Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

I'm sorry, but the idea that men's rights and feminism can "unite" is an absurdity. The solution lies elsewhere.

Reclusemaxxer

Reclusemaxxer

-
Joined
Jun 22, 2022
Posts
11,591
I'm sorry, but the idea that men's rights and feminism can "unite" is an absurdity. The solution lies elsewhere.

When feminists hear that men are facing discrimination by sex, their response is "so start your own movement", upon which they label whatever such movement men attempt to organize as "misogyny" and "dangerous", and demand of the media, academy and authorities to ban it, and are granted their request with no questions asked. This causes some to propose instead of a separate men's activism, a unification with feminism - the rationale being, "aren't both for the same goal? Same equality to both sexes?" But the idea of "unification" between men's activism and feminism, is absurd and hypocritical to begin with, because the lion's share of men's problems in a modern society is caused by feminist actions.

Men who go through parental alienation for example, are facing this because of laws, practices and women's norms that feminism enacted and created; men who are denied a job opportunity despite being the better candidate, so that a less suitable woman will be accepted, are discriminated because of their sex since feminists demanded quotas to circumvent equal opportunity; boys who receive lower grades for same performances as girls and do not reach the threshold for what they wanted to study in university, are in this position because feminism educated teachers to assume that girls are discriminated against and to compensate by preferential treatment for girls which amounts to discrimination of boys; and I can go on and on, for example about the fact that the lifespan gap is growing every decade because feminists caused the medical world to believe that women's medicine is neglected while in fact research budgets for female diseases are 3 times higher than for men's; or about the fact that feminism demanded more power to women in psychology and now when 75% of therapists are women, almost all of them are feminists and so, instead of seeing their profession as meant for offering therapy to men as well according to men's needs, they are guided to use their position to attempt to "design" men according to definitions laid out in radical feminism - the verb "design" comes directly out of recent policy papers - and men are left with little options of unbiased psychological help.

Feminism has not created most of the problems a man will face in general - but **feminism is indeed what has created most of the problems that** ***are unique to men or primarily affect men*** in modern society. Feminism does not deny this - instead it frames this as "no one likes losing privileges", while in reality **feminism has re-defined basic human rights, basic human dignity and equal opportunity as "privileges" when given to men equally so these could be denied**; these are not "privileges" that men are denied by feminism, but basic human rights and dignity. Therefore the "unification" idea is ridiculous - will the abuser join forces with the abused to assist him in facing the implications of the abuser's actions? To brush off feminism's responsibility for men's issues in a modern society, and to preserve the "feminism is for men too!" manipulative recruitment of men to help in revoking their own human rights, feminism blamed men for what it did to them - "you suffer because of yourself - because of your own patriarchy". So "the patriarchy" made 75% of psychologists women who attempt to engineer instead of providing therapy; provided 3 times less research budgets to men's diseases so that the lifespan gap of men would grow every decade; taught teachers to give boys lower grades for same performances; selected the less suitable female candidate to discriminate against the better candidate because of his sex to fill quotas; and created a legal system that enabled parental alienation; all of those are "things men have only themselves to blame for" - "the patriarchy". **Blaming the other for own actions is a typical behavioral pattern of an abuser, and this is what formed between feminism and men - an abusive relationship.**

Instead of the absurdity (and even abuse) of "unification", **men need to turn their efforts from feminists, to women in general,** and to offer to women a new paradigm of equality - one which is formed by both sexes and is for both sexes (I call this lovism, you can think of another name), and to let women choose between feminists, and men. Between separatist feminism, and equality as mutuality, in the form of one lovism. **Once men and women join forces in a new movement that belongs equally to both, that movement could start attending to the unique issues of each of the two sexes**, and so what causes sexist morals against men, which is the cause of some radical problems (of both sexes) and of society's attempt to ignore them, will stop.

Yes, this means that men need to acknowledge that no "men's feminism" will ever reach the status of a female feminism in a human society - that men don't have this option, whether as a basis for unification with feminism or as a concept of separatism that imitates feminism's separatism. The only option men have, other than going their own way as MGTOW, is offering to women, not to ideological feminists, a mutual perspective - a perspective of mutuality. This can indeed be offered from the position of MGTOW - so women will be aware of the consequence of endorsing an entire anti-male society - but that offer should be the pathway taken, and not men's feminism acting alone and certainly not a delusion that those who created men's discrimination are the partners for a unified action with men - **they are the ones who send men to "create their own movement" and five minutes later get it banned**, for insinuating the blasphemy that maybe not all women are perfect god-like entities when discussing how men may get hurt too by women in their relations - which is framed as "misogyny".

Women will eventually choose unified lovism over separatist feminism, because deep down women are sacrificing something of their own humanity when choosing separatist and abusive feminism over mutuality with men, something that they don't want to sacrifice and in fact that almost no human, men included, can. But for this to happen, men must offer it.
 
You have no dignity if copy a long ass paragraph from reddit and pass it as your own
 
The patriarchy is bad for men - Its bad for tranny men
Feminism helps men - It helps chad
 
Tl;dr. Men and women are enemies. Women need to be enslaved. The End.
 

Similar threads

Seahorsecel
Replies
11
Views
454
ElTruecel
ElTruecel
Top Red Garnacho
Replies
20
Views
305
rope infinity ♾️
rope infinity ♾️
L
Replies
14
Views
315
brazi
brazi

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top