Maybe Some in The Men's Right Movement Want Violence

[CynthiaCypher]

When you read want some in this movement are saying, you can tell that they are angry. But what exactly are they angry at? They are angry that they can't always get their way, that they can no longer give orders and have it be done. They are angry that women are no longer submissive to them and they are angry at their loss of power.

And sometimes they get so angry, they advocate violence.

So what is a person suppose to think when one of them writes stuff like this:

"I began predicting that in a culture where the law protected one demographic, but did not govern that group, and where it governed another demographic, without protecting that demographic, a society would adapt. The members of a social caste governed but not protected by law, would begin to seek redress of grievance through other means, such as the use of retributive violence."

"Grievances will be redressed by retributive violence."

The only conclusion I can come to is that definitely some in the MRM want to pursue violence against women.

Note: Thank you Mancheeze for the heads up

 

[Revoltingest]

Meh.
There are angry people in any movement.
I've even seen peace activists get violent (rallies near my old office).
Should the presence of fringe thugs be writ large regarding a whole movement?
Anyway, those advocating violence should be decried.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Meh.
There are angry people in any movement.
I've even seen peace activists get violent (rallies near my old office).
Should the presence of fringe thugs be writ large regarding a whole movement?
Anyway, those advocating violence should be decried.

I think the whole movement is about anger. In fact that is the rhetoric coming out from that movement.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I find ideologues of all stripes tend to be angry people. Then again, many people seem to enjoy being angry.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

When you read want some in this movement are saying, you can tell that they are angry. But what exactly are they angry at? They are angry that they can't always get their way, that they can no longer give orders and have it be done. They are angry that women are no longer submissive to them and they are angry at their loss of power.

And sometimes they get so angry, they advocate violence.

So what is a person suppose to think when one of them writes stuff like this:

"I began predicting that in a culture where the law protected one demographic, but did not govern that group, and where it governed another demographic, without protecting that demographic, a society would adapt. The members of a social caste governed but not protected by law, would begin to seek redress of grievance through other means, such as the use of retributive violence."

"Grievances will be redressed by retributive violence."

The only conclusion I can come to is that definitely some in the MRM want to pursue violence against women.

Note: Thank you Mancheeze for the heads up

Dress it up in pretty language, and it simply seems like just another ideology:

Above all, you have to identify what it is you want, and then align your actions with that goal. Men today are confused – they have desires common to men all of eras, but they refuse to own up to them and act to satisfy them. They think they’ve evolved, that they’re no longer a primal, violent beast, so they suppress their innermost desires. This suppression of male instinct is at the root of their woes with women in relationships. The man wants something, like sex twice daily, and the woman refuses to accommodate him. Yet he soldiers on, ******* away his dignity. Men are rewarding mediocrity from women when they’d never accept it from a man.

The masculine man, by contrast, is completely honest with himself about what he wants. He isn’t ashamed of groping girls, because that is something he finds spiritually fulfilling. He is quick to acknowledge that he is not getting what he wants. He doesn’t suffer in relationships, because he knows that to do so is fruitless. If a girl say, starts refusing to have sex with him, he respects her wishes by withdrawing from her. He knows that he cannot continue with her.

He comes off as less ‘creepy’ than other men, because he suffers no delusions about what the future holds. He assumes the future is, at best, no better than the present, so he doesn’t hold out for improvements in her character. As soon as his needs cease to be met, he bids her adieu. Short of being married, he knows the answer is always the same: walk.

Tip of the iceberg. Plenty more.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Warning: explicit language in the link.

On the extreme end of the spectrum:

only ******* can be whores!!!! Men having sex are just normal and natural. Any women having sex are whores, sluts, and every other perjorative. you ******* need to learn that you are garbage for men to enjoy and spit out. You are **** and should die after you are no longer sexually useful. Die after age 27. Guys are good until they are 60 or more, you are worthless!!!!

 

[freethinker44]

"I began predicting that in a culture where the law protected one demographic, but did not govern that group, and where it governed another demographic, without protecting that demographic, a society would adapt. The members of a social caste governed but not protected by law, would begin to seek redress of grievance through other means, such as the use of retributive violence."

You mean like this?

SCUM Manifesto - Valerie Solanas

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Some of the **** they say reminds me of some of the stuff that the most radical feminists say. Every movement has its extremist nutjobs. Two sides of the same coin.

 

[freethinker44]

Dress it up in pretty language, and it simply seems like just another ideology:



Tip of the iceberg. Plenty more.

Warning: explicit language in the link.

On the extreme end of the spectrum:

Derailing.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

But back to the middle, from what I've seen online...

Most MRA sites that I've visited are separatist by nature, and look for ways to either separate themselves from women, marry more submissive/demure women (quite a few advocate marrying Asian women because they're assumed to be less like the American angry feminist), or give PUA advice on how to look so as to be a stud and pick up as many chicks as possible. A lot of the forums show frustration and being upset from being screwed over by women and divorce/custody laws.

Every now and then, there's either the push to go "Galt", or the push to screw women over in retaliation (i.e. ex-girlfriends or ex-wives). For the most part, they're airing grievances and comparing female psychology and sexuality to severe psychosis or comparing women to children.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

You mean like this?

SCUM Manifesto - Valerie Solanas

What are your thoughts on the SCUM manifesto?

What are your thoughts on Elliot Rodger's manifesto?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I must have been left off the invitation. Would someone please tell me what the hell I need a "men's rights" movement for?

 

[freethinker44]

What are your thoughts on the SCUM manifesto?

What are your thoughts on Elliot Rodger's manifesto?

They're garbage. Both of them.

 

[freethinker44]

I must have been left off the invitation. Would someone please tell me what the hell I need a "men's rights" movement for?

Get a divorce and go through a custody hearing and then see if you still need an answer to that question.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Guilt by association seems to be a popular thread starter.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Get a divorce and go through a custody hearing and then see if you still need an answer to that question.

Pssst. (whispers)*It's the system that assumes women are the natural caregivers and men are the natural providers. Something feminists have been arguing against for a while.*

 

[freethinker44]

Pssst. (whispers)*It's the system that assumes women are the natural caregivers and men are the natural providers. Something feminists have been arguing against for a while.*

And yet...

But back to the middle, from what I've seen online...

Most MRA sites that I've visited are separatist by nature, and look for ways to either separate themselves from women, marry more submissive/demure women (quite a few advocate marrying Asian women because they're assumed to be less like the American angry feminist), or give PUA advice on how to look so as to be a stud and pick up as many chicks as possible. A lot of the forums show frustration and being upset from being screwed over by women and divorce/custody laws.

Every now and then, there's either the push to go "Galt", or the push to screw women over in retaliation (i.e. ex-girlfriends or ex-wives). For the most part, they're airing grievances and comparing female psychology and sexuality to severe psychosis or comparing women to children.

Apparently those issues are just whiny separatists complaining about female sexuality and psychology.

Or maybe it's just that they're "derailing" by talking about issues that effect men.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Pssst. (whispers)*It's the system that assumes women are the natural caregivers and men are the natural providers. Something feminists have been arguing against for a while.*

Back to the kitchen, you. This is a manly discussion! :149:

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Get a divorce and go through a custody hearing and then see if you still need an answer to that question.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

You mean like this?

SCUM Manifesto - Valerie Solanas

Is that all you can throw at us. An out-dated piece of arty satire?

I have seen far worse coming from MRA's and they are not writing satire. And the MRA's are far more prolific than Valerie Solanas, who is a mere footnote in the Feminist movement.