The Red Pill Movement (MRA): Men Waking Up as Victims

Within the past couple of centuries millions of women woke up to the fact that they’ve been getting a raw deal. In politics, the workplace, business, finance, and even when it came to their homes and their children, they realized that they were second-class citizens.

And so the feminist movement was born.

A major theme in some parts of the feminist movement is that women are the victims of a patriarchal society—or more simply, victims of men.

The Red PillWithin the past half century, as the feminist movement has gained strength, tens of thousands of men woke up to the fact that they’ve been getting a raw deal. It is overwhelmingly men who die in war, at the workplace, and by homicide and suicide. Men get taken for granted and taken to the cleaners financially by women in the divorce courts, and they lose their children to their ex-wives, too. And men are subject to an invisible epidemic of emotional and physical abuse by women.

And so the men’s rights movement was born.

A major theme in some parts of the men’s rights movement is that men are the victims of an increasingly gynocentric society—or more simply, victims of women.

Welcome to the manosphere, popularly known as the Red Pill movement. This is the world where men are downtrodden, and women and feminism are their oppressors.

And the reality is, there is truth in both positions. Women are victims. Men are victims.

The question is, who and what are they victims of?

The Red Pill

“The Red Pill” is a reference to this famous scene in the movie The Matrix (1999):

In the scene, Morpheus (Laurence Fishburne) offers Neo (Keanu Reeves) a choice between taking a blue pill, which will result in his remaining asleep in the computer-simulated world in which he lives, and a red pill, which will result in his waking up to the cold, hard reality that he is enslaved and exploited, and has been living in an illusion his entire life.

The men in the Red Pill movement see themselves as having woken up to the reality that they are oppressed, and that women and feminism are the oppressors. And though this may seem outlandish and ridiculous to the average person in mainstream Western society, many of these men are in the movement precisely because they have personally gotten the worst of it in previous marriages and relationships with women.

These men have woken up as victims.

Men who have this waking up experience commonly go in one of three different directions, forming the three major segments of the Red Pill movement:

  1. Becoming a men’s rights activist (MRA)
  2. Becoming a “pick-up artist” (PUA)
  3. Becoming a MGTOW: Men Going Their Own Way

We’ll take up PUAs and MGTOWs in separate articles.

And even in this initial article, which will focus on MRAs, we won’t spend time describing the movement. You can read about it yourself at the various Wikipedia links above, or go to some of its own major online sites, such as:

Or just google it. You’ll find plenty of material to keep you falling down that particular rabbit hole for a very long time.

Who are the perpetrators?

If you spend any time at all reading posts or watching videos by Red Pill men, you’ll hear all about how terrible feminism, gynocentrism, and women in general are. Much of it is just plain over the top—a ridiculous caricature of women, feminism, and contemporary society.

And yet, where there’s smoke, there’s fire.

Men do not have a corner on the market of being exploitative jerks. There are plenty of women out there who marry men only for their money, sap off of men, use men to get themselves pregnant, cheat on men, verbally and physically abuse men, and yes, even rape men. A man who suffers these things at the hands of a woman is just as much a victim, and the woman is just as much a perpetrator, as when a man attacks, abuses, or takes advantage of a woman. And the pain of a man who has been victimized is just as real as the pain of a woman who has been victimized.

The reality is that there are many men who have been and are the victims of women. Many of them populate the Red Pill movement. And if some of these men have gone over the top in their strident, blanket condemnation of women and feminism, perhaps we should cut them a bit of slack. Some of them are seriously hurting, and they’re letting off steam.

But that doesn’t mean they’re right about women. Only that they’re right about some women whose wiles and treachery they have personally experienced.

When one human being abuses, assaults, and takes advantage of another human being, it is wrong and destructive regardless of the gender of the perpetrator or the victim.

Cultural and systemic issues

And yet, there are also systemic issues at work here.

If you ask a Red Pill man what these systemic issues are, most likely he will point to feminism and gynocentrism. It is an article of faith in the manosphere that men have lost their leading position in Western society, which is now run for the benefit of women, to the detriment of men—and that this is very, very bad.

By contrast, if you ask many feminists what the systemic issues are, they will point to patriarchy and male privilege. They will assure you that our society and culture still favors men over women.

Clearly, since each group thinks it is the victim, there is more going on here than meets the eye.

In reality, both men and women have built and participated in a culture that causes serious problems both for women and for men.

Biological factors

An unavoidable biological fact has driven both men and women to create and perpetuate that culture:

Women get pregnant and have babies. Men impregnate women, and do not have babies.

This means that ever since the species began:

  • Women have placed a high value on safety and security.
  • Men have placed a high value on risk-taking and danger.

You see, carrying, birthing, and nursing babies is an intrinsically high-risk activity. Babies are vulnerable and defenseless. And women become more vulnerable when they are carrying and caring for babies. Women naturally place a high value on safety and security to counterbalance their inherently risky biological role in carrying, nursing, and caring for babies and young children.

Fathering babies, on the other hand, is an intrinsically low-risk activity. It’s quick, easy, and quite pleasurable!

The problem for men is that there is a limited supply of women to impregnate. A man could theoretically impregnate a woman every night. But each time he does, that woman will be pregnant for nine months, and, in the natural order of things, nursing (and not ovulating) for a year or more after giving birth. This means that women must be choosy about who they will mate with. And they will chose a man whom they believe will best provide them with the safety and security that they need for the long, arduous process of pregnancy, birthing, and the nursing and care of their children.

Guess which men look like the best prospects?

The ones who will go out and engage in the risky and dangerous pursuits of hunting for food and defending their family and tribe against any competing men, hostile tribes, and predatory animals.

Men naturally place a high value on risk-taking and danger to counterbalance their inherently easy biological role in fathering children.

In today’s civilized societies, the risks for women of carrying, birthing, and caring for babies and young children have been greatly reduced. And the dangers men face in providing for and protecting their women and children have also been greatly reduced.

But those risks have by no means been eliminated. And they are still powerful factors driving women to place a high value on safety and security, and driving men to place a high value on risk-taking and danger.

That’s why men still have a shorter life expectancy than women, and suffer the lion’s share of the deaths and injuries in war, on the job, and in the external and internal conflicts that lead to murder and suicide.

And that’s why women still commonly look for a man who they believe will provide them with safety and security—and also still commonly subject themselves to the will of those men in the bargain.

Biology is not the fault of men or women

From the perspective of biology and evolution, are the systemic cultural factors that lead both men and women to be victims, each in their own way, really the fault of the opposite sex? Aren’t they really the result of the intrinsic division of labor between men and women in which men father children, which is easy, whereas women bear children, which is hard?

Isn’t this the biological reason so many men find themselves at the mercy of a violent and dangerous world, and also at the mercy of women who require them to take on that world or risk losing both the women and their children?

And isn’t this the biological reason that so many women put themselves at the mercy of men, who sometimes turn out to be violent and exploitative, attacking and harming the very women they are supposed to be protecting and providing for, or who abandon them and fail to protect them and provide for them at all?

Are the biology and evolution of male and female, and the roles that biology and evolution push them into, really the fault of men or of women? Is it really men as a group who are oppressing women? Is it really women as a group who are oppressing men?

I think not.

And the sooner both men and women realize that we’re in this together, and that we will never entirely escape our biology and psychology as men and women, the sooner we can stop blaming each other and take a more realistic and balanced approach to overcoming the victimization of both women and men.

Personal maturity—or lack thereof

The first thing to recognize in approaching this victimization is that all of us—both men and women—start out in life rather self-absorbed and messed-up.

When I read articles and watch videos from the manosphere, I hear all about how selfish, self-indulgent, and stupid women are.

When I read articles and watch videos from some segments of the feminist movement, I hear all about how selfish, self-indulgent, and stupid men are.

Why is that?

Because both women and men tend to start out in life rather selfish, self-indulgent, and stupid. And some of them never really grow out of it.

Physically, it takes a couple of decades to grow from infancy to full adulthood. But emotionally and psychologically, it takes a lot longer than that to grow to full maturity as a human being. Speaking for myself, when I look back at my teens and twenties I cringe at some of the idiotic things I thought, said, and did back then!

So when men complain about how selfish and stupid women are, and women complain about how stupid and selfish men are, they’re both right! We’re all stupid and selfish when we start out in life. And it takes a lifetime for most of us to grow out of it—if we ever grow out of it at all.

Biology also requires us to start coupling up with one another and having our families when we’re still rather young, stupid, and selfish. And as young and foolish people we subject each other to all manner of terrible treatment, slashing and burning each other and our relationships. If we manage to get out of our teens, twenties, and thirties without some serious scars from our relationships and our own idiocy, then we are truly fortunate.

Being jerks is part of the (initial) human condition

In other words, much of the bitterness of men against women, and of women against men, is not particularly intrinsic to men or to women. It’s the human reality that all of us, both men and women, take a much longer time to mature emotionally and psychologically than we do to mature physically. And during that long and difficult process of maturing as human beings we rub our rough edges up against one another and cause a lot of physical and emotional damage to each other and to ourselves.

So is it really the fault of women that men get hurt at their hands? And is it really the fault of men that women get hurt at their hands?

Yes and no.

Of course, we are responsible for our own actions.

And yet, it’s really not our fault that we start out as rather immature, selfish, and stupid human beings, and must grow out of it. That’s just our nature as human beings born into this corrupted world.

As we mature psychologically and start taking responsibility for our own life and actions, we can reduce the amount of harm we do to one another. We can move toward relationships in which men no longer abuse and exploit women, and women no longer abuse and exploit men. We can move toward relationships in which each of us contributes our own unique heart, mind, and physical self to the wellbeing of our partner, and together we contribute to the wellbeing of the human community.

Getting practical

Those are fine-sounding words.

But our life is not lived in generalities. It is lived in the particular events and circumstances that we experience.

Covering all of the grievances of the men’s rights activists in the Red Pill movement would expand this article to book length. So let’s just look at a couple of them for now.

Men’s high death rates

Men’s rights activists point out that men have a far higher death rate than women in war, in the workplace, and through homicide and suicide, and that men have a shorter life expectancy than women.

True enough. Men as men do suffer some disadvantages compared to women.

But does this mean that men are being victimized by women and by a gynocentric culture?

Hardly.

Men had higher death rates than women long before gynocentrism was even a gleam in the early feminists’ eyes. Throughout recorded history—most of which was filled with patriarchal societies—men have overwhelmingly been the ones who have fought and died in wars. Men have been far more likely than women to engage in risky and dangerous professions and pursuits. And men have killed each other in far higher numbers than women. And they did all these things in pursuit of their own goals.

Did these dangerous activities of men bring some benefits to women?

Yes, they did.

But for the most part, it wasn’t women who made men do these things. Men did them for their own reasons, even if getting and keeping women was one of those reasons.

In short, men’s higher death rates are not the fault of women, but result from men pursuing their own goals and ambitions. That is true whether the society is patriarchal or gynocentric.

Men must take responsibility for their own lives and choices, and not blame women and gynocentrism for the higher death rates of men. If men don’t like their higher death rates, then it’s up to them to make different choices in their own lives, and to bring about the necessary changes in society to reduce those death rates.

Men suffering in divorce court

A very common grievance among Red Pill men is that men get the short end of the stick in divorce court. After supporting their wives and children for years, their wives divorce them, take the children, and get hefty child support and alimony payments as well.

Yeah, it sucks to be a man in that situation.

But let’s look at it from a more realistic and balanced perspective.

These same Red Pill men commonly believe that men are suited by evolution and nature to be the dominant partner and the breadwinner and protector of woman, while women are suited to be the submissive partner, dependent upon men and designed to raise children and take care of the home.

If that’s their attitude about gender roles, aren’t the courts just enforcing exactly those roles when the marriage ends in divorce?

You can’t have it both ways. If you are going to insist that men must be macho, dominant, protector-breadwinners, and women must be submissive homebodies who cook and clean and take care of the children, don’t complain when the courts impose exactly those roles on you when your marriage fails.

Losing custody of children

And another thing: When you’re standing in front of the judge in the divorce court, it’s a little too late to suddenly decide that you want to be an active father to your children. The men who complain bitterly about losing their children are often the same ones who took little or no interest in their children while the marriage was still intact.

Men, if you’re standing in front of the judge and saying you want custody of your children, you’d better have a track record of being an active, involved parent who has changed some diapers, shuttled the kids to and from school, taken them to their team sports and other activities, spent solid time with them, and generally been there for them. If the judge sees that their mother has been the active parent, and you’ve been only minimally involved in their lives, guess which parent the judge is going to give custody to?

I speak from experience. I’ve been through the whole thing myself. And I was able to remain an active father to my children for the rest of their growing up years, while severing all financial ties to their mother. Though it was certainly a painful experience for everyone involved, I was able to move on with my life as a free man. And I have a good, strong relationship with my adult children to this day.

Oh, and it was a female judge presiding in the divorce court.

The choice is yours long before the divorce

So men, don’t waste your time complaining about how the system is rigged against you.

Don’t wait until your wife files for divorce to suddenly discover that you want to be an active, involved father to your children.

Put in the time being a father to your children now. Do your share of the parenting. And then, in the unfortunate event that your marriage breaks down, you can stand in front of the judge and say, “I’ve been an active father to my children. I’ve done my share of the parenting. I want to continue to do that, Your Honor.”

Judges are not as unreasonable as you think. But they won’t pay much attention to your desperate pleas when your back is against the wall in divorce court. They will look at what you have done or not done as a father in the years before the divorce.

If this means working a little less, letting your wife provide some of the household income, and spending more time with your children, then that might just be what you have to do if you truly want to be an active father to your children.

In short, when it comes to divorce court, the choice is in your hands—but you have to make that choice long before you end up on the opposite side of the courtroom from your wife.

  • If you choose to be the traditional breadwinner and absentee father during your children’s growing-up years, the judge will most likely continue that same arrangement if your marriage breaks up.
  • But if you choose to be an active father to your children during their growing-up years on a more equal basis with your wife, the judge will most likely continue that arrangement after the divorce.

Men, the choice is in your hands

Men are not the victims of women in divorce court. Rather, divorce courts commonly impose upon men exactly the choices they have made in relation to their wives and children during the course of their marriage.

So men, choose wisely what sort of marriage relationship you want with a woman, and how active a father you want to be to your children. There may come a time when you’re stuck with that choice whether you like it or not.

Are there miscarriages of justice in divorce court, in which men just plain get a raw deal that they don’t deserve?

Of course there are. We live in an imperfect world, with imperfect courts run by imperfect people. And men have every right to advocate for reform in the court system if they see injustice there.

But if you want to minimize the “unfairness” of any divorce court that may be in your own future, think carefully about your career, your marriage, and your parenting. These choices are in your own hands. And it’s best if you make them before you tie the knot.

Men are not victims of women

Yes, as I said earlier, some men are the victims of some women. Women can be jerks just as men can, and women can be evil just as men can.

But men as a class are not victims of women as a class. Nor has gynocentrism ruined the world for men.

So to the Red Pill MRAs I say:

Chill out about women. Women as a group are not evil bitches out to destroy your life. Self-absorbed and out grab stuff for themselves? Probably. Especially when they’re young. But not any more self-absorbed and out for themselves than men are when they are young. It takes a few decades for us human beings, both men and women, to grow up and quit being so focused on ourselves.

Quit blaming women for your problems. Be a man. Take responsibility for your own life. Make the choices that will put your life and your relationships on the footing that you want for them.

If things don’t always turn out the way you hoped they would, join the club. Welcome to the human race. Sometimes life sucks no matter how hard you try. Pick yourself up, dust yourself off, and move on a little wiser from the experience.

If you really want to be a man, you can’t blame women or gynocentrism or anything else for your problems. It’s your job to make your own life and your own relationships what you want them to be.

Nobody said it would be easy.

Man up, quit complaining, and do the hard work.

For the second article in this series, see: “The Red Pill Movement (PUA): Men Waking Up as Animals.”

For further reading:

About

Lee Woofenden is an ordained minister, writer, editor, translator, and teacher. He enjoys taking spiritual insights from the Bible and the writings of Emanuel Swedenborg and putting them into plain English as guides for everyday life.

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Sex Marriage Relationships
11 comments on “The Red Pill Movement (MRA): Men Waking Up as Victims
  1. larryzb says:

    ood, thought provoking post, Lee.

    Regrettably, we cannot get honest, rational debate on this “war of the sexes” in the US. Many women and men cannot be objective as emotion fuels their take on this subject.

    We read a book some years back (we reviewed it on our blog back in 2012) called Brain Sex. It was co-authored by a man and a woman. The thesis was that the differences between men and women are largely found in the brain. Men’s and women’s brains are wired (interconnected) differently and these very different “engines” run on very different “fuels”. The fuels being different hormones and different concentrations of these hormones. (The authors used these terms: engines and fuels.) The hormones are some of the most powerful mind altering bio-chemicals known.

    We do not want to sound overly deterministic, but we cannot explain the differences between men and women by only taking into account cultural norms and such other social factors.

    Equity feminism got hijacked in the 1960s and morphed into what is called radical or gender feminism. That is a big part of the problem in the US. Consider the bitter fruits of this radical feminism that helped to fuel the so-called sexual revolution in the US. Can we get women to do some honest introspection here?

    Lastly, the Christian churches largely side with the feminists and have alienated many men in recent years for failing to be objective. Men are not fully to blame for all the related problems. Women have some culpability as well. Where is honesty in our post modern society?

    Methinks the society is now becoming anti-male and anti all things truly masculine. Men ought not apologize for being masculine. (Consider how boys are treated in school. Normal healthy play is frowned upon. Gasp! Boys cannot play with toy guns. The feminizing of society continues.)

    • Lee says:

      Hi larryzb,

      Thanks for your thoughts.

      It’s good to distinguish between academia and the vociferous “movement” people on the one hand, and the general society on the other. We hear a lot from the more radical ends of both feminism and the men’s rights movement. But the vast bulk of society lives somewhere in the middle. And people in the middle are generally more sensible about these issues than academia and the radical extremes.

      Yes, the differences between men and women are not just cultural, but biological, psychological, and as I say in some of the other articles here, spiritual as well. We will never erase the differences between men and women. They run right to the core of a man and of a woman, no matter how confusing gender roles may become outwardly. And over time, I believe that good sense will reign as those fundamental differences reassert themselves, but in a way that does not pit men against women and vice versa. The differences, in my view, are complementary, not conflicting.

      In Western society the pendulum has swung heavily over to the valuing of women side culturally, as a reaction to many centuries of valuing men more than women. That is understandable. But it is just that: a pendulum swing. And things will keep swinging back and forth until we reach a better state of equilibrium than we’ve had in past ages.

      Also, differences don’t take away our freedom. Rather, they enhance it. Each of us is a unique individual, making our own free will choices. Men make choices in one way, women make choices in another way, different cultural and racial groups make choices in different ways, and all together it makes for the full pattern that is the human community. Nothing wrong with that. And arguing about which is better or worse is a total waste of breath. It takes all kinds of people to make the world work. The variety makes us stronger.

      • larryzb says:

        “In Western society the pendulum has swung heavily over to the valuing of women side culturally, as a reaction to many centuries of valuing men more than women. That is understandable. But it is just that: a pendulum swing. And things will keep swinging back and forth until we reach a better state of equilibrium than we’ve had in past ages.”

        We fully agree on this. It is funny, but I have thought the same thing, about the pendulum analogy when it comes to the Christian approach to sex. A very long held anti-sex attitude caused the society’s mores to be too extreme in one direction. Once, the pendulum broke loose in the 1960s, it did not stop at a “happy medium” point but kept on going to towards the other unhealthy extreme we have now.

        It does take all kinds of people to make the world work. But, that does not mean that we need tolerate evil actions and condone these. There are moral absolutes, Lee. By way of example, as Christians we cannot approve of great moral evils such as the common practice of abortion (one of the defining issues of current feminism). Avoid the abstract and consider that every time an abortion is performed a child’s life is snuffed out. (And, yes, it is only loving Christians – more are needed – that offer the abortion bound mother life affirming options and alternatives.)

        • Lee says:

          Hi larryzb,

          Yes, of course valuing our differences does not extend to condoning evil. However, I don’t believe God creates anyone, or any group of people, for evil. Each individual or group makes its own choices on which direction to go, whether in a good and positive direction or an evil and negative direction. Diversity is good when the people choose the good. But even when people or groups choose the evil, we are still commanded to love them, not hate them, even if it must at times be “tough love.” In other words, we must work for the good of other people even if they are involved in evil. Sometimes that will mean resisting and punishing their evil, but our motives should never be hatred or revenge against them, but rather a desire for their wellbeing and the wellbeing of the community and society.

          As for moral absolutes, that’s a tough one. For example, the commandment is, “Thou shalt not kill.” But most people and societies believe that it is moral to kill if necessary for self-defense, or for the defense of one’s household, community, or country. I.e., even though it is one of the Ten Commandments, most people and cultures do not believe that “Thou shalt not kill” is a moral absolute, but that is dependent upon the situation and motive for the killing.

          And the ancient Jews (and many Jews today) take doing no work on the Sabbath as a moral absolute. But Jesus said, “It is lawful to do good on the Sabbath” (Matthew 12:12).

          And as for abortion, even hard-core abortion opponents usually support an exception if the life of the mother is in serious danger. It is hard to balance one life against another.

          Perhaps there are only two moral absolutes:

          1. You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.
          2. You shall love your neighbor as yourself.
  2. Tony says:

    Hi lee

    Excellent article we men and women definitely have issues that need to be worked out.

    I also look forward to the other articles concerning PUAs and MGTOW especially MGTOW

    “Man up, quit complaining, and do the hard work”

    ^ That statement is the reason why

  3. Bill McCord says:

    “variety makes us stronger” summarizes well our human condition—-thank you, Lee, for continuing your enlightening path and sharing–so has been your pursuit and for the rest of us a great benefit:)!~bill

    • Lee says:

      Hi Bill,

      Thanks for stopping by, and for your good and kind words.

      Now I have to ask: Are you the Bill McCord I knew in Washington State back in the 1980s?

  4. mikekto says:

    “Within the past couple of centuries millions of women woke up to the fact that they’ve been getting a raw deal. In politics, the workplace, business, finance, and even when it came to their homes and their children, they realized that they were second-class citizens.”

    Odd that you’re Christian and saying this because the culture in America was built with Christianity.
    Your statement is based on 2nd wave feminism but feminism started somewhere around 1848. At least this is when a group of women met in Senca Falls, NY to have a meeting. Things were in balance I will explain with my other response below.

    “If you ask a Red Pill man what these systemic issues are, most likely he will point to feminism and gynocentrism. It is an article of faith in the manosphere that men have lost their leading position in Western society, which is now run for the benefit of women, to the detriment of men—and that this is very, very bad.

    By contrast, if you ask many feminists what the systemic issues are, they will point to patriarchy and male privilege. They will assure you that our society and culture still favors men over women.”

    Now you do not understand Patriarchy and gynocentrism was in balance. The ying and yang principle. The reason feminism attack Patriarchy is to weaken men and take away their power. That’s why quite a few women want equal say in the relationship or marriage. But to do that is also giving a man’s power. He is literally weakening himself. He himself isn’t able to solve problems because there will be conflict. If he isn’t able to solve problems he won’t be happy because he thrives on solving problems for women. This has been proven. Don’t aren’t happy going to work. Some women who are married end up quitting their high paying career to be house wives. Going to work especially in the corporate world actually raises a woman’s testosterone. This make her out of balance because testosterone makes her more stressed. I’m generally speaking here it’s all about hormones for women. Look at how feminists attack fathers on father’s day.

    When women started having the right to vote things started changing on a larger scale. Now they were gain more power and slowly over time they got more and more power. Second wave feminism came about because it the next course. Sure it was the elites that promoted feminism but it was coming to that anyways. It may have taken a little longer.

    It’s women will destroy society, although men too are the contributors indirectly.
    No worries though once there economic collapse , war, high crime, rape from radical Muslims women as a whole will change their ways. The question is are men willing go back to women to protect them?

    • Lee says:

      Hi mikekto,

      I’m a little confused now.

      In your first comment here, you said, “It just shows some of these men don’t even deserve a decent woman because it’s all the women’s fault. Personally I take my responsibility for my choices . . . .” This makes it sound like you’re opposed to blaming women for all our problems.

      But now you seem to be saying that it’s all women’s fault after all. “It’s women [who] will destroy society,” you say.

      So which is it? Is it all the women’s fault, or do men have to take responsibility for our societal problems as well?

      Most non-MRAs look at the preaching of MRAs and see their views as completely lopsided and unrealistically negative toward women and feminism. Your statement, “The reason feminism attack Patriarchy is to weaken men and take away their power,” is a case in point.

      Really?

      Feminism is all about women weakening men and taking away their power?

      This sounds more like the irrational fears of men who are not secure in their masculinity than it does like an objective assessment of the feminist movement.

      Perhaps there are some grasping, greedy, evil women in the feminist movement who want to weaken men and take away their power.

      But for the most part, the women in the feminist movement were and are interested in women’s issues such as providing for needy children, ending rape and spousal abuse, putting a stop to sex trafficking and forced prostitution, and so on. And when it comes to the issue of women having access to higher-paying jobs, much of the impetus for that came from women being left destitute, and often being forced into prostitution, if men failed to support them or abandoned them. Women didn’t want to weaken men. They wanted to be able to take responsibility for their own lives, and protect themselves from evil and shiftless men. (Sorry, but just as not all women are horrible sluts, not all men are virtuous saints.)

      As long as MRAs continue to spout these silly, one-sided conspiracy theories about the horrors of feminism and the ball-busting evils of feminists out to destroy men and civilization as we know it, no one outside the MRA movement will take them seriously.

      But I’ve already stated my views on that in the above article.

      About the video: Sorry, but the video does not attack fathers. The adult child of a single mother saying “Happy Father’s Day” to his or her mother is not a terrible feminist attack on men. It’s an appreciation of women who, for whatever reason, had to do their best to serve as both mothers and fathers to their children.

      Is that how things ought to be?

      No.

      I agree with the maker of the video that both boys and girls should have fathers, or father figures, growing up, and that a mother simply can’t fill in that void when there is no father figure.

      But life is what happens when you’ve made other plans. Whether we like it or not, a lot of kids are brought up by single mothers. And it’s not always the mother’s fault. Sometimes the fathers were drunks, or abusive, or druggies, or just plain lazy, and simply didn’t have the character to serve as a father figure to their kids. Those kids whose fathers were absent appreciating what their single mothers did for them is not an attack on fathers. Are men, and fathers, really so weak that they can’t handle some adult children of single mothers saying “Happy Father’s Day, Mom”?

      It’s true that the big government nanny state has done massive damage to the role of fathers in our culture—especially poor and minority fathers. However, this doesn’t absolve men of the responsibility of stepping up, being a man, and raising their own children. If men shirk their parental responsibilities, is it really women’s fault? Personally, I fought to retain my role as an active father to my children when my first marriage broke up. It’s the one good thing I brought out of that whole terrible episode in my life. So I don’t have much sympathy for men crying about single mothers ruining their children’s lives. But I already covered that in the above article.

      Oh, and waiting for civilization to collapse so that we can pick up the pieces is not a good solution. History shows that when civilization collapses, what comes next is rarely better than what existed before.

      And about “radical Muslims,” if your country and region were constantly under military attack by a foreign superpower that thinks it has a right to replace your leaders and your governments at will, don’t you think you’d become radicalized, too? It’s easy to point the finger at those terrible Muslim fundamentalists. It’s a lot harder to realize that much of the reason large segments of Islam have become radicalized is that its countries have been invaded and its leaders assassinated over and over again by the “Christian” West. Read the history of U.S. political and military intervention in the Middle East going back many decades, and maybe you’ll understand why so much of the Muslim word hates the U.S. and has become radicalized. It’s simply a matter of history that ISIS was the direct result of U.S. military intervention in Iraq.

      But back to the subject at hand, as I’ve said in various articles here, I believe that both men and women should be free to live as they wish, as long as they don’t harm or kill other people and their property. If we remove the various legal and social strictures requiring women to be one way and men to be another, then over time men and women will naturally express their own natures freely. And “radical feminist” dogma to the contrary notwithstanding, men and women are different, not only physically, but psychologically as well. Once the current gender chaos has begun to settle down, that fact will reassert itself, and men and women will naturally, of their own free will, settle into the societal roles that suit them best, and that best contribute to society.

      For an article here that covers various and changing gender roles in summary form, please see: “What are the Roles of Men and Women toward Each Other and in Society?

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Lee & Annette Woofenden

Lee & Annette Woofenden

Featured Book

<

Click to buy on Amazon

Join 867 other followers

Earlier Posts
Blog Stats
  • 1,531,778 hits
%d bloggers like this: