Why are feminists so threatened by the MRA movement?

[LaVoixDeLaRaison]

When I was at university, the Gender Equality society (of which I was a member) chose to rename itself the Feminist society, arguing that the only way equality could be achieved was by focusing on women's issues. This led some other students to set up an MRA group, which was met with some resistance from the feminists. On this very board I see commenters angrily referring to MRAs as if they are all members of an evil homogeneous group.

Isn't it possible that men and women both suffer oppression from society in different ways? That the levels of this oppression are not necessarily equal, but are still important if we are to achieve equality? I often see feminists agreeing with certain 'male issues' (e.g. media stereotypes, elevated male suicide rate), but suggesting that feminism has other priorities, and if they want to do something about these issues then they should make their own groups. Why do they get criticized when they do exactly that? Better still, wouldn't feminism be better off if it didn't alienate so many men (and women, focused on a wider range of issues, and stopped pitting the sexes against one another?

NAMRAALT

Way too funny .

Do I think all MRAs are going to go on killing sprees?

No.

Do I know that MRAs condone violence against women?

Yes.

Please point out all the 'atrocities' feminists have committed with the express purpose o furthering the feminist cause. This was Elliot Roger's avowed aim. That and his being angry that women he wanted to fuck refused him, because that's not allows either.

Tell me, what do you think of the phrase FriendZoning?

Parents dont have rights. I think that this basic concept passes MRAs by.

It also enrages them that the welfare of a lesser being to them ie a child comes before what they want.

I don't think any assumptions are made by courts that benefit women. Women put in the domestic labour before divorce. That is recognised by courts. That's not trampling on anyone's rights and nor is it of benefit to women. Women (and therefore the children they care for) end up poorer on average after divorce. These perceived benefits are actually just allowing the status quo to be maintained.

Oh blimey! My post was to Momagain1!

Are you trying to suggest that all MRAs are like that, which is the reason why they are so terrible?

To me, Roger Elliot personified the logical conclusion of MRA thinking, yes.

As I said up thread and as PetulaGordino has just re-iterated, it's not that feminists feel threatened by MRAs. We are actually, literally threatened by them.

Oh, and Christina Hoff Somers?

Not a feminist. Not in any way a feminist.

She is an MRA handmaiden who gets wheeled out to try and lend their tantrums a level of credibility with women.

Just because someone says they are something, doesn't mean they are. To quote the Bible, by their fruits shall ye know them, and her fruit tastes of MRA stooge.

"What matters is that arguments are based on proper academic rigour, and are not influenced by politics." Yeah coz there's no bias in academia . But way to go on dismissing women's lived experiences.

sorry yes, i just repeated you annie

Right, Christina H-S argues, and cites other sources which argue, that the stats on women, pay and employment are wrong because 'precise figures do not exist' (though I presume we are to infer they would be lower?), on the basis that 'serious economists' do not 'believe' they do.

A man said 'we are talking' about fewer girls sold into sexual slavery and the number 'likely' includes a lot of boys, too. Nice. Specific.

550.00 women turn up in the ER not because of violence, but because of 'violence related' injuries. I don't quite get the distinction - would that be if your boyfriend threatened to hit you and you stepped back off a cliff or something?

There's a 'clear possibility' that a survey on violence on campus is only filled in by people who've encountered it. So yeah, I guess we should dismiss those whingers! Also the figures should be tweaked, because at the moment they count forced kissing or rape when the woman is drunk, and that skews the figures. I assume these things are to be re-cast as Just One Of Those Things?

And my favourite - 'the 23-cent gender pay gap is simply the difference between the average earnings of all men and women working full-time'. Aaaaah, I see. The women just choose bad jobs, even though they had every opportunity not to?

cordelia fine's proper academic rigour was dismissed by the OP anyway

Oh yes, and they didn't actually find that the campus survey was only filled in by those who had a beef of some kind - they just assumed that was probably the case.

That's not a terribly persuasive article. It's just a lot of people saying things are 'likely' or unknown, or possible, to fit their anti-feminist agenda.

BuffyBotRebooted

Thank you for outlining the theoretical perspective, and I accept that that is what many feminists believe. However, you admit that it is a blunt instrument, and a social rather than a scientific theory. What about the feminists who don't accept that? What if I believe that men's problems will not be solved by focusing only on removing the patriarchal power structure? Is there any room for that sort of discussion in feminist circles? Or will they get shouted down and told that they are not feminist? I'm saddened to say my experience is that it has been the latter.

I would argue that modern women in the western world provide a fine example of a situation in which 'oppressors' have given up their power, largely as a result of reasonable debate. No doubt you disagree, but can you tell me what rights men have that women don't have?

PetulaGordino
Not only by me, but by distinguished Cambridge psychologist Simon Baron-Cohen and Harvard cognitive scientist Steven Pinker, amongst many others. I don't pretend to be anywhere near as qualified or as intelligent as Cordelia Fine, but likewise the same applies to those who disagree with her. All I can do is look at all the arguments as they were presented, and try to reach my own conclusions based on academic honesty. You can sneer at me for disagreeing with the work of an academic, but you're doing exactly the same thing.

Oh god, here we go. True colours time.

well shall we start with getting rid of the patriarchy and if that doesn't solve men's problems we'll work from there?

m'okay?

How long a list do you want?

I'll start with bodily autonomy.

"modern women in the western world provide a fine example of a situation in which 'oppressors' have given up their power, largely as a result of reasonable debate"

the hard work and personal sacrifice of feminists over decades dismissed, right there

I lead a normal, and even slightly sheltered life, and I still need more fingers than I have to count the number of times I've been sexually assualted - from minor gropings/flashing to forced kissing (with tongues), to boyfriends not stopping when forcefully asked to.

1 in 5 is an underestimate.

The last is also rubbish. How many women here have assumed to be the secretary/assistant/helper rather than the actual job we're performing, expectations matter, and if you're expected to take a lower paid job then it takes effort to question it.

And as to the whole it's not 35% of women who visit the ER, but only 35% of women who visit because of violent injuries - there aren't words - who's playing shenanigans with statistics now.

Right, I've asked you this several times but you've brought the subject up yourself now. What issues would not be dealt with by getting rid of the patriarchy? What are your examples? If you ignore this I will assume you don't have any.

more distraction from the problem of male violence, which no MRA wants to acknowledge or address

Just for info, there are a lot of women on this thread who can very well hold their own academically with S B-C. Now, have a think about what that says about your basic assumptions about women. Then come back and apologise.

You yourself said hat you agreed with CF's findings but liked S B-Cs better, what does that tell us?

Why does the best science, in your opinion, get done by people with cocks?

True colours time. This.

Surprised it got as far as page 19 before absolute certainty arrives….

CaptChaos
I think friend-zoning is something that can be done by men or women. It can be emotionally quite difficult for the person on the receiving end, but it is also a difficult circumstance for the other person who is only trying to let them down gently. Of course, no one should feel entitled to a relationship with anyone just because they happen to be friends. But how on earth is any of that relevant to this discussion?

CaptChaos
TheOriginalSteamingNit
Yes she's called an anti-feminist/MRA by many, but do you get to decide who is and who is not a feminist? I daresay you'd say exactly the same thing about me, but nonetheless I identify as a feminist because I believe in gender equality.

You're making deliberately incorrect assumptions, and I think you know that was not what she was claiming at all. She was merely pointing out that the studies were flawed, and should therefore not be treated as if they were gospel. This was only a short article and could only go into limited depth, but she has explained more clearly her arguments in some of her books.