Patriarchy is supposedly a system that assists men).

It was clear to MRAs that Feminism had no interest in helping men, none whatsoever. Feminism was never about equality, it was always about gaining advantages for women without limit and with no end point in sight. It was also clear that they would not tolerate any approach to gender issues except feminism. It was their way or the highway and 40 years of walking alongside the feminism float in the gender parade had proven that their way was a dead end for men (and literally death for many men).

So the highway it was, and the sensibilities of Feminists be damned.

It was then, and only then, that things finally started to change. Over the next 5 to 6 years, awareness of men’s issues rose incredibly fast. The media finally started to take notice (although they still viewed gender issues through the myopic lens of feminism and were rarely complimentary), people started speaking out more often, and more and more people were becoming aware of the issues that men face and the largely ignored ways in which society discriminates against them. Men’s Rights Advocacy exploded online.

At the same time, the more that feminists resisted this progress, the more opportunities we were given to shine the spotlight of public attention on them and their violent, bigoted, childish, and censorious tactics and to counter their misinformation with well-referenced data and peer-reviewed studies. The public at large started to make it quite clear that it was not impressed with what feminism had become.

Feminists sure didn’t like that. As I have seen others say, “The truth is not hate but, oh, how it is hated!”.

At around this point feminists realised that the rise of the MRM meant that their stranglehold on the gender narrative (and more importantly the government funding that goes with it) was at risk and, whereas before they were content to ignore and ridicule us, it now became all out war. MRAs were evil, violent, racist, homophobic, rape supporting, misogynist, kitten-eating, 2-headed monsters from outer-space, and must be stopped at all costs! But that attitude only made their tactics even more desperate and extreme, even more dishonest and censorious. We simply weathered their abuse (which is/was harder than it sounds) while doing little more than continuing to shine the spotlight of public attention on them. Again, this worked beautifully and the world saw just how crazy and mendacious feminists can be. Even greater support for the MRM followed.

Fast forward another 5 years to the present…

Feminism is now on the back foot and is being forced to make concessions. We have politicians in the US, UK, and Australia who are starting to oppose the more blatantly sexist Feminist policies and the media is not only taking regular notice of us but is even, increasingly, giving us a fair shake. There has even been a hollywood-quality feature length documentary (The Red Pill) made about the MRM by award-winning film maker Cassie Jaye, and its not even a hit piece! (not that feminists didn’t try to make it one by threatening to block her funding unless they got creative control).

The number of people who identify as feminists is now at an all time low (18% in the US, 7% in the UK) and feminism is widely (and rightly) seen as a ridiculous self-contradictory set of hateful dogma without any intellectual merit, generated by bigoted man-hating crazies.

Feminism does still have significant political and academic power but these institutions are downstream from culture and will change when the attitude of the population has shifted sufficiently. That point is not very far away.

So, what exactly was it that I have noticed?

I’ve noticed that, when Feminism had a vice-grip on the whip they couldn’t give a toss about men. They had to give men’s issues lip-service in order to maintain the façade of being about equality but they never had the slightest intention of addressing any of men’s issues and in fact took every opportunity to ridicule, belittle, and shame into silence, the few men and women that dared to raise them. Worse, if men were harmed in the service of gaining more rights and privileges for women then that was just fine by them, many even preferred it.

However, now that the MRM has managed to pry Feminism’s fingers from the neck of the gender narrative and Feminists can see the writing on the wall, they are scared witless and well they should be! Not because they face retribution from the MRM and not because the MRM wants to oppress women. No, they are scared because the rise of the MRM means the loss of their stranglehold on the narrative and will likely mean the loss of the political and academic power, and most of all the funding, that they have enjoyed (and exploited) for so long.

So NOW, after 30+ years of ignoring men’s issues, NOW after an additional 15 years of ridiculing, dismissing, demonising and lying about men, NOW that their monopoly on the narrative and stranglehold on the cashflow is no longer secure, NOW they want to kiss and make up? NOW they want a “Big Tent” approach? NOW they are interested in addressing men’s issues (this time for sure!)?

Yeah? Well I very much doubt it.

But maybe they really mean it this time. Maybe they have seen the error of their ways and really do want to help men, maybe they are sincere… Yeah, and maybe pigs will start their own airline.

It’s too little, too late. Charlie Brown is sick of Lucy pulling the football away at the last second and he’s not falling for that ever again.

Perhaps if Feminists had shown a little bit of integrity and made some genuine overtures of co-operation before they were grabbed by the scruff of the neck and forced to the table by the MRM they would have a bit more credibility but in my view the only thing they are sorry about is that they can no longer get away with ignoring the issues facing men with impunity and that this “olive branch” is nothing but damage control in the fight to retain control of the narrative.

Once again, as always, Feminists are thinking only of themselves, not men.

Feminists have made their filthy, sticky, flea-ridden bed and this time they are going to have to lie in it. Lucky for them, lying is what they do best.

It boils down to this, Feminism now has 2 simple options:

1) Get out of our way


2) Be utterly destroyed


Recommended Content

%d bloggers like this: