Friend has very conflicting views about women, politics etc

But the same can be said of some feminists as well.
Yes, by misogynists.
This is the Feminism and women's rights board of Mumsnet and you are calling Feminism a cult like the MRAs?
Go to AVFM and try that and you will be banned and doxxed and harassed off the interwebs. Pictures of the front door of your house will be published with suggestions that you be paid a visit to set you straight. You might be swatted if you are in the US.

When men stumble into the MRA cult and hear exactly what they want to hear some of them embrace it.

Very true. But the same can be said of some feminists as well.

It's an interesting question, OP, and I've also had some similar issues in a friendship.

I'm very open to having friends with different beliefs. As any serial expatriate like me will tell you: you have to find a way to rub along with people with radically different beliefs from you, or you will be very, very lonely. My atheism doesn't affect my friendship with a vicar. My political beliefs are very different to my husband's. I even manage friendships with Daily Mail readers

But there are still some bottom lines for friendship - there has to be some common ground to come together on. I'd struggle to find much value in continuing to exert myself to be friends with the man described in the OP. What would be the point? I'd spend my whole time defending my worldview, and that would get old, very quickly. I like a debate well enough, but not All.The.Time. I'd quietly let it drop and find more congenial company.

When men stumble into the MRA cult and hear exactly what they want to hear some of them embrace it. That is what it sounds like your friend has done. He has become an out and proud misogynist.

mancheeze thank you for your response! just what I was interested to learn about

YVW.

MRA's are the whiniest shits on the planet and nothing they claim is accurate.

I dunno, Lweji, I think my boobs make me naturally more skilled at making World Book Day costumes and getting term dates in the shared household calendar. Meanwhile, my husband's penis makes him naturally flawed at remembering whether Clarks or Start-Rite do the bigger sizes. It's just biology, simple as.

"Custody goes to women because women are STILL the primary caregivers "

The irony of posting this straight after a comment 'debunking' biological differences.

What biological differences and physical differences do you think enable women to better play the primary caregiver role?

The pps wasn't saying women are more suited to that role, but that they are either given it, or end up doing it primarily. Apart from giving birth and breastfeeding, which is only in the first couple of years at best (in general), there's no reason women should be primary caregivers other than societal expectations.

Tell us more about this strange concept known as 'economics', O wise one!

Meanwhile: agree, IfyouseeRitaMoreno. It's good to see more and more organisations in all sectors moving away from the idea that diversity is doing a favour to others, rather than something which makes the organisation itself stronger. Although it's still way behind where it should be. I really liked the government going full-on clickbait on the issue of women on boards recently: www.gov.uk/government/news/revealed-the-worst-explanations-for-not-appointing-women-to-ftse-company-boards

@mancheeze "I spent years debunking MRA's"

"Why are jobs that contain a majority of women, like teaching and caring jobs the lowest paid when it can be argued that these jobs are the most important in the world?"

You've spent years debunking MRA's and that was the best you could come up with.

Nursing and Teaching are paid for by the government, if you want to pay nurses and teachers and other caring professions more then that would mean increasing taxes or/and diverting taxes away from other things.

Now you could make an argument that we could spend less on defence, foreign aid etc in order to pay nurses, teachers more and you could probably give them a small pay increase. I'm sure a lot of people would be happy with that.

But you seem to be questioning why nurses, teachers are paid less than other professions.

Reality is that a lot of professions are well paid because they contribute and are vital to the profits of a company.

R&D teams at a STEM company invent new products, advance new technology etc that solve problems or make things easier and are commercially valuable.

Marketing teams figure out how to launch those products and increase sales.

Sales teams then go out and actually negotiate the deals to sell those products.

All of these staff will have basic salaries and performance bonuses that are dependent on their output and contribution to the company.

This is really basic capitalism/economics and I'm not sure why it needs explaining.

"Custody goes to women because women are STILL the primary caregivers "

The irony of posting this straight after a comment 'debunking' biological differences.

What biological differences and physical differences do you think enable women to better play the primary caregiver role?

I think when men get older and lose much of the power and privilege they had that was unearned for a large part, they become bitter and blame others.

I hate not being able to edit when I don't get my quotes in bold correctly.

grrrr

These are typical men's rights/alt right rhetorical tricks. They are easily debunked. I spent years debunking MRA's and their ridiculous assertions.

- feminism is now unnecessary as we already have equality laws - it leads to communism (bad) and is inherently "anti-male"

Then why did Trump just reinstate the gag rule and why do Republicans continually roll back women's ability to access contraception and abortion?

the gender pay gap doesn't exist, women just choose to do lower paid jobs (the jordan peterson / cathy newman interview "proved" this).

Why are jobs that contain a majority of women, like teaching and caring jobs the lowest paid when it can be argued that these jobs are the most important in the world?

Also, see this lovely clip of Peterson in full MRA garb claiming that his son won't mate with a woman because he can't throw snowballs:

he said that "the world is ruled by beautiful women who scorn men and look down their noses at them"

LOL. This guy sounds like he's paranoid.

inequality in the home (and outside) doesn't exist - women choose to do more housework etc because of their biological nature.

Another baseless claim that is not backed up by any science. Ask him to tell you the biological mechanism responsible for this. He'll make up some whacky explanation that has no bearing on reality.

the courts frequently rule in favour of the mother rather than the father as far as child contact goes as a result of institutional sexism against men rather than "doing what's best for the child"

No. Custody goes to women because women are STILL the primary caregivers and WANT custody. It's only small minority of custody cases where there is conflict. See Liz Library re: custody.

the fact that murders and DV happen more within families was more of a problem than the fact that they are usually male against women

He gets this directly from MRA Erin Pizzey. It's patently false. See Duluth model research.

Otherwise, this guy is doing what many men do these days. They act like they're the most oppressed group on the planet. It's a mantrum.

If women aren’t applying for X course or entering Z profession, it’s not enough to shrug and say “oh well nobody’s forcing them”, we need to be thinking about why they’re making those choices.

Exactly! And we need to actually grasp the radical idea that women actually have something to offer those industries and that by not recognizing women's potential we are wasting a lot of talent.

Doubt anyone is planning to force SAHMs back to work or deny people making their own choices. But we need to look beyond letting people make their own choice to see the background people are making those choices against. If women aren’t applying for X course or entering Z profession, it’s not enough to shrug and say “oh well nobody’s forcing them”, we need to be thinking about why they’re making those choices. Likewise why female parents are making different choices w/r/t balancing parenting and work than male ones.

What do you think “needs to be done.”?

I would advise women not to give up work and remain economically active (as I did, albeit I downshifted a level).

I also advise any young women I meet to make university choices based on earnings and flexibility. “Gender Studies” is not the path to economic independence!

But many actually do want to stop working when they have children. Should we force them to work?

Or do we let people make their own choices?

The only person I need to discuss the distribution of housework Is my husband. And we agree what works for us. I can’t see why anyone else is intestested in who unloads our dishwasher.

Well I quite agree, but many people are, else those Mars Venus type books wouldn't be so popular..

Gender pay gap - yes, but when you have a situation where elderly women are overwhelmingly poorer than men, does it matter why the choices were made?

Expecting the free market to reward morally good choices is clearly naive, but we live in a world where money determines well-being so something needs to be done.

Pursue.

The women being programmed to do housework thing is just so bat shit crazy that I wouldn’t even bother debating that one.

The only person I need to discuss the distribution of housework Is my husband. And we agree what works for us. I can’t see why anyone else is intestested in who unloads our dishwasher.

But there are other points that I think are worth debating - like the Gender Pay gap and how much is due to women and men’s choices about the careers they wish to peruse.

I know that my choices have affected my career. And that has probably led to the skewing if my organisations diversity stats.

But I lead my life to suit me. And not to improve my organisations diversity stats.

Good god. Some of these posts. You aren’t obliged to keep people with such directly offensive (to YOU, as a human) views in your life in the name of debate. He basically thinks women (you) are “biologically” inferior. Healthy debate is one thing, but all the views you listed in your OP are ones we’ve all come up against literally countless times online and in real life. It’s exhausting. If your mind hasn’t been changed by these arguments before, it won’t be changed by them now.

You can’t ‘sensibly debate’ a man who feels qualified to inform you that women are biologically programmed to enjoy doing housework

I remember my ex bringing home a survey once showing that most women like housework because it releases oxytocin, so why didn't I? That pseudo-science is so harmful because it informs people's expectations of you and your expectations of yourself.

My life would be so much easier if I did enjoy housework.

You can’t ‘sensibly debate’ a man who feels qualified to inform you that women are biologically programmed to enjoy doing housework.

OP, please don’t think my comments weee about you. I took your OP in the way it was intended.

My comments were really directed at the many other posters who were recommending that you move away from this friendship purely because of his views.

I guess I put across that I was terrible, but I get the feeling from him whichever facts I put across to him he's never going to change his mind

I think that is the key OP, he, like many others willingly misinterpret feminism and so you wonder if any amount of sensible debate will change their minds, so in the end it seems like a folly to keep trying.

I'm not sure where you go on to from there? Humour? Sarcasm? Ignorance? But I feel your dilemma. It's one all feminists face.

At the end of the day, it's not about having blinkers on, it's about working out the cost to your mental health of banging your head against a brick wall in the hope that there is some light and mutual understanding somewhere.

FWR isn't an echo chamber, but a respite from all that head banging!