This article has come about because of an aspect of male psychology that has cropped up again and again following the release of the documentary series on this site and on YouTube. The essential message concerns what I perceive to be the fundamental isolation of most Men’s Rights Activist’s (MRA’s) from each each other and also from the larger body of men who are not MRA’s. This isolation seems to have several different causes and several effects, some of these effects are positive but some, perhaps most, are negative.
I have shown this clip before featuring Angry Harry regarding the men’s movement and some of the reasons behind the lack of identity and cohesiveness amongst men.
Angry Harry and Erin Pizzey on male psychology
10m 19s
It would seem that men have had an underdeveloped sense of identity as Men. They will see them selves as Muslims, or Blacks or by their profession like police officers or firemen. However, when it comes to seeing themselves as Men, in the same way that women see themselves as a group, men seem to draw a blank. Male common identity and therefore male solidarity does not exist. This is changing, although in my view, this change is slow and patchy in the population. MRA’s have a distinct sense of themselves as men, but the spread beyond them is minimal.
An example of this lack of male identity can be shown with the following thought experiment: imagine a woman saying to a man who happens to be a policeman that “all men are pigs”. What might his reaction be?
Now imagine the same woman saying to the same man something a little different: “all policemen are pigs”. Which assertion will arouse the greater response from the man?
We can’t know but we can hazard a confident guess; he will be far more upset about the second slur because he sees and identifies himself as a policeman more than he sees himself as a man. An insult to all men he does not generally take personally, but criticise his function and he gets upset. Men see themselves as human-doings instead of human-beings. Women do not have this hole in their psyche. An insult to one woman is an insult to all women and she and the sisterhood will ensure that you don’t forget it.
Make no mistake that this is one of the primary reasons that Feminism has gained such enormous traction in the Western World; men’s failure to react to negative propaganda about the entire male sex, which has prompted cultural changes and ensuing anti-male legislation. As MRA Paul Elam describes succinctly: “Suppose they had a gender war… and men showed up.”
The Men’s Movement and me
I exhibit some of the same isolationist mentality of other men involved in the MRM.
I don’t profess to speak for all men or even most men – I speak for me. I have my own understanding of Feminism and misandry, their origins and their effects and this is presented in the films. My analysis and my conclusions are my own thoughts and at the end of the day, it matters little to me if anyone else agrees.
If the men’s movement as a whole wants films with different perspectives to represent the greater part of the MRM (if there is such a consensus of opinion in the men’s movement), then it needs to get on and do it. That wasn’t my remit with these films. My sole purpose was to redress the balance as I saw it.
I wanted men to watch these films and feel good about themselves unlike the effect on men of any documentary to be found on mainstream TV. There are no documentaries on TV anywhere in the world that celebrate men and their achievements past and present. Those that cover inventions or other historical endeavours, do not in any way focus on the fact that the protagonists are men nor do they explore what it is about men that has made them so inventive, so productive and so capable.
However, there are countless documentaries singling out men in some negative light and singling out manhood and masculinity as being the prime cause of this or that problem. From crime to domestic abuse, the media is positively frenzied in its attempts to single out men for blame even where this is demonstrably not the case.
Documentary response
I have noted three general responses to the films thus far.
1) The best thing since sliced bread – 40%
2) Biased unfairly in favour of men – 45%
3) Misogynistic – 15%
The percentages broadly reflect opinions I have encountered. I want to focus on number 2 because number 1 represents mostly MRA’s who generally understand the material and see how it fits in to the scheme of things as regards the men’s movement; and number 3 represents individuals – typically Feminist men and women – who automatically refute men’s issues in a Pavlovian manner without genuine analysis and so can be regarded as irrelevant to the issues addressed in this article.
So we come to those – mostly men – who say that the films are biased in favour of men and that this is somehow negative or represents propaganda. Now what does that mean, exactly?
Is a biased film a bad thing? Why would I have made films that are biased in favour of men? Or, to put it another way; what should films like these be like if not biased in favour of men?
Can men see the wood for the trees?
I wonder at many men and their borderline pathological desire to miss the wood for the trees.
I have lost count of the number of men who have sought to correct me on the finer points of the origins of Feminism, for example. They have nothing at all to comment on the more salient points of the film or remark on the effects of Feminism described as I see them or even as they see them. No. Instead, they want to tell me that I’m wrong about this minor detail or that.
To take the example of the Feminism group of films:
- Men want to tell me that Feminism did not start in 1940, it started in 1917, or 1906, or 1880.
- Radical Feminism did not hijack Feminism, I am instructed, it was a part of it from the beginning.
- Feminism was the idea of organisation B not organisation A.
- The correct figure is 7.2% not 7% as you state in your film. You are wrong, mwm!
- You are wrong to call women who have adopted Feminism “stupid”.
- etc, etc
These things matter but only to a small degree. If you’ve been punched in the face and it hurts like hell, whether the punch was a right-hook or an overhand-right is largely irrelevant, your blood dripping to the floor is of more pressing concern.
With Feminists, we are not dealing with reasonable people and in order to effect any chance of a balanced representation of men’s issues, there is a requirement for partisan presentation of the facts.
There is no point in expecting Harriet Harman for example, quite likely the next labour leader in 2010,to grow a conscience or perhaps some intellect and suddenly start believing men to be human beings. That will never happen. In other words, for men’s views to be heard amongst the storm of female-centric media coverage requires material that pertains almost exclusively to the male experience. In other words, bias in this case, is a necessity in our attempts to achieve balance.
Typical dim-witted and irrelevant criticism from men
“Facts and balanced information are imperative in order to fight the misinformation out there.”
Agreed, but the presentation of those facts cannot be as so many men believe it should be done. Do any of them really think that a presentation of a boatload of even-handed stats and a graph or two disproving one of the myriad false Feminist assertions against men that has taken hold throughout our culture, is going to have any impact whatsoever?
No, it won’t. Presenting information like that in our biased media landscape is exactly like pissing into the wind: the only impact it can have is on yourself, not anyone else.
My opinions are partisan and pro-man, a stance that is so incredibly rare in our society that a great many men don’t actually know how to handle it and tend to react with self-defeating shock. Do many men actually believe that the way to defend oneself in a street fight is with the Marquis of Queensbury rules? It really is not rocket science why men have allowed Feminism to run over them, stop and then reverse over them for good measure. Men seem to reserve their ability to fight and defend themselves only in circumstances where they can do so against another man.
When, I dare to present a view that is actually positive for men and covers the male experience BY ITSELF and ON ITS OWN, my critics, primarily men, can’t assimilate it. It blows a fuse. They must prevaricate and fluster and talk about balance and bury themselves in irrelevant details and trivial asides and indeed warnings to me that I have over-stated things here, and I should have praised women there and we must not present our case in isolation and I must be careful to specify ad nauseam which PARTICULAR women I mean and I must be SEEN to be entirely fair and indeed angelic.
Seen by who? The Feminist establishment? No, my misguided friends, that is simply not the case.
Feminists understand the issues of presentation far better than men and have thus been relatively quiet about the films. To a Feminist, it makes sense to be positive about women and so they see the threat that positivity in the discussion of men means for Feminism. Positivity about men is like Kryptonite to Feminism and Feminists are well aware of this.
In contrast Men seem worried by the positivity and don’t understand its strength. To all too many men, including many MRA’s, being positive about men or negative about women is shocking and can’t be accurate. Indeed, it shouldn’t be allowed!
What this is, is IRRITATING.
Feminist women don’t irritate me because they are easy to understand, but men with their near psychotic, pathological automatic refusal to defend themselves, irritate me a great deal.
“Cherry-picking statistics is wrong”
This is no secret. It is intentional. This is not about lying because there are no lies, and it’s also not about picking an anomalous minority of data that goes against the majority. Rather, it’s about focus on the male experience for once, not the female. If you want the female experience, just open any newspaper, turn on the TV or listen to the news and you will be presented near exclusively with the female experience of life, the female understanding of the world, female stats wrapped up in female terms. From the government on down we virtually drown in the female meme.
Yet, for me to dare to present alternative views and the male perspective – at least this male’s perspective – men want to tell me that I am being biased and I do not cover the whole story and I should be fairer, and my data may be misconstrued. Lord have mercy, where do these men come from?
My films do indeed present one side of the story: the side that is never heard elsewhere in the media. The reality is that the intent of these films is to expose new and different information: a point of view that mainstream media is not interested in covering.
If all other information in the public domain is cherry picked, when government ministers are cherry-picking anti-male stats and then enacting legislation against men as a result (think VAWA and the UK DV bill) it is a matter of necessity to present the opposing cherry-picked statistics, not bias. Two bunches of opposing cherry-picked statistics goes a long way towards creating a balanced statistical view.
This criticism from men for cherry-picking stats and film clips seems to me almost as if they have no comprehension of what constitutes an argument. What is it that is so difficult for many men I have come across to understand about this? Do men, the creators of philosophy and logic, really not understand the concept of argument and counter-argument?
It’s like saying that if a man is on top of you punching you in the face repeatedly, then the thing to do is not punch him back and struggle to get back to your feet. No. Apparently, the right thing to do is to punch yourself in the face with your left hand and punch the aggressor in the face with your right. Then you would be being balanced in your self-defence and fair to all concerned. Please!.
Men are dazed and confused and think that the way to fight fire is with a wet tissue rather than a powerful extinguisher. These men are so used to taking a beating from the various arms of Feminism that they almost seem to prefer it to relief. Where do these men come from? Why do I even have to know about them?
The reaction from Men, not Feminist women, is the single thing that has ever made me regret releasing the films to the public. If the project had been for men rather than for myself, it would probably not have been worth doing.
That was not easy to write but there it is.
Feminists could not have done the harm they have without the active, self-defeating, pathological co-operation of men who refuse to acknowledge that a punch in the face is a punch in the face regardless of who does the punching.
Feminism has had it’s day and we are likely on the way out of the mire for various reasons. However, least amongst those reasons are a great many men. Some men are influential. some MRA’s make the MRM what it is and have had a positive impact. Most men are not even in the fight because they don’t know what’s at stake until they get screwed by the system they’ve allowed to take over.
But the men that do understand the situation, and who then proceed to criticise me for my efforts to present partisan truth, that would not otherwise get any airplay whatsoever in our media, those men are more problem than solution. They are so caught up in fear and petrified of making a noise and comfortable with the reality of oppression, that information running counter to their comfort zone of self-blame and misplaced fairness they find intolerable.
These men, the MRM can do without.
“I must be angry and bitter to do what I do”
As pointed out in the follow-up article to Toxic women, this is a common claim about my motivations from men (and women, but men are at issue here) regarding this website and the documentary films. It is not correct at all but it exposes the thought processes of men when confronted with material that does not play into their comfort-zone of the institutionalised abuse of men: institutional misandry.
I liken the men’s movement to be like outlying islands compared with Feminist society which constitutes the much larger mainland. Many men wave and some even cheer as they sail past the islands and some may even pay a short visit if they have suffered some abuse or other wrought by the system, as if they are taking a holiday from the misandry on the mainland. But very, very few stay to set up home (even holiday homes!) and the vast majority are soon back on the boat and on their way back to the mainland, to what they are used to, depend on and perhaps even need.
If a man does take anything more than a passing interest in issues that specifically affect him or other men, his motivation must be personal and can thereby be safely categorised as a rant. He receives little or no support from other men, because he is seen as weak and as a failed man. Acknowledging discrimination against men is perceived by many men to be an admission of weakness. Indeed, it is perceived to be more manly for men to be discriminated against but suffer in silence about it, than it is to voice complaint and rectify it.
The British Airways scandal
As an example, the British Airways discrimination against men in their heinous and criminal assumption that men pose a risk to children simply by virtue of being men. To be fair, several airlines, perhaps most, have a similar policy. If women were in this same situation do you really believe for one instant that any BA flights would be taking off right now?
Women and the government as one would be down on BA like a tonne of bricks and the airline would quite probably be put out of business as a result of litigation. Other airlines would have seen the destruction of BA and would sing from the rooftops their admiration of women and how safe they were around children.
In reality, the knowledge of the repercussions would preclude such a policy ever being considered. Yet, even though they are being sued in the courts over the policy, they have no intention of changing it. How could they have such confidence about such blatant discrimination and an obviously illegal policy?
Why, because the targets are men. of course.
British Airways can safely and publicly implement this despicable discrimination against men even though perhaps half or more of their travellers are men and perhaps two-thirds tickets are purchased by men on behalf of their wives, families or business.
In other words, in no time at all, if men cared enough about themselves, BA could be brought to a situation of zero income due to men’s simple choice to not fly with them.
But it would never happen and could never happen because men will instead slink away and bear the misandry like a worn pair of old shoes that cut his feet and let in water, but that he can’t bring himself to throw away.
This aspect is not a criticism of men, believe it or not. If men want to seek criticism, any newspaper, film, book or news show would do that job admirably. But it has to be recognised that men – and our under-developed psychology of self – are very much their own worst enemies when it comes to tackling misandry effectively.
What lies behind men’s lack of unity in the face of quite obvious and indeed monstrous oppression?
Let me list the reasons
Some reasons will be looked at, some only listed.
FEAR in speaking out
“I have no doubt that, someday, the distortion of truth by the radical feminists of our time will be seen to have been the greatest intellectual crime of the second half of the twentieth century. At the present time, however, we still live under the aegis of that crime, and calling attention to it is an act of great moral courage”.
Professor Howard S. Schwartz, of Oakland University in Michigan, USA, 2001
The fear men feel in taking a stand against Feminism is often multi-faceted but basically amounts to the fact that to go up against the machine behind Feminism is tremendous act of courage. Speaking out against the myriad evils of Feminism – even demonstrably obvious evils – is treated as an outrage: the equivalent of denying the Holocaust. A man risks being squashed utterly and it is a very brave thing indeed to make a stand.
It could mean dismissal from a job, it could mean the denial of a promotion, a black mark on a personnel record. It can also mean vicious attacks from women safe in the superior position given to them by Feminism. Shaming and belittling tactics, accusations of misogyny and sexism.
It is this fear of reprisal for speaking the truth and defending themselves that very, very few MRA’s give their real names or their full names or appear on film, myself included. Indeed, I was recently in contact with a potential contributor to this website who stated that he left a previous blog due to fears of his identity being discovered and so changed his mind about contributing to this one as well. I could almost smell his fear in his emails.
Of course, his position is understandable, there can be, indeed are likely to be, very real consequences for men in speaking your mind, hence aliases and faceless blogs.
In a male dominated world why is it only women that can speak their minds without fear of reprisal?
Angry Harry on the fear that men feel when speaking out
1m 00s
Hatred and fear of weakness ( a very strong instinct)
It does not affect me
It’s not that bad because none of this happened to me
It could never happen to me
Complete lack of awareness
No time or interest for such matters
Self-hatred
A great many men have been conditioned since birth by saturation media coverage of men’s evil ways alongside a conspicuous absence of coverage of the greatness of men.
A case in point:
Bill Maher, Michael Moore, Christina Hoff-Summers on Feminism and Misandry
Michael Moore’s attitude in this clip is perfectly understandable following 50 years of radical Feminism. He has grown up in a world that refuses to recognize the greatness of men whilst it has overdosed exploring the negatives of men.
He is a perfect example of the modern man who feels distant and separate from other men and indeed wants to be distinguished from other men – the bad men that we are led to believe constitute the majority of men out there.
Christina Hoff-Summers tries to introduce just one example of incalculable male brilliance by mentioning that every time she goes over a bridge she thinks of the inventiveness of men. A woman tries to focus on the positives of men, not the man. What does this tell us?
How have men become so adept at hating themselves that it takes a woman to have pity on us and remind us of our greatness?
Getting lost in the detail.
It’s like men are being punched repeatedly in the face (yes, I know: again with the punching analogy) but rather than block the punches, they want to analyse the precise punching technique being used against them and want to argue with the man next to him, also being punched repeatedly, about whether the punches are mostly lefts or mostly rights. Even when they find it hard to talk about these distinctions because they’re spitting blood and teeth, it is the details that get these men fired up; the punches they simply accept.
The good and the bad of distributed activism
The benefits of distributed activism – disorganised resistance – are covered by Angry Harry on his website and by Paul Elam on YouTube.
I interviewed Angry Harry in 2004 and here he speaks about the power of the men’s movement and why it will be unstoppable.
Angry Harry on the Men’s Movement
10m 31s
The good thing about it is that to whatever extent that it works, it’s a necessity that it works because it is, perhaps, the only thing men are ever likely to have amongst men alone. As discussed here earlier, men seem to have an allergic reaction to the idea of supporting other men, even when those men are essentially campaigning on their behalf.
Forum-jockeys and other men who voice concerns about men’s issues but do precisely nothing about it, have had a lot to say about some of the films. Mostly negative, mostly trivial and mostly irrelevant. On Reddit for example, I have received more support as to the core message of the films from the Women’s Rights section rather than the Men’s Rights section. What does this tell us about the type of men involved in men’s rights on a platform such as Reddit and what does it tell us about what men are up against when it is women that provide what support there is for films that pertain to the male experience in our society?
What it tells me is something I used to find anathema to me, but that has been told to me numerous times by more than one of the MRA’s I have met and discussed this with: the furtherance of men’s rights may depend on women more than it depends on men.
Are women as a group, a potential asset for the men’s movement or more of an enormous obstacle that must be navigated?
Look at this clip:
Joe Biden demonstrates how easy it is to manipulate women
Biden must be thinking “How easy is this?”
Just say this and say that, say women are strong and proud, say we will do this for women and that for women and it’s like cream to a cat, they lap it up and vote accordingly. Along with the gullibility and selfishness so easily milked by this politician, lies the hidden strength of women: they think and act as one.
Women decide what they want (more accurately they are told what they want) and then they band together to get it.
For all the top MRA’s verbiage about men finally standing up for themselves due to the need to fight for survival in a society made ever more hostile to men and boys, it appears to me that it is a legitimate concept that unity amongst women holds the key for male freedom, not the men’s movement itself.
Like a massive oil-tanker moving at speed, the views of the majority of women have enormous mass and thereby enormous inertia in a given direction. Turning that mass onto a different more positive course away from Feminism may be incredibly difficult, but may also be the key for men to achieve what is good for us all: the end of misandry.
Or perhaps it’s like harnessing a blue whale as it courses through the ocean. If you can find a way to do it, then you could really go places. Men on the other hand are more like a school of fish. If you can even manage to herd the fish together into a school, when you then try to actually harness it, the apparently solid mass dissolves into individuals and the harness can find no purchase. Achieving unity amongst men and above all maintaining unity, is like trying to hold onto a glob of air? Did you ever try to hold on to a glob of air?
Whilst I have always thought that it was a part of the process that women need to be re-educated as-it-were as to the true nature and purpose of Feminism, it is only recently that I have thought that this was quite possibly essential to the success and unity of the Men’s Movement itself.
The men’s rights movement should perhaps be putting the lions share of it’s efforts into winning women to the cause rather than men. My goodness, that thought is like swallowing a cow to me, apologies if it gives you the same feeling…
Stephen Fitzgerald and Erin Pizzey have both remarked to me that non-Feminist women are essential allies to men in the process, but I resisted this idea. It was the gullibility of a great many women that had got us here, how could women seriously be relied upon to get us out of it?
But I am left with the extraordinarily uncomfortable possibility: if not women, then who?
I now think it essential that women be convinced and brought on board whenever possible. If we convince 10 women, then we have 10 people behind us. If we convince 10 men, we have 10 individuals doing their own thing, for a time, arguing with you over irrelevancies and subverting efforts (often unintentionally) every step of the way and who are likely to then disappear in short order. Perhaps harsh, but oh so true in my experience.
To sum up, I have been surprised by the negativity from a great many men within discussions about the men’s movement in general and also specifically regarding my documentary. However, I have been equally surprised by the strength of support of quite a few other men. The numbers in support however, don’t compare and that is a real shame.
I believe very strongly in the men’s movement and men themselves, that’s why this site and especially why the documentary series exists. I do not feel negatively about men.
However, I am annoyed about the lack of cohesion amongst men. How we will achieve our aims whilst continuing to practice such accomplished infighting is a very big question.
I have attempted to do things for men, but have had very little support from other men. It is so frustrating, that men won’t except that Feminists are our enemy’s.
Having to fight men as well totally undoes me.
I am guilty – of focusing and disagreeing with some of your facts, because I thought you were unaware on how evil and committed, against men and boys Feminism really is.
But god I am so grateful these films are available.
Thank you for being, and giving to men and me, Roderick.
well of course it would be bias! its looking at one side of the story, its not about discrimination against people, its discrimination against men! would you call it biased if it was only about women? most people would say no, but it is because its analyzing the state of women
as for the cherry picking, that is good and bad as you want to go with what the majority of studies, or major studies say; you dont want to pick one study out of 500 that says what you want and you want to give all the details (or atleast thats what i would want)
I meant cherry picking in the sense of looking at the male-oriented stats for once rather than the female ones. I did not mean ignoring any mass of contrary evidence, that would be self-defeating.
You’re doing a great job and don’t forget -this is just the beginning. The first Male Studies academic program is starting this year at the Onstep Institute.
Thank you for all you are trying to do.
This is an imortant presentation and an important perspective. Regardless of how we arrange our vegetables on the plate, the meal is fine and appreciated. In my readings at a variety of sites, I am amazed at the number of men who seem to be looking up, busy discussing the weather while walking through a minefield. I challenge myself to consider that their lack of cohesion and inability to group or to unite, is descriptive rather than poignant. I do fear that if this were ever to change that men as a group would be as easy to sway politically as women. Although I am sure at some point my considerations will go the way of santa claus and the easter bunnie. It is dangerous times to be an individual, as the political has certainly raped the personal. I am a fifty three year old man, and aware that misandry is much older than we believe. It was a shackle to my Father and to my Grandfathers. I have heard many family members recounting the crimes of my Fathers, that narrow view disgusts me.
I have to write a sociology paper at Texas A&M University over the wage disparity according to gender. I have seen a few of the videos and I like them ALOT! Are there any other resources you would recommend looking at? feel free to email me at jdaehnke@tamu.edu
Thanks for your effort in promoting the male point of view.
If you must read any book about the gender wage gap, then get Why Men Earn More by Warren Farrell. Not only does it give a comprehensive explanation for the gender disparity, but the bibliography alone is worth the price of admission.
1. One of the main reasons that ‘negative’ comments tend to predominate when responding to articles or videos is due to the fact that readers tend to focus on points with which they disagree.
I have done it myself – many times.
I read a great article. Agree with it 99%. But then post a comment about the 1% where I disagree.
And the motivation to focus on that 1% stems, I think, from the desire get this most excellent author to move even more in tune with your own views.
Or, perhaps you can see a trap heading his way unless he closes that ‘loophole’.
Perhaps you can see that this author is well worth ‘helping along’, and so you politely point out where you think he has gone wrong..
Perhaps you want this author to support your own views (knowingly or otherwise) and so you feel the need to alert him to why your views might be slightly different from his.
And also, perhaps, there is often not much point in taking the time to agree with somebody’s views.
After all, those views have have already been expressed! Why express them again?
All in all, therefore, I would not get too downhearted about the nit-picking. For every nit-pick made in the comments section of your videos, there will be 10 viewers who walked away quite satisfied with what you said, and who did not feel the need to make their own comments.
2. And I’m just about to do exactly what I described above! LOL! Here it comes, …
“I now think it essential that women be convinced and brought on board whenever possible.”
Two points.
A. I doubt that many women give two hoots about what happens to men. And if you do take women ‘on board’ then you will likely have to water down both your demands and your rhetoric; so much so, in my view, that nothing much would ever be accomplished.
Indeed, with the exception of a very few women MRAs, whenever I have seen women accepted into the fold (e.g. on a forum) I have seen the effectiveness of the group, as a whole, plummet.
B. “The men’s rights movement should perhaps be putting the lions share of it’s efforts into winning women to the cause rather than men.”
And the best way to achieve this – judging by the SUCCESSFUL methods used by the blacks, the gays, the feminists etc etc – is to threaten to create real problems for them if they don’t come ‘on board’.
Catch 22? LOL!
3. ” Achieving unity amongst men and above all maintaining unity, is like trying to hold onto a glob of air? ”
Yes, but it is getting easier.
Our forces are definitely growing. (This really is happening.) And, as they grow, more and more men will begin to see things in the way in which we already tend to see them.
And then, in much the same way that everybody recently ‘agreed’ with feminism, so it is that they will, one day, agree with the MM.
Furthermore, we must always remember that we do not actually need much of the population to actively support the MM. Indeed, the so-called ‘minority’ groups that are now so powerful did NOT have majority support at the time.
They ‘won’ that support by being aggressive towards those who stood in their way. And this is what they still do.
In my piece, …
http://www.angryharry.com/esNoMensGroups.htm
… I point out that there are unimaginably huge forces that conspire to oppose the growth of the MM.
And it is these huge forces – rather than our ‘tactics’ – that keep holding us back.
Our progress is slow because of these huge forces – and yet we are making headway.
As just one example, Baroness Stern recently castigated Harriet Harman for her biased reporting of the rape statistics. Why do you think that she did this? After all these years?
Well, I’ll tell you! LOL!
It’s because some of our politicians can see us on the horizon, and we represent the most almighty force that there has ever been.
Men are EVERYWHERE. They’re mean. They’re dangerous. They’re clever. And they are resourceful.
And *millions* of them are now gradually wising up to who their enemies really are.
… And, further, please remember that 99+% of those nit-pickers and naysayers will not have one-tenth of the insight into what is going on when compared to you.
And, if their comments upset you, or detract from your work, then throw them off. We already have enough trouble trying to get our messages across, so why give space to those comments that are designed to undermine our efforts?
Just get rid of them.
We have a war on our hands. We should not let enemy soldiers into our barracks, nor should we allow their propagandists to swan into our domains in order to discourage our troops and our supporters.
Indeed, the only way in which we are going to win this war satisfactorily is to push feminism and misandry right out of sight and, thence, into oblivion.
And Step 1 is to give them no space and no voice within our own areas of activity.
One of the most crippling problems that we men have as a group is our lack of an all-male space. Currently, we only have the internet. But be that as it is, I still love it.
Just put ONE woman in with a group of twenty men, and suddenly the delivery changes. Chivalry sets in and the creativity is stifled.
A comfortably masculine presentation by one man will stimulate others. Only then will the spark catch and the machinery roll. A woman present — however well-meaning — is a spoon of water in the fuel. More than one, more spoons.
Nothing against women. Some are lovely people. But we need a space in which to be ourselves, to talk freely, to use the right language. Only in an unrestricted environment can we come up with the ideas and methods for achieving our goals as men. Belief in these goals by a significant number of men would be enough to ensure women in large enough numbers will follow anyway.
Feminists should be barred of course. They’re not real women, but a cancer in our society. And, by the way, they NEVER use logical arguments but manipulations of words.
how do I get a invitation code this would be great for me
The uncut films are no longer online, I’m afraid, but I’m working on producing publicly available films asap both on this website and on YouTube.
Thank you so much for this..I thought I was alone. When I found your site and videos I was so happy..
thankyouthankyouthankyou
“The history of our “movement” has resembled a circular firing squad unable to redirect its fire at the real, philosophic enemies.” – R. F. Doyle
“Is feminism a cure for which there is no disease, or a disease for which there is no cure?” – R. F. Doyle
“I believe very strongly in the men’s movement and men themselves, that’s why this site and especially why the documentary series exists. I do not feel negatively about men.
However, I am annoyed about the lack of cohesion amongst men. How we will achieve our aims whilst continuing to practice such accomplished infighting is a very big question.!
It is that lack of cohesion that will win the day! At the risk of being denigrated for disagreeing with you (see above) the strength of the Men’s Movement is in its very lack of organisation. Pizzey (like most women) fails to understand this point but it is VITAL that we do not form an organisation where we can be slaughtered or decapitated as we try and gather around a “leader.” It is BECAUSE we are not organised as one big entity that we are so difficult to stop.
Erin had her own fledgling organisation when she started the shelter movement. She has failed to learn from her experience. Others moved in and took it over. They cannot do that to us.
The “infighting” is a crucial component in keeping us fluid as a movement and honing our arguments. It teaches us to stand up to bullies and fight for our corner. It teaches us, sometimes, to accept our position may be flawed or incomplete. It teaches us what and who our enemies are within the movement. Helping us to identify those who are just on a power trip as opposed to those who really care about the issues. It can expose infiltrators and hangers on. It’s a good thing if you look at it in a positive light.
hey really love your videos and all you are doing to improve the laws of western society as it relates to men. I myself am from Africa,west africa to be precise, it is a real shocker and appalling at the treatment men endure as it relates to women. I have long shared the views which you take about but have only recently discovered there was any thing called the men’s movement. I have long given up hope for western men as i seen so many of the “betarize” themselves in relations to women. i would like to know how i could obtain an invite code so i can fully view all your restricted videos. i understand that maybe due to some legal issues you may be apprehensive, but i would really like to implore your co-operataion in giving me the privilege to view your videos. thanks you
Hi
Thank you from the bottom of my heart for standing up for this most oppressed body of humans, the men! I’ve had enough of racism against men!!
As for men being fractious I agree, but look at the tremendous brain washing, that’s been going on for generations, where female points of view have been relentlessly drilled into the minds of boys, who have been taught that ‘being male= being evil’.
It’s hard to stand up for those considered evil, so we need first of all to replace that nefarious brain wash, with a positive counter brain wash, focused on the great sides of men and trust me you’re doing a fine job of it.
Don’t despair; men in their millions are waking up to the slight of hand that’s been employed against them. A deep roar is rising from the collective throat of men that will eventually unseat feminism from its throne.
It’s going to take some time though, perhaps several decades. Great work and I for one am with you all the way.
We do not need to brainwash anyone, ever.
The facts are our ammunition.
To my mind the mens’ movement is more like ‘factivism’ than activism.
Just one more thing; we need to clarify that this is not a war of the sexes, but a war against injustices.
Basis my long involvement with men’s issues and observing feminism your short videos are very well done. Your vids serve as a great starting point for the emerging novice and a knowing confirmation for the seasoned.
Thank you for making the sacrifices in producing these most commendable videos. Your efforts help in leading the way to exposing the many hate mongers wrongly ensconced in professions that have been degraded by their very presence.
May my comments bring the favourable category #1 in the Documentary Response rate up to 41%.
I know this is an old thread but I hadn’t been to your site before, I’d only watched a few videos on youtube recently which were nice frankly because it was good to know that someone was not only paying attention to facts but trying to disseminate them.
Personally I view the lack of a “unified” mens movement as a relative nonissue. Personally I was somewhat offended from Ms. Pizzey’s assessment (despite the fact I approve of her stances in general) that because men didn’t divide up the housework in a shelter that there is something wrong with their behavior, it is called stoicism and in my opinion women in general could do with a bit of it.
I think that the only reason that there hasn’t been an explosion of Men’s rights groups etc is just accounted for from a dwindling of overt support of Feminism amongst many women combined with the fact that many men simply haven’t reached their last straw yet. I also don’t think that the last straw for a good number of men is long in the coming but that is neither here nor there. When it does come I don’t anticipate it turning out any differently than every other burning issue that has roused men in number. I also try to keep in mind that patience is also a largely male trait.
Well, whilst I think it’s good to look for light at the end of the tunnel, I think it’s also good to accept when it isn’t there. Women support Feminism as strongly and overtly now as at any point in it’s history. All that’s really changed is the terminology used to ascribe to it. Women now believe that they support the continuing drive for equality rather than some irrational and militant women’s rights campaign, little understanding that it’s the same thing. I do accept that many women don’t properly understand what they support when they quietly approve of the latest speech from our Minister for Women, but I don’t accept that there are less women actually in support.
As for men reaching the last straw, I have recently come to think very differently about that, but I haven’t reached a final conclusion. Right now, however, I don’t think that there is such a thing as a “last straw” for men. Neither are men “patient”, so much as they are unaware.
As I have covered in some detail in this article, I think the men’s movement cannot work as long as it is focused on simply spreading the word to men, or attempting to get certain ideas into the mainstream media. Such information is essentially falling on deaf ears because not only are men not listening, they are not actually capable of listening. As Angry Harry said, men don’t seem to realise that there is some part of their psyche that’s missing as regards caring about themselves. Where I currently disagree with him, is in the idea that the further increase in the spread of information will fix this serious problem within men.
The British Airways situation is the perfect case in point. Even with full mainstream coverage of a single example of the hatred of men in our society, men said and did nothing about it. It simply didn’t register in the mind’s of men as a problem that they should deal with.
As the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink. The men’s movement’s biggest problem is men themselves, not Feminism or anything else; and right now, the problem looks to me as if it may be insurmountable.
Well personally I don’t believe that the average woman supports a (phony)drive for equality either. I attribute it to general ignorance or outright stupidity in many cases, this is where I think most women fall in the spectrum. Those who are aware don’t need to support it they need only ignore it, they can just go along for a ride to all the benefits that the sexists acquire for themselves and by extension all women.
In situations like the British Airways issue again I just attribute it to simply being able to tolerate things or at least try and apply some twisted logic. This for example (sorry the link isn’t working and British Airways doesn’t come to this part of the country)but I assume you’re referring to men not being able to be seated alone with children? I look at it from the perspective of a rank and file man. With all the issues that could be inflicted on men to read that they aren’t allowed to sit next to a kid on a plane probably doesn’t register much.
Acknowledging that something is sexist doesn’t necessarily mean that with all the real issues, primarily education in my opinion (I admit I don’t know what the situation is on the other side of the Atlantic) this is a battle simply not worth fighting. I understand the frustration for those that are worth fighting, family court, divorce court, education etc and for that I would concede that it is likely men willfully turning a blind eye.
Again this is just the feeling I get from people in general, here equality doesn’t seem like it would be that hard to achieve, in California, New York, Washington state and DC it wouldn’t be worth fighting I admit I have only experience dealing with people in the US and Canada.
Like I say when I think about what men are or aren’t willing to deal with “straws” if you will that is a bit disengenuous as I tend to look at it more like a war and in general in my opinion women can’t seem to grasp what a Pyrrhic victory is whereas a young boy understands it by nature almost. This is why I believe it will take something in particular an opportunity for a killing blow if you will for most men to “do” something. Sorry for the rambling, it’s much too late for me to try being coherent lol.
I hear you about Phyrric victory. That’s what Feminism has been and it’s also true that men never took part in the fight anyway.
The link went to another article on this site called “Why I Don’t Fly British Airways”. As I have suggested, men will accept abuse, discrimination and hatred directed against them ad infinitum. There is no breaking point for men as they are too adaptable and too willing to apply “twisted logic” as you put it, to what is clearly naked hatred. It is good to positive about changes in the future brought about by an awakening amongst men, but I simply don’t see it.
If you look at the British Airways article above, pay particular attention to where I look at the catalyst that making a stand over BA could have been. By doing a simple thing – not flying with BA – many more large scale victories could have been had for men in society with no extra effort. The really complex and intractable hatred against men that flows within the family court, the mainstream media and government legislation could have begun to be tackled by simply not flying with BA.
It is folly to think that men are reserving their fight for the really tough battles when, ironically, they wouldn’t even need to be fought if men tackled the easy ones. I don’t think that it will be men finally saying “enough is enough” that will force a change and improve our lot. Rather, I think global circumstances might be the catalyst. Eventually. Maybe.
“The Misandry Bubble” is one angle on this.
It takes longer for free individuals to coalesce behind something important. But when they do, they embody a massive power, dwarfing that of a coalition of individually weak, mindless zombies. Think special forces .. the impact that a few good men can have ..
Thank you, MWM, for everything you have done and continue to do. Don’t sweat the 45%, it makes us stronger.
Keep up the good work.
The truth always rises to the surface eventually.
It’s only a matter of time, but my patience snapped a long time ago. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
Telling the truth, in any case, is fundamentally necessary.
[BTW Include me in the "best thing since sliced-bread" category]
The video project was excellent because it brought all the trivial arguments together, injected a dose of reality and stuck it, very concisely, under people’s noses.
It seems there’s a fair amount of agonizing about what comes next.
There’s a new breed of political activist, e.g Glenn Sachs in the US and “Daveyone” in the UK, plus others too numerous to mention, who are trying to change the system from within. Such men are energetic and dedicated – good luck to them – but they are constrained not only by prevailing politics but also language.
Feminist discourse has ruled the roost for half a century and some basic truths cannot even be expressed by politically active men for fear that they may be unacceptable, both nationally and internationally.
However, there is one area (which you have often alluded to)where men will always have the upper hand – the option to vote with their feet.
For women, dependency is normal. Replacing dependency on one particular man with dependency on extended family, or looking to the state for security, artificial jobs or benefits doesn’t change that.
Meanwhile,to gain their place in civilized society, men are expected to not only gain independence, but also show willing to take on dependents and share their resources, with an individual woman, a community or the state. If they wish to give up their natural freedom they must exact a price, instead of merely giving it away.
Decades ago, when we heard soap-box feminists talking about ‘awareness’, we thought it was just another buzz-word. “Awareness” is important.
Now there is a growing awareness among men. They don’t need to coalesce into ‘activism’ groups or political parties. All they need to do is reconstruct their lives according to their new awareness and quietly walk away from situations that are not to their liking.
Cheers. What you say is true, but it’s effect on the behaviour of men might not be so obvious. Most men will not become MGTOW. To my mind, most men will behave the same way as men always have, no matter what the cultural landscape.
The awareness that is growing amongst men is only growing amongst some men. That said, I think that this still might be enough to effect the change we need, but it’s not about most men, it’s about a few men.
I don’t know what I love you more for…enlightening me or your analogies.
“the right thing to do is to punch yourself in the face with your left hand and punch the aggressor in the face with your right. Then you would be being balanced in your self-defence and fair to all concerned.”