I
f you’ve spent any time on the internet eventually you’ll run across a perfectly horrible subsection of the online community known as Men’s Rights Activists. These brave warrior souls have taken up the mighty struggle of the oppressed dominant majority and are serving as the tip of the spear against the root cause of all evil in society, namely feminism. MRA ‘activists’ spend their time trolling and threatening women online and off, causing a stir when they can for their 15 minutes of infamy, and generally just whinging about how unfair life as a privileged middle class white dude actually is. The misogyny laced whinging gets really old, really fast as one quickly realize how crass and superficial the MRA movement is as their ideology is simply the polar opposite of what feminism advocates on pretty much every issue.
Being the stupid, whingy-creeptastic counterpoint to feminism isn’t exactly the pinnacle of awesome and given some time and self-awareness most MRA’s should come to realize that. But more importantly it is what the MRA’s don’t do, they don’t organize, they don’t create social structures to help men, they don’t have an ideology that is coherent past a furious fap-fest longing for the 1950’s or earlier when men could be men and women could serve them, or some shit like that.
The current MRA lobby is currently punching far above their weight, given that they are a bitter house divided, and only gain notoriety for doing really asinine stunts which usually involve behaving like sexist bags of douche toward women. Rally on Brave Manosphere Warriors! Continue on your manly pursuit of pissing up that rope and yelling forcefully into the wind. No one with a even the smallest wit of sense cares and rightfully dismisses MRA tomfoolery as soon as it rears its ugly little head.
Now take a look internet Atheism. How different is it from what our courageous manospherians are doing? Oh certainly we’re on the thin edge of the wedge in the online battle against the religious. Take a step back though and look at what you’re accomplishing and keep your dry rope handy (dry rope wicks moisture better).
Without the social organization and structures in place i.e. the stuff that actually changes society, how different are we from the the ill-lauded MRA camp. Nothing changes because you (again) adroitly illustrate how christian fop #2342346 believes in magic and how irrational that stance is in the first place. Did you want a cookie for proving, mostly to yourself, that you are on the side of right and they are on the side of wrong. Piss meet rope.
Brave Atheist warrior what are you accomplishing by smugly publishing article #23098340 on how goofy religious belief is? Most rational people get it, we really do so then past preaching to the choir what is the point? Do we honestly think the deluded are going to one day browse to our carefully laid out arguments and proofs against their mumbo-jumbo and go, “holy-fuck batman! I’ve been wrong all this time, let the good times deconversion begin!”
*party officially started, commence roof raising*.
Said no serious religious person ever.
They have history on their side, they have social structures on their side and they have fear on their side. Do you honestly believe that shouting( cogently mind you) into the wind is going to have a measurable effect on the current state of affairs. Full marks if you do, but my optimism tank is out of fucks to give about the perceived importance of shouting into the wind, even if it is for a good cause.
Did you want to change society for the better? Start organizing in meatspace, start putting together the organizations that have the social power to change societies path – our opponents already have the organizations, the traditions, and the fear working for them. We need to do better than mere online activism because it can only go so far when pitted against the organized opposition of the religious faith/lifestyle.
bleatmop
Mystro
The Arbourist
Dead Wild Roses 
8 comments
March 30, 2014 at 12:49 pm
bleatmop
I would agree that we atheists have to do better if we want to start having real political power. The religious have been declaring all out war on secularized society in the USA since the Moral Majority started to become a thing and that batshit crazy has been trickling up here ever since, to the point that it is becoming a tidal wave. Despite the fact that our societies are becoming more secular and non-religious than ever, it is the religious ones that are organizing in the meat space and getting more power than ever. Is there any other explanation of how the regressivtards still manage to put pressure on governments for the abortion debate, an issue that is so firmly in our camp that our ultra-conservative PM refuses to address it directly, but instead attacks it by proxy?
The issue with organizing atheists is that we often have little in common outside thinking that belief in gods is an asinine endeavor. We come in all stripes, liberal, conservative, communists and fascists. Feminists and MRAs are atheists. I remember it being such an issue that even putting Atheism + on this webpage caused outrage from people who thought atheism should stay pure and ineffective at anything, the realm of college professors and the weird guy down the street that your parents told you to stay away from.
So what is the answer? Do we start an organization locally? If so, what are its goals and purposes? Does it take the role of political activism? The role of Atheist Church that you see rising in the USA? What is would be the rallying call? The purpose?
I’m in btw. I’d be willing to help and do something. As important as the fight in the cyber space is, it still needs a firm bedrock of meatspace activism underneath it for it to get influence and enact real change.
LikeLike
March 30, 2014 at 3:59 pm
toomanyspiders
Oh man, could I tell you a few stories about the manosphere! While I appreciate their efforts to examine gender outside the hackneyed traditions we’ve grown accustomed to, let’s just say they go a bit too far. More than a bit.
One thing I don’t understand and keep seeking an explanation for: the manosphere hates single moms, but they encourage their brothers in arms to have as much meaningless sex as possible (enter the PUA). I don’t get it?
LikeLike
March 31, 2014 at 8:12 am
VR Kaine
“Did you want to change society for the better? Start organizing in meatspace, start putting together the organizations that have the social power to change societies path – our opponents already have the organizations, the traditions, and the fear working for them. We need to do better than mere online activism because it can only go so far when pitted against the organized opposition…”
I had meant this comment to originally be in response to Mystro’s comment of “in your imaginary world where capitalist ideals reign supreme”, but I’ll put it here instead as I think it’s just as appropriate.
It’s not some “imaginary world” – it’s the one that exists. Capitalist ideals reign surpreme, corporate ideals and structures reign supreme, and religous ideals reign supreme. And why? It’s largely because they are built around leaders and leadership, not losers and losership. That’s why they’re all at the top and most liberals are on the bottom as far as grass-roots influence and change is concerned. You hate them, so you hate their best practices, too, which aren’t actually “theirs” – they’ve just adopted them as theirs and used them to their advantage while your side has tried to reinvent the wheel with “twinkly fingers”, “mic checks”, and all that other bullshit.
You all hate centralized power, so nothing ever gets truly organized. You all hate war, so you don’t even want to know how to fight. In total, you all back losers and you all celebrate victimhood and that’s why you don’t, and will never win. It’s like there’s this subconcious thing where your side rejects winning because if you did win, then what? You’d have to be in power (which you hate), someone would have to be in charge (which you hate), and nobody could whine anymore about how hard done by they are. That totally goes against the far left, “fair share liberal” identity at its very core! That’s just my opinion, but even if untrue I still think that if your side truly did want to win they’d be doing things a whole lot differently at the grass roots level.
The best example of all this is Occupy, the only movement of yours that had any real “meat” to it in the past what – 10, 20, 30 years? Your targets were all wrong, your strategies were all wrong, and naturally the outcome was all wrong even though the cause was somewhat just and noble (it should have been about Government AND the 1% but that’s another discussion). Afraid of leadership, afraid of power, and taking a “feel our pain!” and look at poor us!” strategy? All everyone else had to do was sit back and let the whole thing collapse on itself.
On the other hand take a look at the Democrats post-Clinton. They’ve done a brilliant job with leadership, strategy, and execution using the same strategies and tactics you can find in Catholicism, Capitalism, and Corporatism put to use for themselves. On every level they have absolutely kicked ass. Sure, they’re struggling a bit right now because (in my opinion) they’re starting to support too much “losership” right now, but either way, their strategy and tactics have been brilliant all-around.
This isn’t an attack on your side – it’s some tough love, if you will. I’m a believer in healthy competition and if you look at my posts when Occupy first came out I said that I looked forward to a strong left contender. I also was happy to see the NDP gain power in Canada, even though I disagree a lot with them politically. At the top the Democrats have been more than a strong contender (they’ve been winners) but at the bottom? Your causes have all sucked shit power-wise for reasons that any strategist or leader can easily see.
If Feminism, Atheism, and whatever other “isms” you all support here had some leadership, structure, and battle-wits to them I’d be in full support. On that note, if you’re actually taking this seriously and moving ahead with some sort of organization, I’d be happy to recommend some literature and so forth that might help along the way?
Not holding my breath on that one, but the offer to help is genuine and sincere. As much as we may disagree on many issues, I do believe your hearst are all in the right place and that your viewpoints have been largely under-served in the general public. Your side needs to be a much more formidable foe on the battlefield. To that end, I’m happy to help where I can.
LikeLike
March 31, 2014 at 8:21 am
VR Kaine
@toomanyspiders:
One thing I don’t understand and keep seeking an explanation for: the manosphere hates single moms, but they encourage their brothers in arms to have as much meaningless sex as possible (enter the PUA). I don’t get it?”
PUAs are simply an overcompensation of massive insecurity and over-deflated egos but that aside, advocating “as much meaningless sex as possible” is not advocating “have as many illegitimate kids as possible” as in the case of single motherhood.
Plus, with their absolute avoidance of any sort of responsibility whatsoever, I’m sure those clowns are advocating birth control at every opportunity.
LikeLike
March 31, 2014 at 9:16 am
The Arbourist
@Vern
*grins* – I like being the target of vitriol originally target for others. I also hate broadly inaccurate generalizations of my positions and having then having to explain the strawmanning going on, and then articulate my actual positions, that more often than not, are ignored and mischaracterized *again* thus I need to clarify and…
Firstly, since I am not a political candidate I would not ever be in ‘power’. Secondly, being in charge and using that power to oppress, versus being in power and being responsible are two very different things and yes I do hold power in the second sense and in that second position,as a teacher, I’m damn good at it. Thirdly, I don’t recall ever whining about hard done-by I am, rather, I am well aware of my privilege and how lucky I am to have the opportunities that I do – it’s just that I attribute much of my success to shared the social conditions around me as opposed to the flawed notion of having done it on my own and ‘bootstrapping’ myself to success, which is from any reasonable angle, a large crock of shit.
Can we dispense with the loopy american notions of the political spectrum, the descriptions are as useful as wearing mittens for defusing bombs. Because I’ve never identified as a fair share liberal, but rather as you know, a socialist with preference for social democracy and democratic institutions. So what the hell? This isn’t new news to you. Why do I get the feeling that this is a cookie cutter rant you pull out when you feel that you’re dealing with “those damn lefties” again; because I’m pretty sure we’ve been down this road several times already.
Raising political consciousness and political literacy does not happen overnight, it is a long process filled with advances and retrograde periods. Occupy needed to happen to set the ground work for the next event, as to the nature of that event and when it will happen, your guess is as good as mine.
I’m pretty sure that there is more than your managerial analysis that is holding you back when it comes to the ‘isms’ discussed. :>
I need to survey what is around here first as starting from scratch when it isn’t necessary is stupid. I’m always interested in more reading, so link away. :)
LikeLike
March 31, 2014 at 9:55 am
The Arbourist
@TMS
It is the paradoxical nature of the MRA crowd, women need to be in control and pulling all the strings making their life miserable; aaaand at the very same time be the vacuous, sexy prong-toys for their amusement.
When the only strategy in your playbook is blaming women for *every* problem – these sorts of contradictions crop up.
LikeLike
March 31, 2014 at 10:55 am
VR Kaine
Hi Arb,
Did a quick read-through of your reply and seeing that my comments were coming across as a personal attack? My comments are a harsh criticism of how “your side” (I know that’s a generalization) has handled things at the grass-roots level. It’s a crticism of association same way that someone can criticize me as a “corporatist” or “Capitalist”, but it’s not a criticism of you personally and I hoped that would convey and for that reason I was trying in my haste to make sure I was saying “your side” and not “you”. For instance, I know you don’t personally “hate” capitalism and I’ve seen where you support it. Anyways, if I put a few “you’s” instead of “your side”‘s in there accidentally, I apologize.
“Raising political consciousness and political literacy does not happen overnight, it is a long process filled with advances and retrograde periods.”
Perhaps not overnight, but it can take days and weeks not years and decades. The difference? Leadership, strategy, organization, tactics – all of which is clearly missing from these causes.
“Occupy needed to happen to set the ground work for the next event”.
I completely disagree. Occupy ignored and in fact deliberately shunned almost every rule of leadership, strategy, and battle that exists out there and has been proven for centuries. There efforts were only “ground work” because that’s what they were reduced to, and the nicest things anyone could say about them. Occupy could have been THE event that brought about a new kind of accountabillity in government and corporate policy, and changed the discourse of a nation permanently.
This is what I mean – your side uses words like “necessary” and “groundwork” to make excuses for things that were nothing but sloppy shitshows, wanting to give out fat kid trophies and pleasantries all around instead of giving one ounce of criticism anywhere where it could be useful. Where will you find the harshest critics on the right? Actually on the right! The harshest critics of business are in fact in business because these are the people that leaders in business will look up to and get inspired from. Where’s any real criticism of the left, or even here regarding things like Occupy? Doesn’t exist as far as I’ve seen it, and one of the reasons why it’s so easy to predict that these initiatives will fail. Look at Bill Maher – when he’s ripping on Republicans, everyone’s reposting his comments all over the place. When he’s criticizing Democrats you for the most part get crickets. Half the reason the Tea Party came about was because Obama got elected. The other half was because the Republicans, in the Tea Party’s mind, became too soft. That’s what happens when you have no fear and can openly criticize your own.
“…as to the nature of that event and when it will happen, your guess is as good as mine.”
Ahh, right. “The Event”. Might as well be the second coming of Christ, but either way, why do we have to guess? Answer is because they don’t have any sort of leadership whatsoever, that’s why. They have no target, no structure, no strategy, no tactics and they’re doing nothing to manage the perceptions of them in the mainstream.
The Tea Party organized for the mid-term elections, and they did so very quickly finding and aligning around candidates that would campaign on their cause. There were a number of candidates that Occupy supporters could have got behind, but nope – they couldn’t even get THAT act together. The Tea Party did what they did in months, yet the left keeps giving excuses and “yeah, but it was a good start” platitudes which are usually nothing more than that even years later.
“I need to survey what is around here first…”
Um, OK, if you want to keep getting the same results your side has been getting then I’d say sure, but it’s a sure sign of future defeat. The Republicans keep sticking to their “own” thought leaders, too, their own pool of knowledge, the people they get all warm fuzzies from, and look where it’s getting them – nowhere.
Instead, I’d suggest becoming an expert on corporate strategy, and military strategy. Study how corporate cultures were turned around and why battles were won. Instead of reading about the effects of marketing on society, for instance, study how to become a marketer and increase a marketing campaign’s effectiveness. Learn how to sell. Get down to a tactical level, not just a strategic one.
I’d also suggest mismatching yourself. If a person hates war, then they should read the bios of battlefield leaders and build a case in their mind that argues FOR those leaders, not against them, no matter how uncomfortable. If one can’t understand your adversary in that way, then they’ll never win except maybe by brute force, which is what I think feminism has (still unsuccessfully) resorted to.
Instead, study what they study, know what they know, but know it better than they do and learn to move faster with greater impact and more efficiency than they do. That’s how we compete and win in business, and I think, how your side can compete and win here.
As an example of this, do you remember the movie “The Patriot” with Mel Gibson? After weeks and weeks of carnage and bloodshed, the rebels happen to capture a British General’s diary. Mel Gibson’s character reads it, and instead of saying, “Look how these idiots think” he comes back and says, “I just read the mind of a very brilliant man” (or words to that effect). In a tense prisoner exchange scene, Gibson’s character walks right into the General’s headquarters, gets his prisoners by beating him at his own game, and then casually walks right on out without a single shot being fired or life being lost. Brilliant scene with a great lesson – Sun Tzu: “to know your enemy is to become your enemy.” Had Gibson disrespected or disregarded the General, or had simply went with what he knew and what always worked, he never would have succeeded as he did. Scene is below.
As for links or books, I’d say Sun Tzu as a start but instead, if still interested, shoot me an email – I’ve got better starting points that may be a fun and constructive dialogue between you that we both might find useful. :)
LikeLike
March 31, 2014 at 11:09 am
VR Kaine
*you and I
LikeLike