Is there a men's rights movement now afoot?

[Tahar Joblis]

Not to knock the occasional person, like Warren Farrell, who decided much earlier that men's rights needed addressing much earlier; but I feel like something has changed very recently; in the last several years, it's starting to look like we may be able to start talking about the men's rights movement as a thing without engaging in a great deal of semantic stretching in order to say anything.

When I first looked around at the subject a few years ago - namely, because I had been accused of being involved with it, and I was pretty curious to understand what, exactly, I was being accused of - I saw very little that seemed coherent. There was some father's advocacy groups; some pick-up artists with cynical things to say about modern femininity and masculinity; some angry men; some reactionaries; but very little in the way of a coherent ideology, mission, or movement. The websites dedicated to it were small, and almost invariably examples of horrid web design; not many people were involved, almost none of them women, and you rarely read any news related to the subject.

Yet, there is a rising pattern of recent signs that something is indeed afoot.

• The majority of discrimination complaints filed to the Swedish office that handles such thing are by men, as of about six years ago.
• As of a little over a year ago, the majority of discrimination complaints filed in Australia came from men.
• Warren Farrell was recently protested - quite dramatically - as a speaker. If you look through his press page, there's not really indications he has attracted this sort of organized drama in the past. Opposition, yes, but protests calling him a rape supporter? I couldn't find any coverage of previous violent protests of Warren Farrell; some feminists have objected to him ever since he started looking at men's issues, but nothing like this. A backlash suggests that he has become suddenly more important.
• Weirdly, there is someone trying to start an explicitly anti-feminist party in the UK.
• There are a number of large and growing men's rights related websites and groups with an increasingly prominent web presence. E.g.:
  
  • AVoiceForMen, which now include prominent male and female contributors, and an increasing number that use their real names, real faces, and real identities; some names that have previous recognition, like Erin Pizzey, and is associated with activists going and putting up posters IRL to raise awareness.
  • Reddit's /r/MensRights section, which comes up [as of when I wrote this, anyway] 48th on its list of subreddits sorted by "popularity," whatever Reddit means by that - not far behind /r/Games and /r/cats, and ahead of /r/Soccer and /r/CFB [college football]; it has apparently increased its subscriber list by about fifty percent in the last six months[!].
  • When I fire up Bing - Google personalizes websearch results - and put in "Men's Rights," I actually get multiple men's rights organization pages on the first page of search results, and only one anti-men's rights webpage in those top ten hits.
• I even notice a difference here on NSG in the way people now talk about the subjects related to men's rights.

So. Am I imagining this? Or has there been a fairly dramatic change in the last couple of years? Is the issue of addressing male disadvantages and anti-male discrimination coming to a sudden maturity?

[Rereumrari]

No. Men have no right to complain about anything because they already have too much power in the world.

In all seriousness, yes there may a trend here, but it probably won't get to be very large. Society has no sympathy for problems that men face and generally expects men to be tough enough to take any abuse that comes thier way, so making a case to people that men can unjustly suffer too is pretty hard to do. I think this movement has come less out of men's suffering and more out of a response to the increasingly anti-masculine rhetoic that feminists have adopted over the last 40 years. Hopefully these movements and the increasing public dislike towards modern feminism will cause them to change that stance. If not, they will just fade out.

[Dyakovo]

So. Am I imagining this? Or has there been a fairly dramatic change in the last couple of years? Is the issue of addressing male disadvantages and anti-male discrimination coming to a sudden maturity?

Nah, I'm certain the "men's rights" movement is still chock-full of immaturity.

[Faolinn]

This is moronic on multiple levels because we really don't need one. We've been the privileged sex for several millenia now. Unless we get invaded by matriarchal aliens, there's hardly a point.

[AiliailiA]

You find whatever you want to find on the Internet.

[Hypparchia]

Most of these "- rights" movements exist only on ze Internet anyway.

[Forsher]

So. Am I imagining this? Or has there been a fairly dramatic change in the last couple of years? Is the issue of addressing male disadvantages and anti-male discrimination coming to a sudden maturity?

Nah, I'm certain the "men's rights" movement is still chock-full of immaturity.

The problem with my judging this is that NSG has a lot of anti-MRA types who are very vocal and obviously biased. There are far fewer nations who argue for men's rights and they don't associate themselves with MRAs so I'm going to say you are probably right.

[Khanastan]

So. Am I imagining this? Or has there been a fairly dramatic change in the last couple of years? Is the issue of addressing male disadvantages and anti-male discrimination coming to a sudden maturity?

Nah, I'm certain the "men's rights" movement is still chock-full of immaturity.

Precisely. I can imagine that a men's rights movement would be mostly satirical.

[Forsher]

Nah, I'm certain the "men's rights" movement is still chock-full of immaturity.

Precisely. I can imagine that a men's rights movement would be mostly satirical.

That view is a problem, there are problems that men face. Generally they aren't as numerous as those of women.

[Dyakovo]

Precisely. I can imagine that a men's rights movement would be mostly satirical.

That view is a problem, there are problems that men face. Generally they aren't as numerous as those of women.

The problem is the view that men's rights need a movement.

[Khanastan]

Precisely. I can imagine that a men's rights movement would be mostly satirical.

That view is a problem, there are problems that men face. Generally they aren't as numerous as those of women.

But there are scores upon scores of more men in power than there are women. To be perfectly honest, we face almost no problems. Lets face it, think of how many women there. Now think of how many women out there actually spew out the whole 'every man's a Stalinist' spiel. We are in no immediate danger of anything.

[Khanastan]

That view is a problem, there are problems that men face. Generally they aren't as numerous as those of women.

The problem is the view that men's rights need a movement.

All of my this. As stated in my last post.

[Forsher]

That view is a problem, there are problems that men face. Generally they aren't as numerous as those of women.

The problem is the view that men's rights need a movement.

A matter of perspective.

Some say that feminism handles it. Yeah, that'd be sweet... if you didn't get other (externally recognised) feminists complaining about people enquiring about issues related primarily to men oon feminist websites.

It'd be clearer if one supported no movements but there is more evidence to suggest that it is the existence of movements that causes change (abolitionists, various independence groups etc.) more than anything.

It is also clearer if you reject the idea that men can have problems but that's stupid. It's like saying National doesn't have problems because they're in government except more reliant on conspirational thinking rather than blatant facts (court challenges, unpopular ministers, policy reversals, overly pro-US views, scandals).

[Conserative Morality]

But there are scores upon scores of more men in power than there are women. To be perfectly honest, we face almost no problems. Lets face it, think of how many women there. Now think of how many women out there actually spew out the whole 'every man's a Stalinist' spiel. We are in no immediate danger of anything.

There are still issues that need to be addressed. Though I feel they all fall under the umbrella of feminism, personally, since feminism is about equal rights and treatment for the sexes.

[Triumvirate of Mars]

Discrimination is a two way street.
The KKK was a unorthodox... And cruel "White" racial group which fought for "White" rights.... Yet they did many horrible acts an deeds.
On the flip side, in schools and public education in the U.S you will hear the Black Panthers being glorified, where they did acts which the KKK would have also dared to do.

Civil rights is OVER.... Women have been granted their American free- and amended rights. As well as the african americans and many other minorities.... (Even though it was done in a unconstitutional and wrong way... It still happened).
The problem in modern times is these groups which originally formed for a PURPOSE... IE fighting against the Jim Crow Laws in the 60's... Has now become a organization which fights against the white populice regardless of whether a persons rights is at stake or not and claims the "Race" or "Sex" card. So rather than walking around it... The NAACP has become a Social and Political Terror group. Much like Boy Scouts of America was deemed a "Submersive" group by idiotic American Left-Winged Politicians. Also much like the Tea Party was compared to being a terrorist act (And the modern Rep. group) as a terrorist organization by the VP Joe "WhereAmI?" Biden.

Its time to get a grip and go back to some common sense. If you are a woman, and you want equal rights... Then expect the same in kind from men. Even though personally, morally, I would never hit a woman. But I'd certainly hit a guy which threatened my life, or the life of the person that I love. Actually... I take that back. Not hit. Kill. As for the NAACP.... Their time will come. Their playing a Political blame-shame game and it will come to an end eventually. Whether it be a soft or a hard hit. I'm not sure.

[Khanastan]

But there are scores upon scores of more men in power than there are women. To be perfectly honest, we face almost no problems. Lets face it, think of how many women there. Now think of how many women out there actually spew out the whole 'every man's a Stalinist' spiel. We are in no immediate danger of anything.

There are still issues that need to be addressed. Though I feel they all fall under the umbrella of feminism, personally, since feminism is about equal rights and treatment for the sexes.

In my opinion, the issues that need to be addressed are not feminism related. Feminism is a good thing, equal rights and all that. What need to be looked at is when it goes too far. When it gets too extreme, and there is talk of eugenics and discrimination against men from a far too radical side of feminism. See Feminarchy for what kind of stuff i'm talking about.

[Forsher]

That view is a problem, there are problems that men face. Generally they aren't as numerous as those of women.

But there are scores upon scores of more men in power than there are women. To be perfectly honest, we face almost no problems. Lets face it, think of how many women there. Now think of how many women out there actually spew out the whole 'every man's a Stalinist' spiel. We are in no immediate danger of anything.

I would question the validity of this thoughts process.

In every thread like this the message that patriarchy is bad gets shoved down our throats. We get told time and time again that it hurts everyone.

Accepting that (which to maintain credibility on NSG is a must) means that you accept that the threat is not from women but from men.

And of course there are the more grounded examples of difficulties. Some of which are addressed by feminism. That's better than nothing at all of course.

[Trotskylvania]

It strikes me that there's something daft about forming an identity politics movement when your group is the one that overwhelmingly controls political and economic power.

[Khanastan]

Discrimination is a two way street.
The KKK was a unorthodox... And cruel "White" racial group which fought for "White" rights.... Yet they did many horrible acts an deeds.
On the flip side, in schools and public education in the U.S you will hear the Black Panthers being glorified, where they did acts which the KKK would have also dared to do.

Civil rights is OVER.... Women have been granted their American free- and amended rights. As well as the african americans and many other minorities.... (Even though it was done in a unconstitutional and wrong way... It still happened).
The problem in modern times is these groups which originally formed for a PURPOSE... IE fighting against the Jim Crow Laws in the 60's... Has now become a organization which fights against the white populice regardless of whether a persons rights is at stake or not and claims the "Race" or "Sex" card. So rather than walking around it... The NAACP has become a Social and Political Terror group. Much like Boy Scouts of America was deemed a "Submersive" group by idiotic American Left-Winged Politicians. Also much like the Tea Party was compared to being a terrorist act (And the modern Rep. group) as a terrorist organization by the VP Joe "WhereAmI?" Biden.

Its time to get a grip and go back to some common sense. If you are a woman, and you want equal rights... Then expect the same in kind from men. Even though personally, morally, I would never hit a woman. But I'd certainly hit a guy which threatened my life, or the life of the person that I love. Actually... I take that back. Not hit. Kill. As for the NAACP.... Their time will come. Their playing a Political blame-shame game and it will come to an end eventually. Whether it be a soft or a hard hit. I'm not sure.

Might I just point out, that America isn't the only country ever to experience prejudice. Many countries in the Middle East, China, Africa... the list goes on. Prejudice is a world-wide problem, and you'll need to broaden your horizons if you want your argument to stay coherent.

[Forsher]

Discrimination is a two way street.
The KKK was a unorthodox... And cruel "White" racial group which fought for "White" rights.... Yet they did many horrible acts an deeds.
On the flip side, in schools and public education in the U.S you will hear the Black Panthers being glorified, where they did acts which the KKK would have also dared to do.

Civil rights is OVER.... Women have been granted their American free- and amended rights. As well as the african americans and many other minorities.... (Even though it was done in a unconstitutional and wrong way... It still happened).
The problem in modern times is these groups which originally formed for a PURPOSE... IE fighting against the Jim Crow Laws in the 60's... Has now become a organization which fights against the white populice regardless of whether a persons rights is at stake or not and claims the "Race" or "Sex" card. So rather than walking around it... The NAACP has become a Social and Political Terror group. Much like Boy Scouts of America was deemed a "Submersive" group by idiotic American Left-Winged Politicians. Also much like the Tea Party was compared to being a terrorist act (And the modern Rep. group) as a terrorist organization by the VP Joe "WhereAmI?" Biden.

Its time to get a grip and go back to some common sense. If you are a woman, and you want equal rights... Then expect the same in kind from men. Even though personally, morally, I would never hit a woman. But I'd certainly hit a guy which threatened my life, or the life of the person that I love. Actually... I take that back. Not hit. Kill. As for the NAACP.... Their time will come. Their playing a Political blame-shame game and it will come to an end eventually. Whether it be a soft or a hard hit. I'm not sure.

Might I just point out, that America isn't the only country ever to experience prejudice. Many countries in the Middle East, China, Africa... the list goes on. Prejudice is a world-wide problem, and you'll need to broaden your horizons if you want your argument to stay coherent.

Discussions of this nature here tend to be incredibly US centric. When they do expand they rarely get out of the OECD.

[Triumvirate of Mars]

Might I just point out, that America isn't the only country ever to experience prejudice. Many countries in the Middle East, China, Africa... the list goes on. Prejudice is a world-wide problem, and you'll need to broaden your horizons if you want your argument to stay coherent.

Its not, no worries. My argument is America oriented. Sexism, and racial discrimination on a global scale exists... But unlike most students.... I'm not a globalist. So therefore, it is not a problem, until it becomes MY problem physically.

[Dyakovo]

The problem is the view that men's rights need a movement.

A matter of perspective.

Some say that feminism handles it. Yeah, that'd be sweet... if you didn't get other (externally recognised) feminists complaining about people enquiring about issues related primarily to men oon feminist websites.

It'd be clearer if one supported no movements but there is more evidence to suggest that it is the existence of movements that causes change (abolitionists, various independence groups etc.) more than anything.

It is also clearer if you reject the idea that men can have problems but that's stupid. It's like saying National doesn't have problems because they're in government except more reliant on conspirational thinking rather than blatant facts (court challenges, unpopular ministers, policy reversals, overly pro-US views, scandals).

Nice strawman.
"Men can have problems"=/="Men are experiencing systemic discrimination"

[Khanastan]

Might I just point out, that America isn't the only country ever to experience prejudice. Many countries in the Middle East, China, Africa... the list goes on. Prejudice is a world-wide problem, and you'll need to broaden your horizons if you want your argument to stay coherent.

Discussions of this nature here tend to be incredibly US centric. When they do expand they rarely get out of the OECD.

Okay then, sticking with a US orientated argument to simplify things, we can at least broaden it to the Western or maybe even the Westernizing world. There is, on an official scale, equality across the Western world, but, lets look at places like Brazil and South Korea, where equality is not as emphasized.

[Triumvirate of Mars]

Okay then, sticking with a US orientated argument to simplify things, we can at least broaden it to the Western or maybe even the Westernizing world. There is, on an official scale, equality across the Western world, but, lets look at places like Brazil and South Korea, where equality is not as emphasized

.

Well.. Besides the fact of it being 6 AM, and I'm about to go pass out, and probably bash in my head on the way down.... Let me leave you with this; Yeah... I do have a Confederate Flag as my National one, but that doesn't mean I'm single minded, like most of which are..... Wherever/Whoever you are... Whether you are a male being discriminated by females in South Korea.. Or the otherway around in Brazil. Or even on the basis of Racism... Its fine to argue it here. But it is not our job, and by our.. I mean as a international/globalized "UN" community, to get their independence for them. It is, by all means, their job, their right and duty, to get their own equality under law and ALL circumstances. And I leave with this quote from Kennedy (?), I believe....
"When peaceful protest is made impossible, violence is made inevitable". It is those Males, Females, Blacks, Whites, Asians.. I don't care, to get their own independence. No matter what the international community says about their "Violence", or Peace.
This also applies to States... And groups of people. (IE... The South) Lol. Anyway... Night.

[Conserative Morality]

In my opinion, the issues that need to be addressed are not feminism related. Feminism is a good thing, equal rights and all that. What need to be looked at is when it goes too far. When it gets too extreme, and there is talk of eugenics and discrimination against men from a far too radical side of feminism. See Feminarchy for what kind of stuff i'm talking about.

I think the vast majority of feminists are equal-rights activists. Putting the radicals front-and-center is like saying proponents of republicanism are bad for causing the Reign of Terror in post-revolutionary France.