MRAs and the hatred of women

There’s a lot of talk about MRAs and the hatred of women. It’s usually baseless feminist (or feminist-inspired) rhetoric and I’ll tell you why.

Let’s not confuse women with feminists. MRAs fight against feminism, not against women. It’s a common trick of feminists to intentionally mix up these groups and they choose which word to use based on what suits them the best. If someone gave me a dollar for every occasion I have seen feminists uttering “you hate women” as an answer to statements about feminism I’d be rich.

Also let’s talk about the word “hate”. By definition it’s a very powerful negative feeling. Liberals and feminists use this word (and other loaded ones like -phobe) all the time to shame anyone not agreeing with them. It’s orwellian newspeak. Western culture is so infused with radical feminist thoughts that people just keep on yapping mindlessly about misogyny all the time and it seems nobody stops to think if it’s real at all. It has become so unimaginable to criticise women that if anyone does that s/he’s immediately shut down with accusations of misogyny regardless of what s/he said was true or false.

Dislike is not hatred. Having a low opinion is not hatred. Being realistic is not hatred. Ignorance is not hatred. Avoidance is not hatred.

Hatred is an urge to harm. Hatred is when a new, balanced rape anonimity law is repealed by feminists because they’re perfectly fine with harming innocent men.

I hereby challenge anyone to find real hate in the MRM similar to that of radical feminists’. Present me with articles or books about the society for cutting up women or the drastic reduction of the population of females or the honor of hating women or rape is fine because victims can gain from the experience. That is hatred. Saying “western women are spoiled children” is not.

Update: When I said “liberals and feminists use this word (ie. hate) all the time to shame anyone not agreeing with them” I didn’t think I’d have someone help me out with an example so soon. LVD wrote: “This is exactly a milder form of the hatred I am talking about.” Newspeak at it’s best. There is no such thing as a “milder form of hatred”. If it’s hate it’s not mild, if it’s mild it’s not hate.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Feminism and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

36 Responses to MRAs and the hatred of women

  1. LVD says:

    Like I said before, there may be MANY authentic MRAs who don’t spew hate against women, but the louder voice on internet blogs is the comments section – where such hate is indeed spewed.

  2. Deansdale says:

    LVD, would you be so kind as to provide some links for this supposed hate being spewed?
    I’m a regular at the Spearhead and at Voice for Men but I have not seen a “louder voice” hating women at all. Many of the men there have a low opinion on women, that’s for sure, but that’s not hatred. I have a low opinion on a lot of things, for example some cults of vegetarians and animal rights freaks but I’m not hating them by any means.
    It’s very common to talk about hate in vague terms and generalizations but I’m not buying it. I want real examples and you have to also prove that it’s the “louder voice”.

  3. David Collard says:

    Yes. I have a cool view of women. I always have had. I love the women in my family, but I am not blind to the faults of women, nor do I have a very high opinion of them.

    I also don’t sentimentalise their problems. For example, if a woman has a problem in her society, I am inclined to blame the woman for not following the rules, rather than the society for having rules. I think women, more so than men, need rules to guide them.

  4. LVD says:

    ”For example, if a woman has a problem in her society, I am inclined to blame the woman for not following the rules, rather than the society for having rules. ”

    David, what rules would you be talking about? I’ve travelled all over the world and some cultures’ rules are extremely oppressive. Would you say the same thing for men who “had problems in their society” over oppressive rules. Because many men in those cultures DO face problems for not following oppressive rules.

    Deansdale, I’ve read many hate-filled comments at Spearhead and Roissy’s blogs. Since that was a while ago and since I would have to do the same thing as you to find them (take time to go through various comments from last several months), if you are interested to see them then you can take that time out of your day to do that. I have no interest. I’ve already read them and moved on.

    What “cults of vegetarians” are there? Any sites? I’m a veggie and wasn’t aware there were any cults for me to join. Hook a girl up!

  5. David Collard says:

    I think my comment was clear enough. I don’t sympathise much with women who get themselves into trouble. Especially by not following their society’s rules.

    Women depend on men for their safety and comfort. Men expect women to behave accordingly. If they don’t, men lose sympathy with them. That is behind some of the animus seen at sites like Roissy and The Spearhead.

  6. La Vagina Dentanta says:

    “Society’s rules” is vague.

    For example, in our contemporary American society, there are very few, if any rules. In fact, I can’t really think of any “rules” for women in our society.

    I have however travelled to countries that have many “rules” for both men and women – that I, and very often some of those men and women, indeed do find ridiculous and oppressive.

    So, if you are an American, I have absolutely no idea what sort of “society rules” you are talking about. If however you are a Pakistani or any other sort of South Asian, I know EXACTLY what you are talking about.

  7. Deansdale says:

    LVD, if what you said was true then more than half of the comments should contain misogyny at the Spearhead. That’s really, really far from the truth. I’ve just read at least 50 comments on the last 4 posts there but couldn’t find a single case of misogyny. “Louder voice” my ass.

  8. LVD says:

    They may have gotten better lately. If so, good on them.

  9. David Collard says:

    The “toothed vagina” writes:

    “In fact, I can’t really think of any “rules” for women in our society.”

    You are making my point for me. Women think there are no rules for their behaviour, but have major expectations still of men. That is why some men at Roissy and The Spearhead have come to discount women.

    If women think they have no obligations, why should men keep theirs? If women want to abuse men verbally (feminism), why are you surprised that men return the compliment (“misogyny”)?

    As I said, men provide women with their safety and comfort (through laws and technology) and women in turn provide … what? Mostly whining.

  10. LVD says:

    What are these “expectations” of men?

    My family raised me not to “expect” anything from anybody – not even the government.

    How did your family raise you?

    Or didn’t they?

  11. David Collard says:

    You expect, as I have said more than once now, to have men provide you with comfort and safety. The only reason you are able to be cheeky on the Internet is because men invented it for you.

  12. LVD says:

    Someone else invented the internet for you too. You didn’t invent it.

    Get over yourself.

  13. David Collard says:

    But they were men, Sweetie. You can’t deny that. Perhaps you should think nice thoughts about men sometimes.

  14. Deansdale says:

    LVD, talking about others’ families is off limits here. It’s just half-heartedly concealed shaming language.
    I reckon your comments don’t contain anything of value lately so if you continue down this path you should expect to be moderated. This is not a forum for flame wars.

  15. LVD says:

    This is exactly a milder form of the hatred I am talking about. Notice how David ASSUMES I’m thinking mean thoughts about men…. just because I’ve asked him to clarify what “rules” of society he is talking about. And just because I addressed the ridiculous and oppressive societal rules that some cultures enforce on their women AND men. And how he til date has not answered the question.

    Therefore because HE is unable to answer a question I asked – I must be thinking mean thoughts about ALL men in general.

    Great logic.

  16. David Collard says:

    LVD, you characterise every disagreement with you as “hatred”.

    Great logic.

  17. LVD says:

    Answer the question, son.

  18. David Collard says:

    What I said above was that if women expect men to provide them with safety and comfort (laws and technology), they should behave decently to men. The fact that women spend so much time whining instead (feminism) shows that they do not. That, as I have already said, is behind some of the animus you will see at The Spearhead and Roissy’s site. Men don’t get respect and accordingly they don’t show women respect.

    BTW, I am 55, so if you feel like calling me “son”, you must be kind of old.

  19. LVD says:

    Specify what you mean by “respect”. There’s a general sort of respect which anyone from a decent family is taught to offer to everyone in the form of manners and polite speech. Beyond that?

  20. fidelbogen says:

    It is very simple.

    Women are on their own.

    No reason to take that personally; it’s just the way things are now.

    Thank feminism.

  21. LVD says:

    I was raised to be on my own, fiscally responsible and to fend for myself.

    Who wasn’t?

  22. fidelbogen says:

    Then it will please you to follow “on your own” to the logical endpoint of all its implications, including the unanticipated ones.

  23. David Collard says:

    LVD: “There’s a general sort of respect which anyone from a decent family is taught to offer to everyone in the form of manners and polite speech.”

    And do you think you have shown that here?

  24. Deansdale says:

    Specify what you mean by “respect”.
    Hint: “respect” is the thing you’re not showing here. But I’m sure you can find it in a dictionary.

    I was raised to be on my own, fiscally responsible and to fend for myself.
    Then you don’t need a man and it seems you don’t like them very much either. So I don’t see any reason for you to be here.

  25. Deansdale says:

    I think David Collard was talking about this:
    “(…) In truth, women are no more “independent” than they ever were, but because they’ve transferred the job of protecting and caring for them from the men they personally know to the State, they can pretend to themselves that they no longer need men. Modern women are as “independent” as a tropical fern in a greenhouse in Iceland. All that’s changed is that men, who still do all the dirty, dangerous jobs that must be done, and pay all the taxes and alimony and child-care payments, and fight the wars, etc. etc., that enable women to have the comfortable world they want, no longer get the respect we used to get in return.
    From Philalethes via No Ma’am.

  26. Pingback: Linkage is Good for You: Still Playing Catch-Up Edition (NSFW)

  27. MRA says:

    “Let’s not confuse women with feminists.”

    Let’s conflate the two indeed; there is an indeliable connection.

    “MRAs fight against feminism, not against women.”

    MRAs should fight women as a means of fighting feminism; the two are indelibly connected.

    Feminism is of woman.

    And what females/feminists think of us – what they label us – is irrelevant. They’ve proven themselves untrustworthy, unscrupulous and hypocritical: they’re opinion is devalued to the point of worthlessness.

  28. vasafaxa says:

    Women should be respectful for what men give them and men should be respectful for what women give them. The problem of respect deteriorates when men believe that women are not giving them what they want in return, or when women believe this. The MRA men believe that they aren’t getting what they want from women so they don’t respect them, feminists don’t beleive they are getting what they want from men so they don’t respect them.

    Either way I see large amounts of vitriol on both sides. I have read numerous comments on Roissy’s blogs saying that after 35 women should be sent to Siberia, because the only use for a women is a vagina. Or how about the large characterization of western women as being sluts, gold diggers, shrews, ugly, too masculine. Or how about Vincent Ignacious’s post on how at the core all women are ugly monsters. I remember one commentator calling me a “cunt’ after he said that women were only good barefoot in the kitchen and I replied that maybe that was good for some women, but not all women were the same. The list goes on.

    Although I am perhaps not the most demure, I’ve seen very polite female commentators ((much more polite than I, I admit to being feisty at times)) enter onto sites like Roissy and The Spearhead being derided and kicked out simply for being women. Perhaps, MRA fervor hasn’t yet reached the murderous rage level of some of the worst feminist, but to pretend that it is some benign movement is to discount the very real, very dark edge to it.

    The way I see it to get in an argument about who is being meaner is counter productive, perhaps as counterproductive as a lot of the complaining that goes on BOTH sides.

    Yes the MRA may not want to cut up women, but there is great, great amount of bitterness that can be very off putting to the female ((and perhaps even male!)) observer. Still, I think it has some valid points, the same way I think feminism has some valid points, but often both communicate said points in a very vitrolic fashion.

  29. David Collard says:

    Vasafaxa makes valid points, but I would say a couple of things. One is that some of the women who hang out on Roissy and The Spearhead seem to “get off” on being abused. I have read a couple who have admitted that.

    Really, some of these guys might be abusing women in the hope of making them “tingle”. I have read female comments that imply strongly that the obnoxious men turn them on.

    Men and women are at cross-purposes a lot of the time. What angers a feminist may be what excites another woman. I used to be very careful what I said to my wife. Since I became a lot more forthright, I haven’t noticed her minding. Quite the reverse.

    I generally believe in taking people at face value, but I am starting to suspect that even feminists rather like the negative attention they get from men.

  30. Deansdale says:

    I have read numerous comments on Roissy’s blogs
    Roissy is not an MRA. He touches some of the MRM’s topics but he’s not an activist by any means.

    the only use for a women is a vagina
    This is an exaggerated (or more precisely: retarded) evolutionist PUA standpoint. I’ve never seen real MRAs like Angry Harry, Glenn Sacks or Welmer @ The Spearhead saying things like this. Now of course some idiots comment at MRA sites, but only a handful and they are usually shot down fast.

    how about the large characterization of western women as being sluts, gold diggers, shrews, ugly, too masculine
    You know many, many western women (especially feminists) are proudly advertising some of these things. How’s that misogyny to say something about women which said women are proud of?
    And those supposedly insulting characterizations which don’t make feminists proud are often objectively correct anyways, like WW being shrews or ugly. In most surveys about the world’s ugliest women the top 3 goes to the USA, the UK and Germany.

    how about Vincent Ignatius’s post on how at the core all women are ugly monsters
    That’s a bit much I admit but I think he was referring to the differences in our instincts. Women are evolved to take advantage of and/or despise weak men (betas) and I can understand why they take offence at such behaviour. It’s a common problem that men don’t understand clearly that instincts tied to the survival of the species are not “evil”.
    But Vincent Ignatius is a PUA too like Roissy and not an MRA.

    MRA fervor hasn’t yet reached the murderous rage level of some of the worst feminist, but to pretend that it is some benign movement is to discount the very real, very dark edge to it.
    Asshats are an outlier to the MRM, not the mainstream. We never had a single prominent MRA who was openly hateful of women, contrary to feminist leaders who are loud-mouthed misandrists most of the time. You can rest assured that if all the MRM’s wishes would come true there still wouldn’t be a discussion about reducing the number of women or legalizing rape, or whatever fucked-up shit feminists invent when having nightmares about MRAs.

    to get in an argument about who is being meaner is counter productive
    I was talking about empty accusations of misogyny, not about who’s meaner. Who’s meaner is unarguable anyways. Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned, and feminists are scorned by default, so to speak.

    Yes the MRA may not want to cut up women, but there is great, great amount of bitterness
    But most of it is directed at feminism, family laws, the judicial system, etc, not at women. And also most of this bitterness comes from very negative personal experiences which make them understandable to a certain degree, and not from some vague sense of belonging to an “oppressed” sisterhood. (Bad experiences don’t justify generic hatred of course.)

    some of these guys might be abusing women in the hope of making them “tingle”
    Yeah, it seems plausible that some of them are just idiots wanting to look “alpha”. They’re not MRAs and they don’t even hate women, they’re just confused.

  31. sdaedalus says:

    @David

    I don’t mind a bit of teasing (in Ireland, we call it ‘slagging’, not to be confused with ‘shagging’) but sometimes the guys can go over the line a little with personal remarks.

    The difficulty is, it tends to derail a good discussion (a bit like the moderation). There are plenty of places women could go if we want to flirt (I genuinely don’t find personal attacks a turn-on, quite the contrary in fact) but there are not that many blogs where it is possible to discuss the issues involved in a serious way.

    It’s possible that there may be a bit of attempted negging involved but if so I think some of these guys should reread the Roissy post on negging because they are not quite getting it right according to this post. I think also they may feel women are in the way (I do appreciate this, but some of us are not really there to lecture, but to learn and usually it is the higher-quality commenters who are more tolerant of women).

    Alternatively, some of them just really dislike women I think. They may well have good reason for this but it is a shame in a way that there can’t be more interactive discussion of these issues. I appreciate that neither gender will ever be totally honest when discussing them but some of us at least try our best to be honest.

  32. David Collard says:

    sdaedalus

    I have robust views on women, and my wife and others have sometimes suggested that I am a misogynist, but I have come to see that I am not. Trouble is, many women, and most feminists, are very quick to accuse men of misogyny. And like all definitions, it is tending to broaden. Pretty much any view that is at all masculine is now characterised by some women at least as “misogyny”.

    I don’t think there are many true misogynists out there. Most men are too intrigued by women ever to be real misogynists. Globalman and a few others may be true misogynists. But a lot of the others are just disillusioned.

  33. sdaedalus says:

    @David Collard

    I wouldn’t describe you as a misogynist, David. I don’t think you dislike women. I think you quite like women actually, although you are somewhat bemused by us at times. And you are very polite, it is possible to have a reasonably serious discussion with you. Some Roissy commenters, though, are just rude. I appreciate that people can be sensitive and that it is possible to hit on a sensitive spot and cause them to lash out, but a lot of it is just rudeness for the sake of it. However I understand from men I know that the male sense of humor is a bit more rough and ready, so maybe this is part of it. But there are some who are genuinely trying to be nasty.

  34. David Collard says:

    sdaedalus

    I always get called polite. I think I am very blunt and rough, but people usually call me “polite”.

    I find women interesting. Not admirable, or contemptible, just interesting. A puzzle to be probed.

    There is a general rule I apply in my own thinking, that men who are gratuitously rude to women are probably not very confident with them. I know that sounds like “shaming language”, but I think it is sometimes true.

    Some men on Roissy seem determined to prove that they are cruel physically to women. They have surprised me a bit. Of course, they could be making it up. I don’t mean that I cannot be firm with my wife and expect a lot from her, but I think I know reasonable boundaries. Some men do not.

    As Cecilia once said, once I decide I like a woman, I sort of “adopt” her and become nice to her. You are in that category now. But I am rarely rude to women. At worst, I get a bit pompous and patronising. The worst I can think of lately was calling La Vagina Dentata (sic), “Sweetie”.

  35. Pingback: Family Law and Custody, Why do Women Win More Cases? | lawyer

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s