latest

Re: I love it when Tumblr Feminists and the usual suspects say men won't help themselves. These young guys from #MENchester raise money for Male DV Victims, and their children.

(BlueOrange22)
Anti-MRA employs classic manipulative tactics- first they say the MRM isn't necessary because feminism "helps men to." But then, when you point out the things feminists do that hurt men (gendered DV laws, etc) or the issues they ignore (conscription), they say "oh, well feminism isn't about men."

(fyrie)
Feminists falsely claim feminism is also about men

When men need help feminism ignores the issue

When men help themselves feminism purposefully try and negate the effort

(armaadi)
Then they say, "if you care so much about men, do something about it". Then they get ticked off at MRAs for doing something about it..

(89peters)
Australia hosted the first ever large MRA rally a few days ago. Hundreds of men and women attended. Subjects discussed included the demonization of men, discrimination against boys in school, discrimination against male victims of domestic violence, and the importance of recognizing that males and females should not be at war with each other; nature designed us to be symbiotic. If you harm men you harm women, and if you harm women you harm men. That was the message.

How did feminists respond?

They organized a "counter-march" and tried to drown out the speakers using megaphones and inane chants. One of the chants was "Racist sexist anti-queer, MRA's not welcome here!" This suggests that they haven't even bothered to study the men's rights movement. Anti-gay and racist sentiment are vanishingly rare in the MRM. Ditto misogyny. Many MRAs, including myself, used to consider themselves feminists until they looked at the hard data. I oppose feminism precisely because I support gender equality.

The woman who organized the men's march down under is indeed right wing. She's a Trump supporter. I'm more of a "radical leftist" type, the kind of person Jordan Peterson warns you about. But you know what? I don't fucking care if she is right wing. The rally was non-partisan, and the speakers discussed important issues that most leftists are currently ignoring or attempting to justify.

We cannot continue to pretend as though feminism is a movement for gender equality. It more closely resembles a hate movement. I would not be surprised at all if, within 20 years or so, feminists are regarded in the same way we now regard the Ku Klux Klan.

(Fortnite_FaceBlaster)
Yea, people call me an "MRA" in a negative fashion, as if that's supposed to dismiss anything I have to say.

(armaadi)
They think if they dismiss you as a person they dont have to defend their arguments.

(LEGALinSCCCA)
This is how one "always wins". It's basically the terroristic way of dealing with life. And it causes cognitive dissonance to an extreme. Because they know they're wrong. But refuse to accept it. Which makes them dig in.

(PeonSupreme)
Feminists disrupt, impede and interfere with men’s efforts to form communities amongst themselves, separate and apart from women. They mistakenly believe a weak man poses less of a threat than a strong one.

[OP and comments under "A distinction should be made between the rape of a chaste woman and that of a promiscuous slut."]

@Holyheavens

A chaste woman is either a virgin, a married woman who's only partner in her life has been her husband or a remarried widow. In each of these instances, no fornication took place.
I define the promiscuous slut as a woman who's had sexual relations with more than partner in her life safe for remarried widows as mentioned above.
I'm lenient on premarital sex only if it's done with her one and only lifepartner.
Moving on the topic of rape; a distinction should be made on the severity of punishment depending on whether the victim falls in one of either categories.
The chaste woman can be considered to have been truly traumatized in case of rape, because she has been sullied and bereft of her dignity she was taught to uphold.
The promiscuous slut has no dignity or principles to speak of in the first place. It can barely be considered human because it immediately acts on lust like a wild beast without considering the consequences. Such a creature ought best to pursue a career of prostitution, considering it has no value as a mother or wife. It's not much different from a sexual object. The most it loses when being raped is a couple of minutes. What is one dick more after having been penetrated by various others?
A rapist who's raped a woman in the first category must receive a heavy punishment. Chaste women should be protected from being dirtied at all costs for they are the (future) wifes of moral men. So the death penalty is fitting.
A rapist who's raped a woman in the second category must pay a fine to the raped slut. A slut is not much different from a prostitute -except that she gives her cunt out for free to various men which could be considered as even worse than prostitution- so why not at least pay her to keep things fair and treat her for the whore she is?

From 7339er:

I wouldn't even give the 2nd rapist a fine to be honest. She should think of it as repayment for that male incel's taxes paying for her free abortions and birth control.

From MelvinTheMerciless:

In the second category the fine should not be paid to the slut but to the father of the slut or whoever the legal male guardian may be. If no man claims the slut as part of his household then we're talking about public property. A town bike. So a fine would only be appropriate if a man used the slut in a way that left it unsuitable for future use by other men. In that case, the fine should be paid to the government or the courts (perhaps to defray the costs associated with enforcing monogamy) or to a charitable fund (perhaps one dedicated to the development of sex robots and other female replacement technologies).