Men’s Rights Activism: A White, Heterosexual Boys Club
I often criticize feminists for their wonky conspiracy theories but I have to say, men’s rights activists have certainly legitimized many of their concerns by forming what could easily be described as the single most pathetic cult of commiseration ever commissioned. I think it might have been Dworkin who hyperbolically likened rapists to the myrmidons of patriarchy, but while the exaggerated tap-dance of feminists everywhere is usually something best ignored I think that in the case of neck-beards and ‘nice guys’ everywhere the over-reaction may be warranted; including Dworkin’s metaphor.
Though I think what is most striking about this group is how unfocused they actually are on men’s rights. They are hysterically outspoken on the most general issues middle-class heterosexual men (and mostly white) face and little else. And by ‘issues’ I mean the most banal and quotidian affairs of dating, marriage, and general human interaction. Alarmingly disingenuous to their own cause, this is obvious to anyone who has wasted even 5 seconds listening to their ash-filled mouths flap about.
If I had been a betting man, when first asked about what these people believe, I would have thought that issues affecting black men, like disproportionate incarceration, or issues specifically affecting gay men, would have been at the fore of their activism. After all, these guys prioritize the rights of men. Instead they have only this to say, essentially a platitude, about race and gay issues:
Mensactivism.org has no official position on gay rights, affirmative action, and other related issues. Views presented on this web site about these issues are limited to the individual who made them, and do not represent the views of Mensactivism.org.
It is true that prior to this disclaimer they throw up a smokescreen of support, stating:
…we do support the many issues that men of color and gay or bisexual men face, and want to encourage all men, regardless of their race or sexual orientation, to work together to improve men’s lives and dignity. We will post news when it is related to the status of minority or gay men as men. General news stories about race issues or gay rights are unlikely to be posted unless they specifically relate to the rights of men.
These two gems basically tell us everything we need to know about this group. The second one can be likened to a circle of protection against claims of racism and homophobia because, hey, they ‘support the many issues’ that men of ACTUAL and REAL minority status endure. But of course, only if their complaints relate to men generally. In other words, if said white, middle class, heterosexual doesn’t relate to your ‘lifestyle’ or skin color, then he’s not interested.
This is probably because feminists have already pioneered the rights of several male-only issues pertaining to sexual orientation and race despite what these clowns would have you believe. Black women and lesbian feminists have traditionally been very inclusive of their male counterparts, recognizing that they too suffer from the noxious consequences of racism and homophobia. The history of HIV-AIDS in America, for example, is rife with examples of women bringing awareness to an issue that disproportionately affected men.
Getting back to quote number two, how is it that an issue exclusively affecting gay men would NOT be a men’s issue? Well, it’s obvious if the people we’re quoting are really only focused on heterosexual men. It seems clear to me that gay men and their issues are only important to men’s rights activists when/if they can coopt homophobia to draw attention to their entirely unrelated cause. Further, because feminists are so vehemently opposed to homophobia it would mean sharing ground with the designated enemy and ‘oppressor’ of men, which would inevitably undermine their fatuous premise.
This has racial implications too. I contend again that there is ample evidence here of an organization that blatantly caters strictly to whites while paying only perfunctory lip-service to others. Where’s my proof? Well let’s examine quote number two a second time.
They will only post issues regarding marginalized men of race when it pertains to men in general. So what does this mean? How could an issue exclusively or disproportionately affecting black or Asian men NOT be a men’s issue? If it largely affects men then isn’t it a men’s issue? Apparently not because the white boys of this imaginary problem don’t actually care about issues that do not directly impact them. In order to get attention here you must be absorbed into the contrived male monolith which is clearly envisioned as de facto white and heterosexual.
Black men suffer from a battery of systemic oppressions and stereotypes in the United States. Among them include disproportionate incarceration, exaggerated criminal sentencing, and cultural depictions as violent, inarticulate gangsters with a penchant for drug use, vandalism, and rap. In other words, real problems. Black women are not routinely depicted this way, but black men clearly are. So again, how is this not a men’s issue? Why isn’t this a fucking priority? I’ll tell you, because it isn’t a white male problem and thus it’s not a problem for these guys at all.
Again, I want to be clear that I have no doubt that these men’s rights activists pay lip-service to the causes of minority men, but only when it serves in demonizing feminists or women in general or making it appear as though they have a real cause. Surely, if members of the male community are more severely affected and oppressed by the system then they should be a priority and yet, MRs activists seem blithely unconcerned and unfocused on male groups that face real and systemic discrimination.
The second quote is already more than sufficient to justify shaming this boys club into extinction but if the white whining were not enough the first quote, where they categorically deny any responsibility for its members, would be equally damning.
Notice how they claim that view points are limited to the individuals who state them. So what clearly defined, statistically and empirically substantiated stance or theory do these people hold as an organization? What exactly do they all agree on beside the ‘freedom’ and ‘equality’ bit? Who doesn’t think they stand for those things? Feminism claims to stand for those things already. Secular humanism certainly does and so also do a multitude of other ideologies. The only defining characteristic of this organization seems to be the indignant sense of siege that this cave of internet trolls thinks they’re under.
In the end that is all they are; misplaced indignation and proof positive that some people just refuse to recognize that their right to lord their previously held place of privilege over others is no right at all.