If you are new to these hallowed halls it may be perplexing to you to observe that feminism is an ideology that spread like fire through a stretch of parched Australian brush, while forcing momentum in the men’s movement has been more like trying to ignite a clump of soggy swamp grass by rubbing two sticks together.
The reasons for this are simple enough. Men are hard-wired to cooperate with women, and women are hard-wired to cooperate with each other. At the same time, women are hard-wired to utilize power generated by men, and men are hard-wired to compete with each other, often savagely, to provide that power to women in exchange for sexual access. These realities are as deeply ingrained in our sociobiological programming as the drive for survival, which of course is what much of this boils down to, historically speaking.
Enter the red pill, though, which a limited number of men and women are able to ingest without intellectually imploding. The effect is to strip away a few million years of evolutionary impulses and see past what we were stamped out to be. Feminists imagine they have taken the red pill; that they have moved past biology and social coercion and found a path to freedom from history and the oppression of gender roles. In reality all they have done is step up to the smorgasbord of life and demanded to fill their plates with the most delectable items available, skimming over any unpalatable burdens.
And of course they have been enabled to do this only with the support of some men by the exploitation of other men.
Red pill? My ass. It’s the blue pill at maximum strength; chivalrists and fair damsels in distress; social parasitism suckling from the tit of sexual competition, and we see it play out as it always has, from the Africa Savanna, c. 3,000,000 B.C., to the modern camps of the politically left and right, in the church and among seculars, and alas, between some MRA’s and their fellows.
Thing is, red pills are like antibiotics. You have to take all of them or you are just asking for more problems. At the right dosage, and given enough time, the results can be spectacular. But if your pills are half ingested or if you are taking a placebo, then not only do you stay sick, but you have the possibility of re-infecting others who are trying their best to get better.
The whole point of the red pill, in my opinion, is that we get to move past bio-programming entirely and into an existence that does not mandate our disposability or tolerate abuse, by anyone, even the state. Even from each other.
So far, most in the MRM have done pretty well with seeing and addressing the knee-jerk response in men to support women, no matter the cost or lack of legitimacy (white knighting). We have also done pretty well with taking a look at how women tend to circle the wagons and defend each other, no matter the cost or lack of legitimacy (feminism). And we have begun to sharpen our focus on the notion that both of these factors, though we call them out with modern terminology like feminism and white knighting, are actually just manifestations of what has always been present in men and women. We are learning that the new boss is just the old boss in a different costume.
This is progress for sure, but hardly a stopping point. And unless we are going to stagnate where we are (and ultimately perish because of it) then we need to complete the red pill prescription. We need to keep chugging those little red bastards down till we are able to see that the part of the programming that leads us to compete with each other for alpha-primacy also forms a mentality with the same biological roots that make men disposable and enables feminism.
I am going to use a recent article on this site, and some of the comments that followed, to point to what I am talking about. In this I am going to directly use the words of other MRA’s. I don’t really like doing it, but it is important to show examples, and we were provided them in a quite classical way in the past few days.
A new writer to the MRM penned a piece in which he described his path to becoming an activist. A new writer doing this kind of work is precisely why AVfM is here; to give a forum to a growing chorus of men and women who are manifesting the effects of the red pill and taking a stand.
Within that piece there were a couple of areas that I thought revealed a man who is a work in progress. The first is clear cut:
I still believe that men who brutalize women are the scum of the Earth.
I admit I flinched a little when I read this. Clearly these are words rooted in old world sexist notions about violence; that somehow men who brutalize women are worse than women who brutalize men. It is old programming that tends to swim around in the unconscious even after the first few rounds of red pills.
In addition to that, and a perhaps more subtle revelation about the authors mentality, he describes physically defending oneself from an attack as “reciprocal violence.”
I don’t personally agree with either one of these statements. Indeed, I think they reflect a collective problem in societal consciousness; one that gets corrected with sufficiently therapeutic levels of red pill Realitol™ in the system over a long enough period of time.
It will not, I respectfully submit, be rectified with standardized doses of blue pill shame. But that is what happened.
Case in point, the very first comment to this article contained the following:
When a woman hits a man and he hits her back, this is not a male-on-female crime; this is reciprocal violence. Really? Is it not self-defense against a woman’s violence? or justified payback against a female aggressor? I am always shocked that even fervent men’s rights proponents still are too pussy-footed.
“Pussy-footed.” Really? It is as though the rest of the article, which was actually quite good, inspirational even, somehow didn’t exist. Suddenly, in the eyes of this MRA, he was not a fellow man stepping out of the shadows for the first time to raise his voice against a corrupt, feminist dominated domestic violence industry. He was just “pussy-footed.” Need I fill in the blanks for all that implies? At the time I am writing this, that comment was up voted 27-2, and one of the two down votes was mine.
Yet another person who commented took it even a step further by name calling.
You’re still a mangina/white knighter.
Fortunately that one was the recipient of more down votes than up, but voting is not really the issue here. Culture is. And so is our shared understanding and values.
I posted a nudge for readers to consider that we need to measure our responses and reactions to each other; that we need “constructive dialogue that strengthens our ties and encourages the refinement of our ideas.”
The reaction from the one calling names was, “Isn’t that what we are doing?”
Uh, no. MRA’s name calling and shaming other MRA’s is not constructive. It is petty alpha-gaming, but I will get to that in a moment.
The options here are pretty straight forward, as far as I can tell. How do we choose to react to new MRA’s who are “getting it” but have not had the time or opportunity to fully refine their understanding of the modern zeitgeist? Do we support their work and encourage them to perhaps re-evaluate some of their less thoughtful ideas? Or do we call them names and publicly humiliate them?
Well?
It isn’t just common manners that make prefer the former. I think I have long demonstrated the belief that good manners with the wrong people are a waste of time. No, my aversion here is to blue pill thinking.
As I noted at the start of this article, a significant part of the dynamics that hinder progress in the MRM is the innate friction between men which is driven by an undercurrent of sexual competition. Our unfortunate programming is to apply downward pressure on each other in order to vie for sexual selection. In the last 50 years, we have seen much of that downward pressure manifest in the legal system, in politics and in the PC mandates that dictate social conduct. It is without a doubt a core reason that the MRM even exists in the first place.
And it will serve no better purpose here than it does in society at large.
Part of AVfM’s mission is to create an alternative environment to that. That mission is made all the more difficult by latent misandry. And so it must be addressed from time to time.
My perspective on this is in keeping with my perspective on sociobiology. Feminism is an outgrowth of chivalry. It is dependent on male sexual competition to thrive. In short, misandry, feminism, the stinking lot of it, is a human problem rooted in men’s mindless competition for women. We don’t get out of that competition by simply rejecting women or Going Our Own Way. We get out of it by identifying and respectfully challenging the elements of that competition when they prove dysfunctional, as in going after MRA’s for blood any time we imagine they are not 100% on message. This conduct, when distilled down to its essence, is just a tell-tale artifact of pussy-centric masculinity.
Of course, I know there are many who feel that tearing down each other’s points is just a part of the vetting process, and I agree with that. But when it becomes attacking on a personal level, or an exercise in shame, it is immediately proven that it is not about the point but about the primacy. It is time for another red pill, and then another, till we wake up and realize that it is us, not the target, who is off message.
If you have ever looked around at the explosive numbers of blogs and other efforts to promote men’s rights and wondered “Why the fuck aren’t these guys pooling resources, organizing and flexing more collective muscle?” then in my opinion you have just been given the answer.
Men have never done well at working together in ways intended to benefit men, as a monolithic group. We have always been too busy cooperating for the sake of others, stabbing each other in the back for the sake of pussy, and helping women who work only for their own gain.
I doubt that we will ever see the end of that in the human race. However I also believe that with time and effort we can construct a sub-culture for men and women who want something better than that. From time to time we may have to gently turn to our brothers with a bottle of red pills and say, “Have another.”
441 Posts in Total 
donations either one-time or on a monthly subscription basis.If you don't have paypal, check out the other options. If you want to get some merchandise and sponsor us at the same time, consider the AVfM store. 
Shakaz:
Kimski:
Dr. Tara J. Palmatier:
TDOM:
Nice article, timely and on point.
AVFM – dedicated to helping people fulfill their red pill potential.
‘I still believe that men who brutalize women are the scum of the Earth.’
I too flinched when I read this, for the same reasons as so eloquently described in this article.
However, we are all ‘works in progress,’ and there needs to be more focus on constructive enlightenment, inclusion and the creation of the truly conscious male. Every path starts at the beginning, which for most males is the ‘beautiful dreamer,’ Esther Vilar’s Manipulated Man.
The Manipulated Man is absolutely a masterpiece.
“……The Manipulated Man is absolutely a masterpiece.”
Agreed!
Personally I think the first redpill refill should be required reading of “The Manipulated Man by Esther Vilar, “The Myth of Male Power” by Warren Farrell and “That Bitch: Protect Yourself Against….” by Roy Sheppard and Mary T. Cleary.
“I still believe that men who brutalize women are the scum of the Earth”
Damn, sounds like something from the Good Mangina Project. Not that I’ve ever been over there
It’s like a bullshit clause while still seeking approval and pussy access.
Bigotry certainly is insidious.
I’m not one to promote drug abuse but shit, eat those little red fuckers, for breakfast. Crush them up and snort if you have to, sprinkle on cereal, have with coffee. Fuck me, it’s not rocket surgery. In any situation, take gender out of the equation and see if it still fly’s.
Ye olde adage of turning tables is the simple effective way of determining if you are in fact a bigot yet maybe don’t realize.
I wouldn’t say that. “The manipulated” seems to me, loosely, a kind of gender feminism reversed.
Guess the liberal view here is wider, instead of the socialist infrastructure/superstructure paradigm aplied to genders, being men as oppressor class or oppressed class.
The class perspective has some interest, but it also makes us tend to be bias, victimists, violent (directly or by proxy, in different ways and levels), dishumanizes us.
One small note I plan on expanding upon….
Most men need someone to tell them what to do, or they do nothing.
True story.
It’s interesting that you would show up in this article, since you attacked me on reddit, calling me a white knight and other crap.
Need to read this again:
“MRA’s name calling and shaming other MRA’s is not constructive”
Boo fucking hoo.
Attacking a fellow MRA through name calling and degradation is immature and undermining to the cause. We need to band together and aid each other in our mutual quest for fair treatment. Just because someone’s opinions do not directly and completely align with your own does not make them a white knight or mangina.
If they do not completely agree with all of your ideals then attack them on a character level? That is the same tactic that feminists use. We are better than that!
“Boo Fucking Hoo”
Really, someone who promotes himself in his profile to be a longtime MRA would say something like that rather than take the time to help him understand your rational? Why would you not want to help a fellow MRA to come to understand your point of view, furthering his enlightenment and in essence furthering our cause? Why don’t you just come out and tell him to “Man Up?” A man cannot express dissatisfaction with something that you have done with out you basically calling him a cry baby?
We are lucky to have such mature and helpful MRA’s as Paul Elam. If we had to take our first steps down the road of an MRA with you as our mentor then I would be in deep fear for the cause. I hope you can come to the point in your life where you are solid enough in your own beliefs that you do not have to cut other people down because they dont believe the same as you.
Good night sir…I said good night.
“Men have never done well at working together in ways intended to benefit men, as a monolithic group. ”
we could look to socrates and his crew for a good example of reasoned discussion. they weren’t afraid to trash each others ideas, but it was always the ideas and not the person … and it was for the purpose of coming to the truth.
modern men have been deprived of learning reasoned discourse by gov’t skoolin’, so we naturally fall back into emotional one-upsmanship.
we can do better.
I still believe that men who brutalize women are the scum of the Earth.
When I first read this, I had thought that Phil was either defending himself from potential feminist backlash and/or preaching to a blue pill audience. However, my disappointment is that he made a widespread moral judgment without context. We need to do better than that, there are too many moral crusaders already and DV needs to be treated without pre-judgement or discrimination.
When a woman hits a man and he hits her back, this is not a male-on-female crime; this is reciprocal violence.
Hitting back is not always self-defense. For it to be self-defense, there would have to be no option for escape. Walking away may not seem like an option for some who are proud and insist on standing their ground, but it is.
I’m still thinking about the law of the jungle where peace is maintained by the implicit threat of violence from someone bigger {and hopefully a good sense of justice}. This is still hierarchical thinking and really doesn’t do anything to help men living with DV. Men don’t hit back because of honor, not because of the threat of violence by the State.
I just want it to stop. I want people to have healthy relationships and if they encounter roadbumps then have some help available that is non-judgemental and beneficial rather than moralistic blaming.
If you’re in a relationship with DV and you have not left, then you are very likely part of the problem. This is especially true for women who have every resource available to them.
“Hitting back is not always self-defense”
That’s a good point and distinction to make. Sometimes it is ‘reciprocal violence’
It is a separate argument as to when reciprocal violence is acceptable etc, but certainly this is different to self defense and essentially a ‘grey area’.
Either way I think the burden of proof should rest with the instigator (another grey area) but if someone physically attacks their partner then gets clobbered, I don’t have an awful lot of sympathy for the instigator and they should need to illustrate that retaliation / defense was excessive & drastic. Even then it should be accounted weather all physical violence stemmed from the initial ‘attack’ and therefore a repercussion of the instigator.
Like when bush bitches scale a McDonald’s counter after assaulting an employee then get pulverized with a piece of pipe by a guy that didn’t ask for it. Why should he have to justify the exact extent of his defense. Unless you are professional security, police, military etc, training does not cover exact distribution of defense and such situations. Therefore individuals should not be held accountable for such things when perpetrated against.
“From time to time we may have to gently turn to our brothers with a bottle of red pills and say, “Have another.”
Don’t worry, at least in America, all our problems are solved. We now have Obama “Truth Teams” to “straighten out” any of us who might not “have our minds right” about VAWA, rape culture, feminism, or anything else. Isn’t it wonderful, that we’ll have no more need of red pills/blue pills? I just… What a minute – - – what’s that bulk size pill jar in that “Truth Team” guy’s back pocket?
Oh no, blue pills – trillions of ‘em! http://tinyurl.com/89uhbju
:-/ Form up the guerrilla red pillars – NOW!
My take on “pussy-footing” was not that it was calling someone a “pussy;” it was saying someone was dancing around a point, or missing a point, and/or using euphemisms that hurt men.
I also think “white knight” and “mangina” were not totally out of line…or the end of the world. Why? Because while newbies need support, so do those who are more aware.
The latter know how bad things are and can’t waste time on trolls or male feminists or those who might need 10 years to get current.
For example, today I listened to the Diane Rehm show. It discussed the VAWA, a big deal coming up for refinancing. Four females, including the host, dealt with it…an Act that often reams men. Most of the guests were “sociologists” or feminists who alleged they were “survivors” of DV. So where were men’s voices?
I bet if Diane had asked her producer to find a male spokesman she’d have failed. Because, as Warren Farrell says, women can’t hear what men don’t say. We’re here online, a place where most women can’t hear us. If/when we leave here we’ll need to be elite forces, not milquetoasts. So sometime we spar with each other.
Also today, Fathers & Families announced that Glenn Sacks, after 3 years, will no longer shill for it. F&F also admitted his “air campaign” had netted them more exposure, members, and clout than the prior 14 years had. Well, I know those sorry a-holes. They CHOSE to be led be meek, “rational,” let’s-be-friends manginas. That guaranteed the group anonymity…and irrelevance.
But, shazam: when F&F used mass media techniques in the Internet Age they grew. Now? I bet they go back to being meek, unknown, and ineffective. They can’t roar and be heard if they act like mice.
Anyway, once you know how bad things are, you tend to call a spade a spade. That, too, is part of the red pill learning curve.
If you’ve spent most of your life quashing your feelings, you tend to doubt your gut. When you occasionally dare to speak up in Bluepillville…and get pimp-slapped…you doubt yourself even more. So I suspect some guys, when they finally get it and and get here, they need to have their instincts confirmed. So they stop being nice, polite boys and shout, “I call bullshit!”
Sometimes being “polite” is itself injurious.
Sometimes you need to let it out. For most men, vis-a-vis men’s issues, there’s no place to do this. Luckily, this IS such a place. It’s a virtual sociological gym, a space where we can work out and not pull punches.
Of course, not everyone is ready to spar. Nor do all know how to use all exercise machines. And we DO need spotters and good coaches and so on. It’s just sloppy going. We’re trying to deal with everyone’s concerns. It’s a sort of gender-focused “continental congress.” Sometimes fights break out.
Men DO unite to help each other. They raise barns together, form companies, and act as each other’s buddies. Problems arise, IMHO, when men are forced to do so PUBLICLY…and when male interests conflict (or appear to) with female needs/issues.
Traditionally, guys are raised by mothers. And other females (nurse, nuns, crossing guards, etc.) at tender ages. Their earliest, most primordial needs are met by females (fathers often being away at jobs). That gives women a lot of power to abuse boys if they so wish.
Later, males will naturally look to females for emotional succor. That’s all they know. It’s imprinted.
They also look almost exclusively to women for sex.
All that gives women tremendous power over men. If a woman refuses a man sex, if she refuses to comfort him, where does he go for solace?
It’s a challenge.
We don’t need to shame guys who finally speak out. We also don’t need to shame newbies. Everyone’s feelings matter. So what to do?
If some guys lash out, we should ask what burdens he carries, what demons dog him. Perhaps lashing out helps him cut to the chase. It allows him to separate wheat from chaff. Maybe the target is a feminist in disguise. Better to know sooner rather than later.
Sometimes that’s called for, other times not. So what to do?
We are all learning…and can certainly apologize. Sometimes seasoned vets test newbies sent to the front. They need to know their mettle.
Is that hazing? Maybe. It risks shutting a potential ally down.
I don’t know the answer. I DO know a lot of guys are tired of constantly watching themselves. They are forever told not to commit and ever-expanding number of “offenses.”
Maybe we need a section of this site that caters to newbies. A sort of bootcamp/library where they can get up to speed. Then they can mix it up with folks better trained or more seasoned, more impassioned or deeply wounded.
We should also not mock or demonize lone wolfs trying to grow the men’s movement. Early women’s movement pioneers caught shite, too. And often struggled alone. Or got drummed from the corps for being unPC. The difference is that guys are EXPECTED to cut their own ice, go it alone. They’re not supposed to ask for help or show pain/sorrow. So a lot feel “unmanly” partnering with other men. They worry about getting burned, too.
It might help if men read more. That’d encourage more pro-male writers to publish. Awareness of misandry would spread.
It’d also help if men got private/public funding, allowing them to work full-time on “gender issues” like feminists do.
All that being said, I think we’re all trying to find ways to say our piece without harming/quashing others. I’m just noting that sometimes it hurts to hold back, too.
That’s not to say it doesn’t also hurt to be misunderstood or appear to be attacked.
Hopefully we can reach some accords, hashing out some protocols via this Reply section.
I think that the MRM needs an agreed upon set of principles to establish a baseline for what is acceptable and unacceptable to have as beliefs for MRA’s. A lot of this friction is due to differences of opinion. Someone says something that you disagree with, and suddenly he’s not a “real MRA” or worse, he’s a “mangina” or “white knight”.
Everyone is not going to agree on everything. There needs to be a defined set of principles that everyone must believe in, and beyond that people should allow differences of opinion and not attack other MRA’s based on those differences. What the agreed upon set of principles would be, I do not know. This site is as good of a place as any to establish it though.
We can’t allow people to dictate our discourse when they are saying things that wildly contradict main MRA principles. But at the same time, we shouldn’t go on the offensive if someone has a different opinion about something that is not a main principle.
“I think that the MRM needs an agreed upon set of principles to establish a baseline for what is acceptable and unacceptable to have as beliefs for MRA’s.”
You do that.
Pretty much vindicates what I wrote a few hours ago, which probably makes me ‘unacceptable’ as an MRA.
http://mens-rights.blogspot.com/2012/02/dissatisfaction.html
Very nice blog entry. The following is not directed specifically at you, but does address some of your statements in the blog.
There are times for niceness and times for not. Within the context of it being Phil’s first submission, the majority of the points being right on and the possibility of misunderstanding (it was his first appearance) perhaps a good job and a “Hey what about this comment….” And not go right to mangina (I know you did not do this). And then the discussion can grow from there. Being polite in this instance would not slow down MR activism one bit and shows class.
Another point from your blog:
A subject to look into IMO is denial – at the level where the Jews would not admit they were being exterminated. Many people are there and explains many people’s reaction.
Yeah, I wasn’t really thinking of Phil at all when I wrote that.
On Phil I agree with THIS article.
Although ‘pussy-footed’ is not the same as calling someone a ‘pussy.’
I think it’s pretty ridiculous that you took my comment, where I said that MRA’s should be able to disagree about minor points but should agree as to what the main principles are, and used that as some kind of “vindication” of your blog post.
And you’re doing pretty much to me what Paul wrote about in this article. What do you intend to do by highlighting me like this? I’m just trying to participate in this discussion.
I also disagree pretty much entirely with your blog post. MRA’s should become misogynists? Count me out. Women shouldn’t be allowed in the MRM? Count me out there too. Probably my favorite MRM writer/speaker right now is GirlWritesWhat. She’s a woman, and a damn good advocate for men’s rights. Being hostile to women who support men’s rights is not only assholish behavior, it’s counterproductive for moving the issues forward.
Also, game theory and PUA is not men’s rights. It’s not even part of the same concept. Game is about getting laid. Men’s rights is about equal rights, civil rights, and human rights for men who are being discriminated against. I don’t want anything to do with PUA’s or gamers.
And this is why you fail.
Don’t tell me what’s ‘counterproductive’ for moving issues forward when you haven’t been able to move anything forward yet.
Hi Tom,
I agree, pussy footing and being a pussy are much different.
I do not know why you are getting so many down votes. Oh well.
I always appreciate your opinion Snark and I was wondering if you would consider writing a regular linkage edition/blog bits from the manosphere at AVfM.
Well I already do this daily at mensvoices.wordpress.com, but it’s not really taken off as I had hoped. I get a fair number of readers for a new blog (it’s been linked to in quite a few places) but it’s not really serving its function (clicks from my blog to the places I link to are very low). I’ll probably call the last month a ‘trial period’ and jack it in soon.
I’ve read your work and you’re really good at keeping track of what’s happening and distilling the good stuff. I’m just hoping that it could get a larger audience and perhaps expose AVfM to a larger variety of opinions that we are hoping to form a coalition with.
I’m willing to keep doing it when people read it. People are reading it. But at present, not enough, and a very low click rate.
Just read your post, sums things up quite nicely. George Carlin may have distilled the ultimate human wisdom : women are crazy, and men are stupid.’
Men (MRAs) do need to be more hostile and aggressive, but not towards each other.
“Men (MRAs) do need to be more hostile and aggressive, but not towards each other.”
That sums it up better than I could have done.
Although I’d say it’s the different anti-feminist subcultures/groups of men that need to be more hostile and aggressive, but not towards each other.
Pro-feminist men, obviously, are part of the problem.
Great Idea WhiteCloud. I don’t understand why so many people down-voted you.
Fortunately Paul Elam was looking forward, and he already created such a list: http://www.avoiceformen.com/mission-and-values/
Btw, on the subject of the list…
I think that anything which is not on this list is a diversion and should be treated as such. Contrary to strawmanners who like to misquote and mischaracterize me, fidelbogen, barbarossa, forweg, BP, YBM… WE DO NOT CARE what a guy does in his private life. He can fuck teddy-bears in his private life for all we care.
As long as he doesn’t invade every serious MRA discussion trying to sell us his “teddy-bear-fucking” hobby as “the thing that will rescue” MRA, we’re good.
Again, the list of values already exists, and it is here:
http://www.avoiceformen.com/mission-and-values/
Paul Elam has done a great job. I believe, at least for the purposes of AVfM, and I believe anyone trying to push new or different values is doing a diversion.
Other sites can come up with their own beliefs/values. AVfM already has a list.
“Contrary to strawmanners who like to misquote and mischaracterize me, fidelbogen, barbarossa, forweg, BP, YBM”
I would never dream of mischaracterising Fidelbogen or Barbarossaaa.
That’s weird. I never mentioned your name, nor even implied I was talking about you in any way shape or form.
When I was writing that sentence I was thinking of about 50-100 different episodes I’ve seen recently, and none of them involved you.
Okay, I deserved that.
Ooops, sorry I was trying to defend you and your suggestions.
Sorry if it came off as criticism when I mentioned that it’s already been done. I apologize.
I just related off of the subject of the values page to mention guys who bring up off-topic subjects. So that part of the comment was directed towards them not you. Again, I apologize.
I have no idea why so many people down-voted you. I think they miss-understood what you were saying.
As was said before, if you want to spar with someone’s ideas, go right ahead, but calling them names like an angry little kid doesn’t do any good. That’s more likely to drive someone away than to make them strengthen their argument.
Excellent comment.
In fact, there is very little I disagree with here, though I hold fast to the conviction that name calling, here, between MRA’s serves little constructive purpose and likely does more harm than good.
For that matter, as with all other articles it was me that gave this the final OK. So am I pussy footing? Am I a mangina/white knight? Just a purely rhetorical question.
I just don’t get this line of reasoning. I was waiting for someone to say “Hey Phil, do you actually believe that it is only men who are scummy when they abuse someone?”
It would have been a great question. On point and instructional if Phil decided to learn from it.
Oh, well I have read all the comments here and have had my say in the article, so unless I am asked something I will bow out of it.
But I am holding fast to the policy. When I accept work from MRA’s to be posted here as articles, it is with the understanding that their points may well get shredded to bits. But I insist that personal attacks are out.
“Hey Phil, do you actually believe that it is only men who are scummy when they abuse someone?”
Had anybody actually asked me that question, I would have said that my answer is a fervent, uncompromising “NO”. Just sayin’.
Auntie I have to say i read your ten or twelve commandments post the other day. I was in stitches. Making something so horrible into something entertaining is quite a talent. I loved it.
You cannot overcome biology, but you can redirect it. Feminism has shown that women can be socialized to give up their biological drive to reproduce, at least for a time. They can redirect those reproductive and nurturing energies into a variety of careers where those traits are beneficial. But when the biological clock strikes 12, suddenly, that is no longer sufficient.
The natural male instinct to compete does not mean we must compete for access to women. It can be redirected.
TDOM
Sure, but to what? Street fighting? Sports? Magic: The Gathering tournaments?. How can we effectively socialize guys to compete for anything BUT pussy where there’s an ingrained scarcity mentality coupled with social shaming for the guys who opt out?
The answer to your question is part of a theory about masculinity that I’m currently working on. I recently posted an article titled The Good Man which can serve as an introduction. I boil masculinity down to its basic building block or the instinct to provide/protect. This instinct as applied on its most basic level is in the protection of family (a woman and his offspring) which is the basic social unit. It can be redirected to society at large which includes both men and women. The man/society relationship is a reciprocal one from which both derive benefit.
I think the competitive instinct can be redirected in much the same way. In today’s society, instead of competing for women, the male must adapt to compete against women if he is to survive. The instinct is for man to compete, the socialization is what he competes against. Men must learn to view women as a threat to their existence. That doesn’t mean men need to wipe out the female half of the species, but it does mean that women can no longer be viewed as the prize.
That’s the nutshell version of the theory. There’s much more to it.
TDOM
Simply put, society needs to acknowledge that the relationship between men and women is adversarial by nature: Their interests directly oppose our own, and it has been that way for millennia.
“society needs to acknowledge that the relationship between men and women is adversarial by nature: Their interests directly oppose our own, and it has been that way for millennia.”
No. I would disagree here. By nature men and women are quite complimentary with relatively few competing interests. Traditionally, successful societies have been organized around this. Feminists have destroyed this type of societal organization and as a result, men must now begin to view women as competitors rather than teammates.
Eventually, women will either wipe men from the face of the planet (by enlisting men to do this for them) or men will adopt their new role and restore order, undoing the damage of feminism. That is not to say that I believe we can return to a traditional society. Technology has progressed too far to allow it. That’s why feminism rose to prominence in the first place. There’s no going back, but there is going forward.
TDOM
Barbarossa made a video about this:
In it he explains that when men direct their competitive instinct AWAY from competing for pussy, we have the biggest scientific breakthroughs.
Barbarossa has been speaking about this for a long time. Civilizations that glorify pussy-getting, are stagnant or failing civilizations, because it fosters competing over pussy:
Civilizations where men compete in sports, sciences and intellectual pursuits are glorious civilizations.
In fact, it was feminism (matriarchy) that pushed the notion of “sexual loser”… And anyone shaming men for celibacy is NOT an MRA, and is most definitely not pro-male.
-> Matriarchies shame men for not obtaining enough pussy. You are defined as a success or a failure by your pussy-getting abilities
-> Civilized societies push men toward competing for technological and scientific glory.
The even more worrying part is that there are semi-related communities who are semi-close to the MRA that do this too.
How can we remove social shaming for men who opt out in the overall society, when we have plenty of shamers among our wider circle?
And the other side of the coin, with women/government rigging the game in other pursuits – many men decide not to compete in these other areas as well. So double whammy.
I liked the video. Thanks.
Which is why the MRA should fight to make it socially acceptable for men to opt-out and not compete.
It really isn’t helping if we have so-called-neighbours which shame men based on how much they compete.
The points you make are solid, Alek.
There’s just no need to freak out over PUAs using shaming tactics.
If you couldn’t care less when women do it, I don’t see why it would matter when other men do.
Appreciate what they bring to the table, and disregard them when they are being ignorant.
You’re kidding right? You have got to be fucking kidding.
What do you mean not freak out. I DO FREAK OUT WHEN WOMEN SHAME
I SHAME WOMEN RIGHT BACK. I TREAT WOMEN WHO SHAME WITH SCORN AND RIDICULE AND SHAME THEM RIGHT BACK.
Around me women get defensive and I get them to apologize for shaming… something a lot of people can’t say they’ve managed to accomplish.
I don’t believe in the “ignore it and it will go away” strategy. That’s for fence-sitters. In fact, that’s part of the old chivalrous male-gender-role.
No shaming WILL EVER pass me by unchallenged, and I will rip anyone’s head off for attempting it, be they male, female, old, young or what not.
I agree with Alek. Shaming is the most common method used to keep males under control. Openly confronting and stopping this practice is a very high priority and will be instrumental in advancing men’s rights. I will always bring notice to it when I am involved with the conversion or I over hear someone else do it. This is an everyday must for all MRAs. This is taking activism to the street/everyday life that does more than signing a petition. IMO.
“I DO FREAK OUT WHEN WOMEN SHAME”
Well, that right there is your problem Alek. You give them power because on some level you still want to appeal to them. There comes a point when you are genuinely indifferent to what they think, and that is when they no longer hold this emotional power.
“I don’t believe in the “ignore it and it will go away” strategy. That’s for fence-sitters.”
It’s not ignoring it and hoping it will go away. That’s like saying the marriage strike is akin to burying your head in the sand. In both cases, it’s refusing to allow them that power over you.
I am no fence-sitter, Alek. I’d like to see the MRM move in a more radical (less egalitarian) and a more inclusive (of male subcultures) direction, and my frustration stems from our slow progress. If anything, I would say the fence-sitters are the liberal gender-egalitarians at r/mensrights.
“I agree with Alek. Shaming is the most common method used to keep males under control. Openly confronting and stopping this practice is a very high priority and will be instrumental in advancing men’s rights.”
It probably is a good idea to challenge it openly when it occurs.
But the real priority is simply to expose it. As the website Exposing Feminism did with the Catalogue of Anti-Male Shaming Tactics. Once you understand their manipulative, emotional tricks and psyops, it’s only a matter of time before it becomes meaningless. The traditional shaming tactics used to keep men in line read like a blank page and sound like dead air. That’s what they fear the most: men overcoming the emotional and psychological tools used to bully and control us.
Yes, exposing it. I do believe that this exposure is best achieved on an individual basis. This is why it is important for all who are aware of it to expose it everyday in our personal lives every chance we get.
Great thinking piece Paul.
While men are competing to see who is Alpha and Beta dogs we should always remember that the ugly sisters never stop viewing us as dogs.
Infighting will always destroy any building we have accomplished, any momentum we have.
I always pegged it on the apathy men have towards their own sex.
A friend gets taken to the cleaners by an unscrupulous woman, is falsely accused, is beaten by his spouse, why just buy him a beer give him some words of encouragement and pretend it will all get better tomorrow.
This is the typical response, and it is so very wrong. It is imho the main reason why men have found themselves where they are today.
I personally don’t give a fiddlers flying f%*k who is considered the top dog. Again the femies are still viewing us as dogs whether you’re the top of the heap or the bottom.
OT
I want to add a epic update
When you search for “radfem hub” on Google you get 2 epic suggestions/terminations
1:the underbelly of a hate movement
2:agent orange
Epic MRA and MRM work.
I think my response to his article was very reasonable.
My feelings are that any man, no matter who they are, MRA or not, should be called out if they parrot feminist slogans and propaganda that is designed to further hatred against men. We have enough people doing that without the MRM joining in the chorus.
“men who brutalize women are the scum of the earth”
This sounds like it came straight out of the mouth of a rad fem ideologue. On the surface, it sounds true……but remember this……according to feminists…..brutalizing….when it comes to man vs woman includes…….raising your voice……hurting their feelings…..withholding “your” money from them…..even intitiating a move to a less desirable location…..basically anything that a man hating feminist retard would not approve of……is classed as violence against women…….brutality.
All this while the world laughs on prime time tv about women who chop off their husbands penis. That is not brutality…..but asking for a divorce is brutality according to feminists.
Also, you have to remember that many of our MRA brothers…….have been victims of abusive women/spouses……and some of them have retaliated……and hit back…..I won’t judge them for that……and I wont tolerate someone calling them the scum of the earth……I’ll leave that to the state…..to the feminists……to the manginas……and to all those that seek to demonize men for the purposes of making legitimate their efforts to totally enslave us, and remove all our rights.
Having said all that, I consider Phil a brother who is fighting on our side, although I totally disagree with his “scum of the earth” statement, which I feel is based on a still existent belief that woman should have a certain unaccountabilty…..an immunity….that men do not enjoy, and should not enjoy.
This whole idea that women should never be touched, restrained, or hit back, has been pumped into our heads since I was in primary school. It leads to the sort of little princesses that grow up to be violent, and so self assured that they are untouchable, that they attack Mcdonalds staff, police trying to issue a speeding ticket…teachers who won’t give them the mark they want…..husbands who won’t hand over their credit cards.
Go search youtube and see the all the vids accumulating of women being violent over trivial things…..they all have the same…….I can do anything I want….and nobody can touch me attitude. They even think the cops can’t touch them.
If this culture of female untouchibility has to stop. It just keeps reaching new heights. First it was, you should never hit a woman back, even if they hit you with a baseball bat. Then it progresses……you shouldn’t hold her arms to restrain her…..that’s assault. You shouldn’t put your hands up to deflect blows……that’s a threatening gesture. You shouldn’t yell at them….you shouldn’t push past them to get away……next thing you know….the police will have to limit themselves to begging a woman to surrender after committing multiple murders in front of hundreds of witnesses….and if she doesn’t feel like giving up….she can just walk away…..if a cop touches her…….assault……violence against women…..where does this madness end.
To change the culture, we have to go against the grain. We have to insist that violent women be held to the same standards as violent men……in the street….and in the court.
Yeah, I agree, Stu.
Since we have had a culture where we are never allowed to hit a “lady” even if she is hitting us, maybe we need to reverse that in which women are never to hit a gentleman, even in self defense, or they are no longer real women for the next 50 years. If they report that their husbands are beating them, they are cowards who need to woman-up. Let the feminists chew on that for a few decades. That would be the literal reverse of our culture. And, I am not advocating that this happen, only showing what a dung hill of seething hatred feminist ideology is.
Fair points, Stu, but the question in my mind is whether or not he was parroting feminism expressions. My father was no feminist, but as to the think that men who abuse women are the “scum of the earth,” Well, friend, that could have come right out of his traditional mouth.
And he likely heard it first from his father…
My father, I am quite sure, had no ideas that raising your voice to a woman was also brutalizing. And of course that was also not something that Phil in Utah said, so I hope we can give him the benefit of the doubt till proven otherwise.
My father also parroted like sentiments. But just because he was my father, doesn’t mean I’ll agree with him, or that I can’t see his manginarism.
I have no doubt that Phil is talking about attacking a woman when he refers to brutalizing. But like it or not……it is these sentiments…..these sorts of slogans….propaganda…..that is used as the justification for the continued ramping up of dv laws etc.
Just like the word rape. Feminists say……all sex is rape unless you have verbally asked and received verbal consent for each and every sexual act…each and every time. So now a guy who knows damn well that his wife expects him be the dominant initiator of sex….and that she loves it when he just takes her…..like a mad dog on a bitch on heat……..well that guy is a rapist now……and unless you support the rape of women…….you will support these new laws that define rape as such. So men are shamed into supporting draconian laws by being called……the scum of the earth………rapists…….etc.
We need to just say “screw you” to all of this shaming and propaganda……regardless of whether it’s source is traditionalist……chivarly……or feminism.
If I say that men that rape women are scum……..I mean rape….as in physically force a woman with violence……or serious threat of violence…..to have sex with them……that would be my fathers definition…….and his fathers……but that is not what rape means anymore……so the statement…..”men who rape women are scum”…….should not be uttered…..not without qualifying what you mean by rape……or else you are supporting the feminist version….which is now widely accepted and legally mandated in an increasing number of jurisdictions.
You misread me, bro. I was not suggesting that because my father said something that it made it correct. In fact, I know it wasn’t. I was pointing to the idea that my fathers notions of violence against women, while worded almost exactly as would come from the mouth of a feminist sycophant, were not rooted in that kind of thinking.
He was not a man raised under feminist governance, and in that there is a difference.
just the word scum is enough to tick me off now knowing thats who made this “the plan” hogwash. I hear ya. scum is women NOT men.
Just to put into perspective how entrenched feminism has become around here, today as I passed a sign in front of a mechanic shop that said, “Foreign and Domestic,” I immediately recoiled at the word, “domestic” as it made me think of domestic violence. I thought I was being shamed again for being male. Sounds ridiculous, I know, but that shows how bad things have gotten. Maybe the owner of the shop has become aware of many college women’s apparent LOVE for domestic violence, evidenced by all the DV posters around here, and is using that unconscious buzzword that gives them a gina’ tingle in order to get their business.
There was another sign at the same shop that said that Wednesday is Ladies Day and women get 15% off. The light turned green so I looked back straight again.
The very next sign that I saw was stuck to the back windshield of the Mercedes ML-55 SUV in front of me. That one said, “Save the ta taas.” Of course, a female was driving that Mercedes. I have NEVER seen a male student drive anything like that.
In the morning, I have to look forward to seeing Date Rape signs stuck to the walls. They are little green rectangular stickers that Sexual Assault Services have stuck all over everything. I used to pull them off, but I realized that I might get in trouble, so I quit.
I just wish it would get better. Can I not clear the air at least a little bit around here, at least until I can get through college?
Other men do not see themselves as groups, as this article succintly points out. Women do, however, evidenced by all the “Save the Ta Taas” and Date Rape stickers. Mentioning this perscpective on things to other men does, nearly 100% of the time, result in alpha-male one-upmanship. In fact, I have had numerous guys completely drop me from their contacts and never speak to or even look in my direction again after watching my videos. I have been called an incest advocate, a rape advocate, and so on. It is SO stingingly obvious that this is biological, exactly as this article states.
Perhaps this is not the most insightful comment, but thanks for letting me vent here, lol.
If you ever want to send in articles here, we would love to have them. In the meantime, feel free to vent away. Love reading your posts.
I also gain from reading your posts, Ben. Getting a Ben’s-eye view of a day in the life of a modern day college student is always a disturbing shock for someone far removed from that world. The endless rape hysteria/DV campaigns with their posters and stickers and shrill tub-thumping must be maddening.
I don’t know how you endure such bombardment without seriously losing it – but endure it you must for your own sake. Retaliating could get you in serious trouble and that would derail your final year and do you and the MRM no good. Gather your evidence of rampant misandry for future use and graduate.
Above all else, stop beating your head against the wall of blue-pill ignorance that surrounds you. Nothing less than a life-shattering experience can purge those blue pills from an average guy’s gut. College dudes are young which means most are hopelessly in thrall of the Almighty Vag, hopelessly brainwashed by a lifetime of feminist conditioning or hopelessly stoned. As Wilde said, “Youth is wasted on the young”.
It is the young guys like you and others who comment here that inspires the most hope for change. Never see the red pill as a burden or a curse. It is a gift that gives you clarity and perception that will serve you well as you move forward. Those who shun you will one day pay a price for their blindness. Try to pity them as most will pay dearly for their ignorance.
Good to see you back. Good luck in your final year.
Interesting piece.
Thank you Paul.
I have no problem with you unleashing a torrent of names for certain folks on your radio show. I think name calling as useful feedback and to shame others can get confused on the internet though as it’s often a tonal matter which isn’t carried by the written word.
I’m delighted to see you mention competition amongst men for access to women as leading to men’s lack of co-operation with one another.
I think Warren Farrel got it right when he said in ‘The Myth of Male Power’ that the Men’s Rights Movement would be the longest most drawn out civil rights movement of them all because men have to overcome their biologic urge to compete with one another in order to help men collectively.
This brings to mind the tremendous practical and emotional help I got from a small group of men when very down going through divorce – so I know tremendous co-operation between men is possible, but take Farrel’s point and so try to be patient.
I’ve been called every classic MRA shaming name in the book, by other self-professed MRA’s.
I don’t understand how someone could seriously ridicule and insult someone online, in a forum. They presuppose and make all kinds of assumptions about someone they’ve never even met. You don’t get a thoughtful well reasoned rebuttal mind you. Something sets off their MAN-DAR, and they let loose with a tirade of ad hominem invective.
Would they dare say this to your face? Of course not. The lack of respect some of these guys show people is disconcerting. It’s as much an internet phenomenon as anything, but I’d like to think men, in a men’s online community, would know better how to behave towards each other.
Whenever this happens I always have to ask myself; “Is the problem with the Men’s Movement the men that are in it?” I’m sorry but there are guys out there, some of whom clearly lacked male influence in their lives, that act unadult-like, or don’t understand respect and manners.
It’s an online forum for Christ’s sake!
Don’t be a dick just because you can.
“Don’t be a dick just because you can”
We could start this whole thing up again with that comment. Are you suggesting that part of a man’s body equates to a derogatory remark? Sorry, just couldn’t resist……….
It is interesting to watch the differences between here and The Spearhead. They seem to be a lot more… mild over there.
Also, they seem to think you’re a troll Keyster. While you do say things that clash with what I think, I’m adopting a wait-and-see.
I think Im a bit too militant to hang with the guys at the Spearhead. I like it here where you can call a spade a spade and only occasionally get blasted for it.
There is one person who refers to me as a Troll, whenever I disagree with him or call him out on a crazy statement or blatant lie…which ironically IS being a troll by definition.
The Spearhead blocks anyone who disagrees. It has become an echo chamber for the alpha enforcers.
Hilarious, Denis.
Ive seen you cop it a couple of times and havent agreed not here but elsewhere.
I don’t personally attack people online.
I disagree with them, and get personally attacked myself.
Very much spot-on, Paul.
As long as men insist on AMOGing each other all the goddamned time, we will get precisely nowhere and end up swimming in our own shit, to be honest.
You would think red pillers would realize this, but it seems that for many taking the red pill only applies to demystifying female behavior and reacting to that demystified behavior in a conscious way — but has nothing at all to do with demystifying male behavior and reacting to THAT in a conscious way. On the male side of the ledger, it easily lapses into a kind of lazy, narcissistic acceptance of biological determinism, all too often.
Great post.
There was recently a discussion about the way MRA’s interact over at the Happy Bachelors blog, and the mods over there have done a sterling job on keeping the overall tone of the place to be like a “Victorian Gentleman’s Club”. I think this is a good example of the way we need to respect each other.
I have no problems with correcting other people’s writings or comments, even my own, but even a simple “feedback sandwich” would be sometimes appropriate.
seeing that we are all intelligent gentleman.
Keep up the good work, and keep chugging those red pills down.
Great article Paul. I am humble enough to admit that I am still ‘getting it’. I also admit that for a long time I was a total mangina always looking for the approval of women.
There are many ‘mangina princesses’ in the world today, but it is ridiculous to call anyone who participates on this site a ‘mangina’, because the very fact that they are on this site and posting comments shows to me that they are on our side and wanting to learn.
Words of wisdom Paul worth heeding and in fact could be used as one of those red pills you mention. In the UK, as in other places, women get lower sentencing tariffs compared to men. In a consultation on justice recently feminists have asked for the abolition of women’s prisons altogether. Last year I was at a fem gathering when they boasted that this would be achieved soon. The UK government has not ruled it out. The absurdity is obvious, but has that ever stood in the way of feminist lawmakers and authority?
That is some seriously scary shit. Odds are they’ll get it thats why it’s so scary.
Interesting article and comments.
Men are able to work together just fine in groups for a greater goal, and not for pussy. Hierarchies work, and there will always be some men applying pressure on other men. I think it is questionable to label this “alpha gaming” and to claim that men have never done well at working together in ways intended to benefit men. The first because it assumes that there is something inherently wrong with one person asserting dominance over another, the second because it’s not true.
There are some myths many people in the western world buy into that need fixing: that shaming another person is inherently wrong, that being headstrong and demanding is “childish”, that we have to watch every word we say and make sure to be polite so as not to offend someone, etc. Really what this is is feminization of men, it is the demonization of masculine behavior. It is also called political correctness.
I actually think this tendency for people to get offended by harsh language, this softening of men, is a part of the problem we should not ignore. Yes, sometimes language goes farther than it ought, but other times people are just being overly sensitive and THAT pushes men apart. Of course, going overboard with the harsh language and acting overly emotional is a problem as well. I know I have done this before and regretted it.
Truth will not win over everyone. Use of tactics such as shaming and pressure will also be necessary at times. I’m not talking about this specific case, but in general.
We are men. We will always compete and hopefully enjoy doing it. I don’t want to get out of competing. There is a difference between cheap shots and fair play, but it’s not always possible to tell the difference. I can remember plenty of times when my brother and I were horsing around and it went too far and it became a fight, lol. But we resolved these issues.
Anyway, competition is healthy, and realistically men are always going to do it. Competition is what fueled men to do the great things they have done. And headstrong men who don’t pull their punches have usually been the ones pushing other men to get things done.
Asserting dominance, shaming, even I have a natural aversion to these things, but rationally they are sometimes necessary because human beings are not rational. For example, someone has to lead and assert dominance over others sometimes to get things done. When men asserted dominance over their wives, marriage was much more stable. When we shamed single mothers, we did not have as much of a problem with single mothers.
I just sense a bit of aversion to what is natural male behavior in the article, behavior which we have no hope of changing. I think it would be best to try work with our natural competitiveness rather than to call it a problem. I think the larger problem is that western culture has taught us that natural masculinity IS a problem, and that we should act more like women, becoming quick to snap at others, and quick to take offense. For most men, being rather masculine is healthy.
Lol, the down-votes prove my point. Not very respectable to simply down-vote without presenting a response explaining what’s so terrible about my comment. Down-voting is a cheap shot rather than an honest challenge.
As George R R Martin said, poison is the weapon of women, cravens, and eunuchs.
I did not down vote you, but will give a reply. As people mature many times the driving force becomes loving, understanding and helping. Not competing. IMO. This defines me by choice.
I actually up voted you, and I agree with much of what you say. But I do make a real distinction between what I would call conscious and unconscious competition.
I understand the fraternal fighting. I grew up in Texas with two older brothers. Taking things too far was common, but, and I point this out respectfully, we also grew out of it.
I should have been clear when I said I enjoy competition here I was mostly talking about a competition of ideas, such as there was with rhetoric in the 1800s before co-education destroyed it and it was replaced with composition: http://www.the-spearhead.com/2011/01/27/should-men-tame-their-rhetoric/#comment-67272 . I enjoy arguing over a point, and I try to do it respectfully unless I am disrespected.
I feel disrespected quite a bit at Reddit, lol. When so many people there prefer to misinterpret language in order to be politically correct, to utilize logical fallacies, to perpetuate modern day myths, it’s hard for me to give respect. And when rational conversation doesn’t work, the only thing left is force (strong language, shaming, emotional manipulation). For much of the public, that is all that will ever work. Only a minority will ever see the light and swallow a bottle of red pills. The rest will have to fall in line.
Paul great story as always. I think you may be underestimating that brush fire in Australia. More and more are starting to cry out. I am trying to get the word out of course.
I think you are spot on about attacking each other. One of the nicest things about avfm is the comraderie. Well to this newcomer anyhow. Debate is really good but it should be helpful and polite. This also helps us perform these duties elsewhere which makes it harder to discredit us. I am kind of a new kid on the block here but I’d like to have my say and can accept polite rebuttal. I think with it being vday today taking the message to social networking will be an excellent tactic. Ive been watching one of your bushfires recently. burn baby burn!
We also need a site where men and women can talk it out openly and honestly and thats never going to happen at GMP. I dont want to knock them because at least they are letting some of the msg thru. However I spoke to a woman very politely on there informing her of the horrors of “the plan” she requested a link for evidence. I couldnt post that because apparently im blocked or banned again. Hmmmm looks like I dont have evidence when I do…. Handy that isnt it?
Paul:
Im sincerely glad you wrote this. I’ve been trying to say this, here, for a VERY long time, and Paul, there was a time when even you gave me pretty strong blow back. I allow that maybe I poorly expressed myself, I also note that you have been suggestive of this (the points of the article) for quite some time now, so I am not trying to pull an I told you so. I am trying to support your points.
Over the last 7 years or so after I nearly OD’d on red pills, I have been derided and had attempts to run me off blogs on a rail so to speak, once by what we’d all consider a prominent MRA writer, just because of the screen name I use. It was so bad that I changed the name, and will likely re-register here with my other name, empathologicalism.
There is a huge difference in calling out wrong thinking, and the wit sharpening exercises that USED TO so inform these comments. It was starting to be similar to the dynamic on mixed gender forums where the women based the value of the comment on how it made them FEEL.
The responses here were often that way. I can hear the wheels turning about this being whining, it is absolutely not.
It is precisely about eliminating something that may be tons-o-fun but lacks utility in the MRM.
Your distilled point “Uh, no. MRA’s name calling and shaming other MRA’s is not constructive. It is petty alpha-gaming, but I will get to that in a moment.”"” is well taken.
Its as if the man who deigns speak up before his reflexes are honed is, rather than needing some rails set, and boundaries defined, its as if HE is trying to make the tent bigger. When the fact is, most of the time he will gladly accept teaching. We all should know that if we (mostly) share that common experience of splashing up and out of the matrix tank finding the world and conventional wisdom are not even distant relatives. It took all of us some time, more or less, to get to where we are, and I submit everyone can still slip if they are making comments, or writing their first article.
Its not about you, Paul, making the bad man/men go away…not at all, keep it robust and rough and tumble thats what is a goodly portion of motive behind MRA’s staying active. But if we are not going to take on “pledge classes” and school them, and choose instead to burn them for misspeaking, we may as well all just go play beer rugby.
I’m a human being not an MRA – that’s all I have to say.
Can you point to a link that explains red and blue pill for the uninitiated dummies?
Even googleing did not get me very far, though I admit I did not dedicate a huge amount of time to it.
Just a link that gives concise clear definitions
It’s a perfect allegory assuming you’re familiar with the movie “The Matrix”; which not everyone is.
Human-Stupidity – “Like everyone else, you were born into bondage, born inside a prison that you cannot smell, taste, or touch. A prison for your mind. Unfortunately, no one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.”
In short, the blue pill is the perception of reality as molded by institutionalized mass media culture. The media bombards us with messages, messages that are reinforced in nearly all facets of our existence. Billboards, radio ads, TV sitcom dialogs, magazine covers, marketing messages on product packages, PSA’s, all school levels textbooks and curriculum, disingenuous sermons from corrupted pulpits…blue pills are handed out in our present day anywhere and everywhere.
If we ignore the cognitive dissonance that comes from experiencing reality that does not match up with what the mass media tells us to think, than one is taking the blue pill.
To pay attention to the cognitive dissonance and realize the scope and depth of the lies we’ve internalized and than reject them and live your life in accordance to observable reality, rather than in accordance to the script our mass media culture constantly narrates to us, is to take the red pill.
Excellent, excellent summation, to which I would humbly like to add that elements of human psychobiology also strengthen the blue pill.
Reproductive urges and instincts also hinder our perception of objective reality. It is written in how we react and interrelate to men and women, each in different ways.
And this may be the driving force because so much of mass media is just a reflection of those instincts and urges.
Men habitually lie to themselves about the nature of women generally, and falter in how they interpret behaviors in individual women because facing the truth triggers the dissonance and forces internal conflict.
I think that explains every schmuck in the western world scrounging to buy what he can from Zales for a woman that treats him like a dirt rag. He does it without compunction or shame because he simply does not see his own behavior for what it is. It’s the perfect blend of narcotic mass media and the sociobiologically anesthetized male.
Nail, meet hammer.
I’m relatively new to all this but am fast catching up on background reading. That description of modern mass media culture is spot on. What makes it work is the way it reinforces the disconnect between it says your life should look like and what your values should be, and what actually goes on in daily life and inside your own head. Once you start to unhook yourself from it and look around you, you begin to realise how much of it there is and how pervasive it is.
I have to say I like this artical and the area that it is trying to get us to think. That becomeing an MRA is a process and we do not all fit in that process at the same level. That is not to say that we all will agree on absolutly everything I for one do not think that could be achieveable, given our different backgrounds.
I have also stated that in at least in part that there must be some mutual respect given here for out different backgrounds and I would like to say now also as to exactly where one may be on this path of the MRM. We can ourselves even go back and look at something we have stated even 3 months ago or even last week for that matter and think to ourselves it was a childish almost immature position that I had at that time and would say something different now in light of where you are on that path and how long you have taken your perscription of the Red Pill.
Hey we may have to talk to our pharmacist to try and develop a liquid form because on times the pill seems so hard to swallow but they still need that medication, and will eventually graduate to being able to take the regular perscription. All according to where you are on that path of the MRM.
Yeah, a syrup for the youngest of us and IV for the ones who can’t administer it to themselves on their own.
Let’s all just stay in the room. We ARE going to disagree. Sometimes feelings WILL be hurt. In such cases, folks can step in and offer comfort, guidance, other views. Let’s don’t chase MRA newbies away or walk out ourselves.
M’kay?
We’re like the jurors in “TWELVE ANGRY MEN… minus the asshole(s). We’re hashing things out. It’s going to get messy at times because we’re all passionate and perceptive.
Ever watch the silent, though not soundless, movie QUEST FOR FIRE? A gaggle of prehistoric guys searches for, well, fire…for their freezing clan. There was a leader, but one who kept the group safe and focused, and ultimately, successful (thanks to a woman… which mirrors my thought that women are needed in the MRM, too). The point is: men can and DO work together, And much more than they compete with each other.
It’s a lie that we are “innately” competitive. Just like it’s a lie that testosterone makes men “aggressive” (actually it’s insufficiency that does).
Most guys grow up having best buddies. Young boys love taking care of babies, too. So young dudes have to be “carefully taught” to be aggressive assholes….like the basketball playing son in THE GREAT SANTINI.
Believing we are innately competitive is buying into shaming feminist shite. Assertiveness is not aggressiveness. Power is not only not innately evil, it’s manifested in many ways. Sometimes by NOT being manifested.
We’re undoing our socialization. We’re learning to express ourselves emotionally, air our pains, admit we sometimes need help, and work together in ways we did when young.
There’s nothing we can’t do if we put our minds…and hearts…to it. We don’t need to be perfect, either. “Good enough” is good enough.
Now, for some shitzundgigglz:
http://www.ironsky.net
Enjoy!
“I still believe that men who brutalize women are the scum of the Earth.”
Vs.
“I still believe that people who brutalize other people are the scum of the Earth.”
Search in your red-pill hearts and tell me which phrase was more aptly stated.
The thing is, the statements that a newbie may make that are left over from blue pill haze, are generally true statements. This is the crux of white knight-ism. To say that men who brutalize women are bad men is a true statement. The problem is not that the statement is false, thats just low hanging fruit for their lame rationalizations, taking it to an extreme of MRAs defend abusers.
Its crucial the newbie realize that its the corpus of writing, sayings, events, and media that informs why that statement is true BUT IRRELEVANT and utterly lacking in MRM utility.
MRAs understand that there are bad people, men and women, hence we neednt score points with ladies by parroting about men. Teaching newbies to not do that should remain a robust process.
Red pills ?
Yeah scoff ‘em like smarties.
I mean if it’s not looking good out there why not try somethin different eh ?
We need to have a Red Pill Pez Dispenser. Though who’s head would go on it is anyone’s guess.
Paul Elam you are right on the button!
Men never seem to have much compassion for each other. I say this to my MRA mate when we discuss M.R.As and the schools of thought concerning men’s rights. I always state: – working with men is like trying to herd cats!!!
We mus-ent expect to get along in everything. Compassion for your fellow man is our only way forward.
I once knew a man from a sports club he had brothers. He had a daughter himself and said – the last thing he wanted to see come out during birth, was a baby with a pair of bollocks on it. I couldn’t believe my ears, and I have never forgotten his words.
The competitive dislike and distrust has been encouraged in us boys from our earliest age. Some mothers play sons off against each other from babies. Because she feels threatened and even jealous if the boys are close. Instead of having the boys work together if they want something, she lets them compete against each other for moms attention. Thinking his brother is in the way of what he wants. It creates stress, fear of missing out, anger, hate and a deep despising. I think this is why many brothers hate each other into adulthood. A caring man would show two little boys if they don’t work together, they both miss out!
As babies we soon learn. And have to rely upon each other to get what we need. That is where deep and lasting love begins, with an acknowledged reliance. That love will make a boy all the richer.
But it does put unimportant woman second place, and this explains a lot to me.
Strangely a mature woman should realize she is of the greatest importance to her sons. – As is the father.
Rod.
This article is why I rarely post on any site. I have very strong feelings about men’s rights and I honestly think I have some good Ideas, however I run into a problem.
For myself (and I think others who come here new) I have been slapped so many times by society for actually caring about myself and what I think that I’m super guarded. So I come her new thinking “wow look at this so many people that actually get it! they might actually be allies and not slap me down when I voice my opinion.”
And then we ask a question or write a response and get hypermacho responses. And you wonder why men who aren’t alpha males avoid the MRA? And you read some of these responses about how they think they’re should be a list of what you should believe as an MRA.
Sorry, I don’t work that way I personally think calling deluded men white knights and manginas is stupid are they wrong? Yes. Are they our enemies? Considering they are being used by feminists worse than you are I would say that’s like a cop calling a abused kid as bad as the parents abusing them.
I realize opinions like that are going to get people yelling at me and frankly I do care and its why I don’t normally post. But I figured I put my 2 cents in.
“And then we ask a question or write a response and get hypermacho responses.”
“Hypermacho”? Come on,man. This is part of the problem,this assumption that masculinity has to be controlled,like it’s some kind of a problem if your masculinity is “too pronounced”. Jesus Christ. Has anyone ever pronounced a woman “hyperfeminine” or interrupted her in the middle of speaking with a
“Damn! Tone down the estrogen,lady!”? What’s the difference between a woman clutching a wreath of flowers and swooning over her wedding fantasies,singing and giggling to herself like a lunatic, and men guzzling beer and shouting “Fuck yeah!” at the tv as their favorite boxer pummels his opponent? Neither one is victimizing anyone.Neither one is more particularly more obnoxious than the other,yet people see silliness in the former and evil mysteriously jumps into the latter somewhere.It’s all silly. But it’s part of who we are as people.To punish anyone for acting within a range of behaviors characteristic of their sex is repression, repression creates anger. Which is more frightening to you? A masculine man, or a pissed off masculine man?
Yes, some of the men here have a tendency to talk like…men.Truthfully,I haven’t seen much posturing here,it’s just natural male speech. The problem isn’t with the guys here, they’re talking like men do. I think society might have gone wrong in discarding the right of passage for boys in order to enter manhood.The kind of pansy who can’t handle pointed questions, honest assessments,and no-bullshit responses would have been properly filtered out of adult society.
I didn’t say hypermasculine I said hypermacho and for good reason. Nor did I specifically say here(AVFM) I was generalizing as to MRM sites.
Stating your beliefs and backing them up is quite different then doing what I see many do which is, if someone comes along with differing opinions, attack them personally. This reaction is hypermacho or to put it another term Alpha Male reaction. A new male enters your territory(your beliefs) he challenges your leadership (does not agree with your beliefs 100%) and so the instant reaction is to attack.
Example: “The kind of pansy who can’t handle pointed questions, honest assessments,and no-bullshit responses would have been properly filtered out of adult society.”
Perhaps you didn’t mean to try to insult me but it seems like an attack to me.
And frankly I wasn’t talking about this website but another site I won’t go into but I asked an honest question on whether i could use a picture for a signature and was chewed out for being scum trying to use his site to promote my blog even though I had been polite and asked about using a signature instead of just doing it which he likely would not have noticed had I not brought it up.
All he would have had to say is no, and by doing so not treat me like shit for asking.
I agree with this article on the concept of repressing male competition for the good of the pack as it were, and think the message can be taken a step farther. It is also equally important to cage this beast when debating with female participants, as the desire to impress and win affection that dwells in us can lead to boastfulness and distract from the message giving ideal. Suppressing male primacy in discussion of male rights when talking to anyone is important for discourse to be taken seriously or to be effective.
I agree in social settings there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to suppress your inner male and competitiveness, but when it comes to politics and rationalizing for our rights, it is necessary!