So You Want to Be a Male Feminist? Maybe Don’t

You cannot by def'n be male and feminist. This includes non-heterosexual men and non-Caucasians, too. Feminism posits that the source of the oppression of females is "patriarchy", which is a construct of men. It may well be that among men, heterosexual Caucasians as a class are its primary operators and receivers of its benefits (or so feminists believe), esp. in the western world, but collectively, men are the problem anywhere you go, since patriarchy knows no geographic boundaries.

Thus, maleness of person itself is the tangible, measurable manifestation of the presence of patriarchy. When males are absent, any problems women have w/ ea. other are traceable to patriarchal thinking and relating styles that women wouldn't have had they not had their minds colonized/raped by the patriarchy from a young age; thus men are still to blame.

That's their idea of how things work.

So if you're a man who thinks he's a feminist, guess again. Feminism says males, by feminism's def'n of its arch-enemy, patriarchy, cannot be an ally to feminism or member of its class of person, since males are the embodiment of patriarchy regardless of what indiv. males may believe.

Could Nazis ever accept Jews as loyal members of the Nazi party, assuming we're talking of the same kinds of Nazis in Germany during Hitler's rule? (One of Hitler's ancestors was Jewish, BTW, but since Hitler defined Nazism, as he was "the Fuhrer", he also had the power to grant exceptions -- which for himself, he did.) Could Jews ever accept loyal Nazis as members of the Jewish religion, even if somehow a Nazi sincerely wanted to be a Jew and somehow managed not to be by def'n unacceptable to fellow Nazis?

Those who think this analogy is overblown, think again. The same principles apply in both cases. Nazis seeking to convert to Judaism are nuts. Jews seeking to become Nazis are nuts. Men seeking acceptance as and among feminists are nuts. That's abt the size of it.

Diff. betw. the MR and feminism is in the MR, it's obvious to its members (exc. of course to a few screwballs, but every movement has them), that the inequities and other probs. men have that originate from attitudes, prejudices, expectations, etc. arising from misandry and/or nymphotropism are not inherent to people's genders but are here due to outdated/unnecessary gender-based distinctions and biological imperatives that can be consciously overcome when recognized. Feminism insists that maleness itself is an inherent, if not the inherent, source of women's problems and allowing men into the club of feminism is as dumb as bringing a giant, wheeled wooden horse into your fort and thinking it's a gift from the gods w/out even bothering to look inside it -- while currently at war w/ a neighboring state.

All in all, the MR is far more inclusive and benign than is feminism. But to men who still want to ID themselves as feminists, all I can say is, good luck, guys. We'll keep a seat open here for ya though when you finally realize what's happening to you.

Thanks for writing this. It shows exactly why feminism is for the truly illogical, and emotionally driven. Women, no matter what the situation or circumstances, are always oppressed. Men are always the oppressors. No matter what we do, we're scum. This really bares the hatred for men inherent in the ideology. I'm surprised there are any male feminists at all with this premise.

Forget feminism, be a gender egalitarian. It's not only women who suffer from sexism. Try being conscripted in war, forced out of your family at the whim of a vicious ex-wife while still having to foot all the bills, being the gender who receives about half the government funding for health research as the other gender (while paying ~75% of the taxes no less), or being genitally mutilated at birth, while no one tries to stop it nor cares after the fact. Compare this to feminist issues: catcalls, women not being as interested in the STEM field (but pretending they're being driven out by evil male oppressors), Harry Potter being male and not female, and it really puts things in perspective. It's HUMAN rights, not WOMEN's rights.

I'm not a feminist. I never have been, I don't agree with their view of the world, and I do believe their attitudes and agendas are harmful to society. I'm not sure if I am an MRA. While I believe that boys and men need more advocacy in today's political climate, I don't agree with all of their views of the world which makes me a little cautious about fully identifying myself as one.

Some people in both the feminist and MRA camps refer to themselves as "equalitarians" While I like that this recognizes both genders as having equal values, I don't like that it insinuates that they are equal in every way or that they are the same. I see men and women as very different and unequal in many areas. Their biology is different, therefore their motivations, behaviors and risks are different, and therefor society should have different expectations from them. So I completely understand and accept social sexist double standards (like the "lock and key" analogy). I also like and accept traditional roles as they are the most efficient roles as they are complimentary to each gender's strengths. I reject any notion that traditional roles are based on "social construct" although I am fine with people who choose to live any way they want as long as they don't hurt others or society.

My belief is that men and women are equal parts of one whole. Imagine the yin-yang symbol. They are equal as a whole, but unequal in many areas. Where men tend to have strengths, women tend to be weak and vice-versa. When men and women unite and form families, they are more valuable to society. If you believe that men and women represent a more yin-yang visual symbol, then it would explain the basis of all romantic relationships which is that men trade their production value for a woman's sex and reproduction potential. Basically men are valued for their work and women are valued for reproduction; and I see nothing wrong with that because it is what nature intended and how our species survives. It is simply how life works whether you like it or not.

So basically I acknowledge biological differences more than feminists, MRA's and equalitarians. I don't believe men and women have the same capabilities, so I reject pure "equality". I am not hoping or encouraging a 50/50 rep of both genders in all occupations. However, I do believe in giving each gender equal respect and value in regards to their differences.