AVFM’s come out with their new mission statement. If you just read the first two paragraphs, it’s well written, but it devolves very quickly into taking women’s rights away and calling women ‘gynocentric parasites.’ I had thought that a men’s movement would focus on men but we know this isn’t about men ending traditional gender roles. It’s about eliminating women’s hard won rights. Here’s the first few paragraphs, which you would agree with until they go full tilt woman hating:
‘The past 50 years has been a time of remarkable change in the world of western women. With the help of technology and forward thinking our society has thrown off sex based expectations and limitations for women, allowing them important, long-deserved access to the path of self-actualization.
We now live in a world where a woman’s role in life is one of choice, not a destiny shaped by tradition, determined by biology or forged in law. This, we think, is as it should be.
This revolution in freedom and identity, however, will not be complete until the same standards find their way into the lives of the average man. The absence of that complimentary change in the lives of men has created an imbalance that erodes the autonomy of both sexes. Unless this changes, that Imbalance will worsen.’
Now it turns batshit crazy.
Here are some of the missions of AVFM. Out of 24 new missions, 21 of them involve harming women.
End rape shield laws.
Why would MRA’s want to end protection of a woman’s sexual history when it comes to rape cases? To punish her of course. To add to rape culture. Please see my in-depth post on rape and how MRA’s and men justify its existence.
Rape and other forms of sexual assault shall not be based on “penetration” or any sex-specific characteristic, but based on clearly-stated lack of consent.
Rape is a specific crime. Redefining rape to mean something other than penetration won’t make any difference as all sexual violence is counted as a sexual assault. In order to get accurate stats there is a need to separate rape from envelopment. They are two different things yet both are counted equally under the law.
Dispense with child support except in special circumstances.
They want to be able to be deadbeats. MRA’s don’t care about kids.
Reproductive rights, choice in parenthood for men. Consent to sex is not consent to parenthood. Upholding this idea for women while denying it to men must end. Men must be allowed to unilaterally reject parental rights and obligations during the same period of time in which a woman may legally obtain an abortion. The identified father must be served with legal notification of the intent use his assets for the benefit of a child while an abortion is still legal, or the right to use said assets by the mother are forfeit.
I once read a comment that dealt so eloquently with this issue. Consenting to sex has nothing to do with parenthood. You consent to the possibility that a pregnancy will occur. It’s still a choice equally whether to be a parent for both a man and a woman. Many MRA’s want to leave women in the lurch and not financially care for kids aka promoting dead beats instead of promoting contraception and responsible behaviour.
Ratify the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) precisely as it was originally written, and sign it into law. Or the equivalent in other countries if they do not yet have equal rights as a matter of law.
Their plan in doing this is to put this in so they can then claim men deserve jobs that they think women are ‘stealing’ from them.
Selective Service must either be abolished or include women.
It’s interesting that their focus isn’t just on ending it, which feminists support anyway. MRA’s want an equal number of deaths in manual labour jobs and in the military yet don’t support women getting into those jobs to get the higher pay or in the military. This isn’t about lifting up men. It’s about focusing on women and how best to harm us if they don’t get what they want.
Affirmative Action programs based on sex must be abolished
Racist, sexist assholes. What more do you want?
Abandon Duluth Model and all patriarchy theory-based models of domestic violence in favor of non-ideological evidence-based solutions and programs.
The Duluth Model doesn’t preclude men being victims. The problem is that women are the majority of victims in frequency and severity of battering. The only way MRA’s claim this outrageous stat is by using a flawed method that isn’t accepted by govt. research projects on DV because it doesn’t measure violence accurately. Plus, there is an ideology behind battering women: patriarchal control and dominion over women’s lives.
Require all state and federally funded DV programs to extend full and equal services, including shelter, without regard to sex.
They already have services based on demand. Men who call DV lines can go to hotels and other accommodations set up with the service they call. The issue here is men don’t need the same amount of services women do. Men are never going to be allowed into women’s shelters. I wonder if this means Paul Elam is going to take that 100K and the extra 33K he got a couple months ago and start a battered men’s shelter in Texas? Prolly not, which is why they wrote this:
‘It is time for feminism to fulfill its promise, and to quit making a mockery of it.’
Does anyone find this absurd? They expect feminism to start taking those hard won rights AWAY from women? Isn’t this where Paulie steps in and does something with all that money except make stupid mission statements on his website that promote hatred of women and children? What promise did feminism make? It’s a movement for equality. It never promised to allow dead beat dads not support their own kids. Wow. These guys are so entitled and so dense.
Implement the assumption of equal physical parenting during divorce.
This is not what MRA’s are for. This is their tricky language. What they really want is what’s called FORCED shared parenting. This is what father’s rights groups have been trying to do for over 2 decades. Forced shared parenting allows the abusive parent who doesn’t really want the kids (usually the father and as we can see MRA’s don’t want to support their kids either) to get equal custody to harm the ex Recently in Canada there was an MRA styled bill that got decimated in the senate due to its harmful proposal that abusers should have forced shared custody and that after divorce the financially weaker partner, (usually the mother) can’t move unless the father says so. It’s also a strategy to get out of paying child support. You can see by the above mission statement that MRA’s don’t want to care for their kids unless it’s to harass their ex.
End alimony except by pre-nuptial agreement.
Another thing to hurt mainly women and kids after divorce.
Marriage should be based solely on contract law.
I have never heard of this before but I’m guessing this is where people get married always with a prenup.
End federal funding and provide penalties for universities that interfere with the rights of men to form campus groups.
Wow! One that actually deals with men, one of only two that deal exclusively with men. You can’t end federal funding because a student body won’t vote you in and dedicate money to you. It’s called democracy. The Canadian Federation of Students VOTES on these things. You’re not entitled to that money. You must serve a purpose. Five dudes don’t warrant a TV and video game room on campus if it doesn’t pass muster. If you actually came up with a purpose for these groups instead of ‘DOWN WITH THE WIMMINZ!’ maybe someone would take you seriously.
Prohibit state interference in any sexual relationship between consenting adults.
This one is strange to me. Am I reading this right? Are they saying to end laws against sexual assault? The state doesn’t interfere if there’s consent. The problem is Elam and friends don’t like the notion of teaching men and women about consent or what rape is. It’s better left blurry so men have avenues to coerce women with alcohol. My next post is about this very subject.
Those are just some of them. Like I said, 21 out of 24 were about women. The last part says
‘It is time for the interests of humanity to take precedence over the interests of men and women as political factions and social adversaries.’
That’s what feminism is. That’s not what you guys are. You really think people are that stupid and can’t read the 24 item list you’ve made and figure out it’s about taking rights away from women and bawling because you think feminists should do that for you?
I suggest EVERYONE, right NOW, click on the book on the right hand column of this blog. It’s called Backlash by Susan Faludi. Decades ago she wrote a book about these fringe misogynist groups and how they raise their ugly visages at every turn where women gain even the smallest bit of equality. It will explain why MRA’s are infatuated with Warren Farrell and why Farrell is just parroting the same trash peddled in the Victorian era as a backlash against women. It explains why feminism is always the target. It also sheds light on why men do this and what they’re trying to gain by it. It’s an eye opener because once you read this book, the entire MRM becomes more hilarious than it already is and most certainly pathetically predictable.