Toxic Masculinity Ends The Men’s Rights Movement

Aside from the obvious, that MRA’s are men who have the same thinking as men in the 14th century and that they have no place in the modern world, there is another characteristic inherent in them that will eventually lead them to their own end.

More and more men, however slight, are adopting the misogynist rhetoric of the MRM. This is getting apparent to us in the mainstream.

A couple instances that pop out to me: Elliot Rodger and Warhammer, they quite clearly have the same beliefs about women that MRA’s do. Rodger thought he was the supreme gentleman that women should go out with which pairs him with MRA Stefan Molyneux who said women who don’t go out with ‘nice guy’s are going to end the human race. Warhammer beat the shit out of his 100 pound girlfriend and is similar to Paul Elam who claims bashing a violent bitch is not only OK, it’s necessary because women start it. I’m saying it’s incredibly easy to pick out MRA’s and we must teach as many women as possible what to look for and hear so they can avoid them.

The one thing, the main thing, that is going to annihilate MRA’s is themselves through toxic masculinity.

Toxic masculinity has gotten a lot of media attention and sociologists like Michael Kimmel are well versed in this subject. Feminists have theorized for decades that gender is harmful to men.

TM is an analysis of the male gender role: masculinity, and how it’s inherently harming men. Feminists have rightly analyzed and criticized gender roles decades ago. The behaviours required to ‘be a man’ is the precise thing that will end the MRM and all its little factions forever. So how will this take place?

boys fighting

Teaching fighting and dominance leads to male violence against women and other men

We are getting a good view of it now. Paul Elam is fighting with MGTOW men, a subset of MRA’s. I won’t detail the many differences between the two groups because it doesn’t truly matter. To them, the distinctions are crucial.

The basic difference between the two groups is thus. MGTOW’s are men who completely reject relationships with women. They’ve invented a lexicon of misogynist terms they share in the Manosphere like ‘hypergamy’ which means women are gold diggers. MRA’s do have relationships with women and are even ok with marriage.

The war is over whether MGTOW’s can be married and still be MGTOW. Elam says ‘yes,’ although he claims his common law relationship isn’t marriage. He forgets that common law is marriage without the ceremony. Depending on which state he resides there are time parameters where once you live with a woman for a certain amount of time, you become legally bound to one another.

MGTOW’s like Hambling represent the opposing side which claims that MGTOW and marriage do not mix, even though Hambling also lives with a woman and is also considered common law.

The conflict started at the end of last year and in the last couple months has gotten very loud and open. Elam’s motivations are part dick-wagging and part charlatan. He would hate to lose to this ‘battle’ to his old protege but he also wants MGTOW men to visit his site and give him money. Paul’s site isn’t doing well.

If I had to pick which group I prefer it would be MGTOW’s even though they are more open about hating women, and that’s probably the same reason I like them more. MRA’s try to cleanse their woman hatred by using left leaning rhetoric while being wholly tradtionalist which makes them a laughingstock.

MGTOW’s are beneficial to women because they’re the men who can’t get dates and fear us. They have serious issues and they do us a favour by taking themselves out of the dating scene, refusing to interact with us. They’re drop-outs who started a movement of fellow drop outs so they’d have an identity and company in their wallowing.

Toxic masculinity requires men to think in terms of hierarchy. Men, instead of viewing all as equals, tend to place men above and below them and women always below them, hence the need for women’s liberation. It’s also why we see men call other men alpha’s, beta’s etc. The phrase ‘man up’ wasn’t invented by women even though the Manosphere thinks it was.

Masculinity necessarily negates equality.  What men do to women by dominating us and treating us as second-class citizens, they do to other men.

The skirmish between Elam and Hambling is a display of toxic masculinity. One of them has to go because to men, someone has to ‘win.’ I suppose winning involves whoever gets the most upvotes on a YouTube video.

They frame what they’re doing as a ‘war’ and use that rhetoric very liberally. One of them must be put in his place. They’ll fight to the death= when Youtube ratings declare a winner. This is why men are bound to fail in any kind of movement that requires unity which means seeing everyone else as an equal, with equal potential and personhood.

Elam won’t let it rest. Hambling won’t let it rest. They’ve been sparring for weeks with various side actors generously giving their opinion and taking sides.

The problem, and we know this as feminists when we discuss toxic masculinity (gender), is that in men’s minds, someone has to be the Alpha and the someone has to be the Beta.

This is why feminists challenge gender and why we need to raise boys differently.

MRA’s think feminists ‘feminize’ boys. MRA’s encourage traditional masculinity and ironically it’s this very gender role that’s got them in this little pickle. Raising boys to put people in hierarchies of importance inevitably leads them to violence since every boy needs to continually find his place in the hierarchy by starting fights with other boys.

I can hear Tom Golden’s soft-spoken whimper that feminists are keeping boys away from games in school which demand domination and winning. See asshole? See why feminists are correct? You idiots are going to ruin your own silly movement because you’re too busy fighting each other over silly shit.

The MRA concept of ‘white knighting’ relates to toxic masculinity in the sense that MRA’s want men to dehumanize others. Elam accused Hambling of white knighting his girlfriend in arguments on AVFM forums. It’s meant as an insult because men aren’t supposed to help others, especially women. Men are not to see others as human.

I say let the blockheads fight. It provides us feminists entertainment and proves our point about toxic gender roles.

I’m savouring the irony. Feminism has known about men’s issues for a long time and educated feminist mothers have been doing their best to get their boys to stop seeing others as constant rivals. That worldview causes war and isn’t this the same disposability that MRA’s moan about so often?

The faulty belief that women somehow enjoy the hierarchical ‘second place’ and the ‘wars’ that go along with masculinity is an MRA one and by extension, a traditional one. Farrell and Elam, even Hambling, reinforce traditional masculinity but blame it on women by claiming we want it, just like they did when a video highlighting street harassment went viral.

Warren Farrell is the mastermind behind those mental gymnastics. He claims men don’t have any choice or agency because men are sex starved idiots who couldn’t possibly make the decision to play competitive sports because they want to dominate and beat other men. He blames football injuries on cheerleaders.

The very disposability MRA’s screech about is brought about by them, through toxic/traditional masculinity. Feminists aren’t destroying men. Men are destroying men.

Hate to put it to you morons but women and feminists see this hierarchical (let Elam try pronouncing that) posturing and the need to destroy another as silly and ridiculous. We understand the importance of equality and value life and see no need to engage in combat displays to put other women down. We’ve known about gender roles for decades.

I don’t know when this will end but I’m sure they’ll see this and talk about it. It’s useless though since they’ll see this as a feminist solution and will condemn it. Or they might find another way of manipulating the language so it doesn’t sound so feminist but will discuss it all the same.

You know the stereotype of the man who can’t ask for directions? This is a perfect metaphor for the current situation. A man must wander around aimlessly because his masculinity depends on it. He must do it on his own. Cooperation is foreign to him. Equality is foreign to him.

Here’s to watching them wander around aimlessly while feminists have held the map for decades.

VIDEOS:

Hambling going after Elam

Elam going after Hambling

BONUS:

Radical feminist mag Trouble and Strife: article about gender. (Go read it MRA’s)

Enjoy!

Advertisements

17 thoughts on “Toxic Masculinity Ends The Men’s Rights Movement

  1. I may have said this before, in which case I apologize for repeating myself. This “showdown” looks like a staged event: The Bawdy-Baldy-D#ckhead of the North Vs. Sick-Psyco-lookin’-Dude of the South. It looks totally phoney to me.

    Woman-hating is definitely going mainstream big time.

    I’m off to read some more articles at that excellent journal, “Trouble and Strife.” I’ve never seen that before. Excellent find! Thanks for providing the link.

    • I put the link to all the back issues in the side bar months ago but I know most ppl don’t see the sidebar (gee I’m really starting to think I should change the design of the blog).

      Trouble and Strife is 100% radfem.

      I love it too.

      • I’ve looked at that list in the side bar recently, too. I just didn’t know what I was looking at.

        Trying to think of a way to make people click: What if there was a way to add a little description?

        For example, in this case maybe something like: “Independent radical feminist magazine, published in Britain between 1983 and 2002.”

        I think that definitely would have made me click. I’m always looking for old feminist magazines and articles.

        This magazine is FANtastic! I’m reading the second issue right now. It’s a .pdf scan. I couldn’t find a direct link at the page for that issue for some reason, so I typed “The new myth of the witch — Rachel Hasted” into Google and found it as the first entry in the search list.

  2. Admittedly I “like” the MGTOW folks more than MRAs in the same way that I “like” David Duke more than Pat Buchanan: One side is overtly — nay — cartoonishly bigoted, and makes no excuses for it. They’ll call women c*nts or wear Swastika armbands. You can spot them a mile away like a guy with an orange hunting jacket in the middle of an open field. They don’t pretend they’re “not racist” or “not misogynist.” There’s no bullshit covering it up with a “civil rights” or “traditional conservative” label. It’s less confusing for the layperson who doesn’t know they’re cut from the same wretched cloth. And speaking of racism and misogyny, why do they seem to intersect so damn often? First Paul Elam promoting overt racists on his website, and now this:
    https://hailtothegynocracy.wordpress.com/2014/12/01/neo-nazis-for-gamergate/

  3. We could write such a great book about the MRM! They interest me because of their inability to see what they are and what they’re up to. They could be dangerous if they got themselves a stalinist-style leader, in spite of their tiny numbers and limited appeal.

    But that won’t happen, because they’ve dived into an elaborate fantasy system rather than acknowledging the frank motivation of the disaffected men they attract: namely, the drive to return women to strict and universal male control. They have decided to try to cover this real motivation up, to be able to expand into the mainstream.

    What is PUA theory? A set of fictional ideas and procedures that are supposed to help individual men to control individual women by cajoling and intimidating and manipulating women. What is MGTOW theory? A set of procedures to help individual men control individual women by preventing women from having the protections of law in a relationship (I disagree that they are avoiding women – women are their only topic of discussion and they are almost all still involved with or looking for women as far as I can tell). What is MRA theory? An attack on feminism because feminism is freeing women from male control.

    Because all this starts out as cover-up and fiction, and the methods consist of underhanded swipes and dirty tricks, the MRM has no credibility, and no new Beloved Leader can save it. For the same reason, it can’t engage in self-criticism and mature into something better than it is. I compare this with feminism in the west, which began as a movement that was not inclusive enough of all women, and which went through an agonizing decade of self-criticism and came out humbler and stronger.

    Besides not acknowledging their real motivations and being unable to grow through self-criticism, they are unaffiliated with any other grassroots movement (except white supremacists, which they don’t want to acknowledge). They seem to think they are libertarian on the whole, but if you look at the emphasis on individual rather than collective action, the emphasis on changing laws, the vague sociological jargon they use, and the lack of principled arguments in favor of expedience, what we seem to have here is a bunch of neo-liberals. It doesn’t help that they are unable to put themselves into any larger political context because of their internal contradictions.

    It also appears that there already is another, larger, much more successful grassroots movement that is better suited to take on the challenges of toxic masculinity, including examining the male drive to control women and its devastating consequences. This group has credibility and organization and power and a stake in helping men. By taking the stance that it will never ally with this group the MRM is greatly weakened and rendered irrelevant from the start. I’m talking about feminism, of course.

    Perhaps after enough upheaval the MRM will re-emerge, stripped-down, hierarchicalized, with a stark and simple and open goal of getting women back into male control. Then they’ll be a problem, but right now, they’re just entertaining.

  4. My comment is a little contradictory, because I’m talking about two ways the MRM could become viable. One way would be to abjure and self-criticize the misogyny that drives the movement, and to re-organize as a movement devoted to ending toxic masculinity rather than re-subordinating women. This would give them credibility and connection and help end a lot of suffering.

    The other would be to focus on the goal of bringing women back into male control, allying strongly and publicly with white supremacists, conservative religions, and conservative politics.

    Personally, I prefer the first way. I don’t support the MRM completely failing as this would drive these issues underground where they would probably manifest violently.

    • Never happen. They’re all traditionalists. Elam preaches traditional masculinity and polices other men. I see what you mean about driving it underground but remember, these men were already underground before Elam gave them a spot to woman hate.

      • Yeah, they’re reactionaries and they’re on the tradcon path. It’s doubtful they’ll do anything else. And if they went underground they wouldn’t be able to recruit like they do now.

    • I say over and over, again, that the MRM, the PUA and other assorted sausage-wielders who go on the web, and pretend that they are at their own little private club, at their frat house, in their garage with the other fellas, or whatever they imagine themselves to be when they type out and make videos talking about their well-thought out plans to harm women, are doing women and girls a marvelous favor.

      If I had only known a few years ago how much men really are plotting against me (I thought I was imagining it!), how much they really hate my guts no matter what I do, how they are obsessed with their meat and so on, I’d have steered even further away from than I did. Maybe I would have been safer. Maybe things would have turned out different for me. Maybe my health would be less fragile right now. But, I didn’t exactly know – suspected maybe, but I didn’t know. I thought, “They can’t ALL be abusers. They can’t all be sick, violent perverts!” But, now I think the writing is on the wall. Nobody could miss it. This is the favor the MRAs and other men have done us in the age of high tech communications via the Web.

      It’s up to women to believe what men are telling us about themselves and act on that information. Lots of women still don’t want to believe it. It’s so horrible. But, the evidence for its validity is everywhere.

  5. AVFM has just adopted a new motto: “GAG THE BITCHES”. It sums up that site and many other manosphere sites so well–truly a stroke of genius, so pithy, so unforgettable. AVFM’s Social Media Director, Janet “Gag the Bitches” Bloomfield came up with it. Kudos, Janet! I plan to repeat AVFM’s motto whenever possible!

    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/11/mens-rights-site-has-simple-and-elegant-suggestion-for-women-talking-about-rape-gag-the-btches/

  6. Hmmm… Well, after reading your comments on this point, I’d have to say that the views of the MRM represent ideas that never go away and probably never will as long as the oppressor lives in any number among us. Right, left, center or whatever, this is the world-wide social order.

    Right now, I think the MRM is just riding the wave of the backlash against women’s small achievements in terms of liberation and the availability of extremely violent porn aimed at women and girls.

    This is just mister being mister. He can’t help it. He was born mister.

  7. i condider myself mgtow and i,m against toxic masculinity. i,m even against normal masculinity.i,m against relationships,sex and marriage. if i want to have a child in the future,i would seek the help of a surrogate. i think men are slaves to their their sex drives and that having sex with a woman is subjurgating and dominating her even if it,s consensual.men should show more discipline and should be independent of sex and marriage.they should also respect women and their fellow men.

    • Well I feel compelled to respond to you b/c it sounds like you’re talking about something I can agree with, to a point.

      I don’t think anyone should have relationships, marriage etc. if they know it’s not for them.

      However, the problem I have with MGTOW is that they hate women. Hate us.

      Men are taught to be slaves to their sex drives imho. If men weren’t they would b a lot happier and it’s good that men are finally realizing that toxic masculinity, the pressure to ‘have lots of women’ is hurting them and women.

      Men need to live their lives, find relationships if they wish and be good human beings first and foremost.

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