Here’s my first confession: I enjoy being angry. I am peaceable interpersonally, but I definitely enjoy being angry, particularly about politics. This has always worried me, but, since it doesn’t hurt anyone, I often indulge, particularly by hate-reading. I’ve known this was not a good habit, and it’s always been in the back of my mind as something that, someday, I need to eliminate. But to my pleasant surprise, when I started to analyze it, I realized that I’ve actually gained a lot from getting angry as entertainment.

Hate-reading is the well-recognized phenomenon of deliberately reading things which exasperate you. For example, if you’re a conservative, you might read The Daily Kos or, if you’re a liberal, you might stop by Fox News. This isn’t the intellectually-honest, exploring-other-ideas reading, but rather reading simply to become frustrated. By no means is hate-reading limited to the merely political: Rich Kids of Instagram collects examples of conspicuous consumption by teenagers, generally accompanied by tone-deaf statements of entitlement. It makes for perfect hate-reading, because who doesn’t like to mock the young, rich, and clueless?

In all cases, you are deliberately exposing yourself to exasperation and anger as a form of entertainment. There are other ingredients in this intoxicating cocktail: morbid fascination, a sharpened sense of superiority and, of course, some self-congratulation. I told you I would be honest; hate-reading is not part of the best and highest that humans have to offer. Above all, though, it’s simple curiosity. Hate-reading may be one of the best ways to really get out of yourself and expose yourself to truly different ideas and attitudes.

For me, my hate-reading material of choice was Men’s Rights Activist material. MRAs are activists who are (at least in name) dedicated to fighting for rights for men, but who are best known for hating feminists and women in general. They can be found at A Voice for Men, the mensrights subreddit, and The Red Pill subreddit. It should be noted that these venues are the home of the men’s rights movement, not a fringe element.

These websites are cesspools of anger, entitlement, and poor reasoning.

MRAs claim to be standing up for men’s rights in a world that is prejudiced against all men; some of their particular issues include male rape, prison rape (which they say predominantly affects men), male suicide and mental illness, a supposed bias in child custody courts, domestic violence against men and, of course, that well-known epidemic of false rape allegations.

Many of these are things that feminists (both male and female) have been working on for years. For example, it was feminists who pressured the FBI to change its definition of rape to allow for male victims–in fact, the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 was spearheaded by a feminist. Similar stories can be told for male suicide, male mental illness and the harm that traditional gender roles do to men.

Not all issues promoted by MRAs are valid; the “false rape accusation epidemic” so favored by MRAs is not at all accurate.

As one example of the culture of the men’s rights movements, consider how often leaders of the movement—including the A Voice for Men PR director, Judgy Bitch—use gender-based slurs to deride people they disagree with. Instead of moving away from rigid gender roles, which would benefit both men and women, the men’s rights movement delights in calling women they disagree with “whores” and men they disagree with “mangina.”

Hint: if you’re using a comparison to a woman as an insult, you’re not doing much to defeat traditional gender roles. And traditional gender roles, including the idea of a man as the unemotional financial provider, could be contributing to the massive numbers of unemployed men suffering from depression and other mental illnesses.

The truth is that the few real issues are used as a cover to complain about women. As J.F. Sargent pointed out in his excellent post, it’s no mistake that the “fundamental beliefs” of the Red Pill subreddit are all about how women are manipulative, irrational, and immoral. This is not a movement about helping men.

However, this article is not about the various problems with the men’s rights movement. More information about the failings and contradictions of the men’s rights movement can be found here, here, here and here. I think I’ve said enough for you to see what qualifies MRA blogs for hate-reading, at least for me.

And as I mentioned above, there are certainly ugly motivations for hate-reading, but I don’t imagine these are unique to me. Nobody is perfect, and maybe there’s a way to put our vices to work, to trick them into helping us become better people.  Honestly, hate-reading is how I became a feminist. I started reading Jezebel out of sick fascination with the self-righteousness and snarky liberalism, but particularly in the comments, I saw a lot of valid points that led me to become a feminist. I still read Jezebel, and I still roll my eyes at some of it, but I also ultimately changed my worldview based on it.

So how did hate-reading change me?

I View Men More Sympathetically

The first truth is that, as much as I hate to admit it, the men’s rights movement did lead me to view men with more sympathy. It’s not that I was anti-male before, but as someone without brothers or any long-term romantic relationships, I’d never been particularly acquainted with the unique problems that men face.

To that extent, the men’s rights movement does give a voice–granted, a hate-filled, invective-spewing, historically ignorant voice–to some of men’s problems. Under all the anger and the rage—and I would never want to be in a room alone with many of these people—I did see their hurt and disappointment. Online, it is possible to take a step back and see the pain.

I am more aware of men’s issues, such as prison rape, male suicide, etc., than I was previously. The men’s rights movement doesn’t actually do anything about those issues; in fact, feminists are better at getting their issues addressed than they are. But this is where I personally became aware of those issues.

I Treat Men Differently (Hopefully Better)

The second truth is that hate-reading MRA blogs did change my behavior. While I’ve always paid for my own dates because I don’t see why men should be responsible for that, I hadn’t worked out all the other ways in which traditional gender roles for men get reinforced in casual behavior.

For example, I used to love a good “compensating for something?” joke when I saw a man driving a huge pick-up truck, or telling men to “man up” when I thought they were being whiny. But if women shouldn’t be judged for their bodies, then neither should men. Small-penis jokes are just another form of body-shaming, and I don’t do that anymore. These are only a few of the small changes that have accumulated; in most cases, I already agreed with the precepts but hadn’t worked out all the conclusions. Unfortunately, rather than finding a way out of these stifling roles, in many ways they are reinforced in the MRM.

I Understand that There Is a Greater Sense of Us-Vs.Them

The third truth is the most difficult: Even as my understanding of men’s pain has grown, I feel a greater sensation of “feminists vs. sexists.” I know, logically, that this dichotomy is excessively simple, yet the effect of reading so many profoundly sexist things on MRA blogs and of seeing misogyny carried so far, is that I am entirely less tolerant of any of its milder manifestations.

Previously, I believed that there could be such a thing as a minor manifestation of misogyny; now, seeing how MRAs have elevated and extended misogyny into an all-encompassing worldview, I am more likely to regard anyone who says something sexist as “one of them.” In short, I feel a greater sense of identity with fellow feminists and less inclination to patiently educate those who aren’t. This is the side effect of reading so many attacks aimed at feminists; I feel a greater need to regroup, to have solidarity, to mark any non-feminists as the enemy. I am not claiming that this is good, only that I have noticed it in myself.

This contradiction may be unique to the men’s rights movement; after all, it’s always going to be difficult to extend the hand of friendship to people who compare you to dogs who must be trained (only one recurring example of the dehumanizing language often applied to women by MRAs). There is tension between my newly-expanded empathy and my emotional reaction to being attacked, even if in the abstract. However, since I am aware of this “us-vs.-them” thinking, I can work to correct it.

I Can Better Fight My Own Biases

This is the final and most important effect of hate-reading: with a little curating, it can lead to profound transformations in a person’s biases. The very silence of hate-reading is what allows actual transformations to happen. Trolling or arguing, even online, is far too emotional to allow for reflection. But as I read, I simultaneously watch myself and try to understand my own reactions and my own biases. There is both time and space to interrogate myself, and perhaps even educate myself.

There are, however, no cure-alls, and some things have to be kept in mind. The most important thing is context. Earlier, I mentioned that the context can help in understanding MRAs; if I heard a man in real life saying the sort of things these men say on the Internet, I would quite literally fear for my safety and never be in the same room with him.

In that case, the context of a non-physical location makes it possible for me to hear them. Since I am not physically threatened by their anger, I can listen rather than fear for myself. But the lack of context also means I don’t know who they “really” are, or how large this movement actually is.

Another risk of hate-reading is that it might make the ideological division worse. I say this because hate-reading is closely related to shaming. As soon as I start sharing my hate-reading, it has become a social activity aimed at policing morality: shaming. But shaming, in my opinion, is the opposite of education. Instead of enlightening, shaming forces people ever further into an us-vs.-them ideology in which ambiguity is not tolerated and neither is betrayal. All these attitudes increase the social cost of change and make it less likely.

I Understand Why Hate Reading is Important

I don’t think I’ll ever stop hate-reading. I enjoy it too much. But despite the risks, I do think there’s a way to do it productively. Sometimes empathy is difficult, and it’s okay to rely on curiosity and a morbid sense of self-righteousness in the mean time. With that in mind, I’ve thought of a few rules for making hate-reading as productive as possible:

  • Go deep. Don’t just choose one blog. Read a variety of “enemy” blogs. This exposes you to multiple voices and ways of reasoning.
  • Read the comments. Sometimes, the commenters can provide the individual voice or necessary fact that makes the argument so much better and more personal.
  • Take breaks. My experience with hate-reading is that the anger fades but the newly gained empathy remains.

Maybe, if we pay attention, we can actually use hate-reading to help us become more empathetic, instead of more angry. I believe the ultimate goal is to see others as human beings, to value them for their humanity; this means taking difficult journeys outside oneself, and hate-reading might be a short-cut.

  • Arvid Persen

    Using TRP as a representation of MRA is about as stupid as me using http://witchwind.wordpress.com/2013/12/15/piv-is-always-rape-ok/ as a representation for feminism.

    And regarding fakerapes, we can’t know. No one can know, nor can anyone know if any rapestatistics are correct except “Reported rapes”. If you’re an extreme pessimist MRA you could assume every reported rape that doesn’t end in court is a false accusation. If you are a pessimist feminist you could assume every accusation is valid and if a woman says its rape it is rape.

    But of course the MRA movement has issues, and so? It’s not like the feminism movement isn’t a vile cesspool of crazy people spouting idiocy like “Looking at me sexually is visual rape”, “Looking at jlaw leaked pictures is literally rape”, “women make 70% of what men do in the same jobs”, “Dont talk to me unless I consent you too”, “Comics/Games should not be sexist towards women because Im a women and I wont buy something I dont like….” And it goes on. But there are legitimate causes for feminism (women) like abortion and contraception rights in USA or generally treatment of women in middle east.

    The reason MRA movements can’t actually get much done is because being affiliated with one in public is like angering half the planet. We are now in a period of third wave feminism which is filled with extremist bullshit and it’s politically correct to support feminism. Any voice against it is asking to get hung out to dry.

    Regarding your third point. Misogyny has no part in MRA. TRP is not MRA, it’s a radical movement that tries to take their position and flip it on the head from sex seeker, to sex controller. They are like the same crazy women that says “PIV is always rape”. People also seem to think “saying bad things about women” means you are misogynistic, you are not. Not only if it’s hyperbole, but in general. You can say a bad thing about women without thinking women are beneath you or inferior, but that’s a useless dictionary debate.

    What most women don’t understand is simply, it’s not “men vs women”, it’s “man vs world”. The average man isn’t attractive or get hit on or get any form of sexual validation outside of if he managed to get a partner. Men are completely ignored by all men they don’t know, AND all women. Of course not all men because of course there are many in relationships etc. But that normal, every day mediocre man you see on the street, no one is talking to him without actually having to, maybe his friends if he has any and they have plans or something. What these men seek is simply validation and to feel they exist and every news article, post or anything that talks down on men or borders on misandry, seems to be internalized by them even more. They are lone, extremely alone.

    Go out on the street, talk to the 100 most average or below average men you can find in their 20-30s, people that dont stand out positively, that looks ok, ask them what they did the last week or month outside of work and colleagues. Or see how much sex they had past year. Im not going to get into the whole male sexuality discussion as that would take too much time but it’s a valid factor involved in their sense of worthlessness. This is why I think so many men come out of the woodworks when catcalling is mentioned, women are complaining about getting the one thing these men want, someone to remind them they exist and have a sexuality.

    Nonetheless, interesting blogpost =)

    • Caroline K. Gorman

      Thank you! That’s a lot to respond to. I know I’m going to miss some stuff.

      I understand that male worthiness is often predicated on sexual validation. To say the least, that’s tragic and wrong. But it has nothing to do with feminism, and in fact I think feminism encourages alternative values that don’t reinforce male loneliness. In short, I don’t deny that male loneliness is a phenomena that exists; and of course sad and angry men (and women) are more likely to take things personally. But that is not caused by feminism.

      Finally, I’d also point out that there is also a sense of loneliness than comes in being talked to only for your looks. Yes, if I stand in public someone will talk to me, or leer at me, or assume I need some help because as a young woman I must be incompetent. These interactions, 9 times out of 10, are not pleasant. It’s like being spoken to by a salesman or an televangelist. It’s not genuine human connection. Even when pleasant, they do nothing to assuage the deep existential loneliness that all humans feel at times. If a person is looking to these sort of interactions for validation, he or she is looking in the wrong place.

      It’s “man vs world” because of outdated gender roles about the lone wolf man who has no emotions and handles everything with a glass of whiskey. Against, something feminism helps with.

      As for the supposedly rabid feminists, you may be interested to know that “PIV is rape” (or “heterosexual intercourse is rape”) quote supposedly attributed to feminists is kind of hard to track down: http://wehuntedthemammoth.com/2011/02/15/factchecking-a-list-of-hateful-quotes-from-feminists/

      • Seth MacLeod

        It was an interesting article that you linked to, but I’m not so sure that it is accurate. Futrelle says that the quote:
        “Heterosexual intercourse is the pure, formalized expression of contempt for women’s bodies” is quite literally fictional. However, it is *nearly identical* to something that Dworkin wrote in her book Intercourse:

        Intercourse is the pure, sterile, formal expression of men’s contempt for women; but that contempt can turn gothic and express itself in many sexual and sadistic practices that eschew intercourse per se.

        http://faculty.cbu.ca/sstewart/sexlove/dworkin.htm

        And from other passages in that chapter as well as other things on Wikipedia, it appears that Dworkin could not be classified as sex-positive at all, and I see that as a problem, though you might not. BUT it is relevant to this quote, because Dworkin sees certain acts as necessarily subjugating women, regardless of consent. Porn, prostitution, BDSM, or whatever else, all seem to be subjugation to her.

        As I was reading that chapter, there were some things that I could agree with, but then she would go ahead and say things that end up reinforcing the idea that she has deeply problematic views regarding sex and consent. Take this defense she wrote about her views:

        [I]f one’s sexual experience has always and without exception
        been based on dominance–not only overt acts but also metaphysical and
        ontological assumptions–how can one read this book? The end of male dominance would mean–in the understanding of such a man–the end of sex. If one has eroticized a differential in power that allows for force as a natural and inevitable part of intercourse, how could one understand that this book does not say that all men are rapists or that all intercourse is rape? Equality in the realm of sex is an antisexual idea if sex requires domination in order to register as sensation. As sad as I am to say it, the limits of the old Adam–and the material power he still has, especially in publishing and media–have set limits on the public discourse (by both men and women) about this book [pages ix-x].

        http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/dworkin/LieDetect.html

        It may start reasonable, in that she seems to be talking about only a certain type of man, but then she falls back to the kink-shaming. And at the end of the chapter that I linked to earlier, she explicitly links rape and prostitution together.

        Last, I’ll link to these two pieces about Dworkin by Cathy Young http://reason.com/archives/2005/04/19/womans-hating and http://reason.com/blog/2005/04/17/the-dworkin-whitewash Here is an excerpt from the second link:

        Whatever her defenders may say, Dworkin was a relentless preacher of hatred toward men (“Under patriarchy, every woman’s son is her betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman” — Letters from a War Zone, 1989, p. 14). Yes, she apparently had genuine and even warm affection for some men in her own life, and spent her last 20 years with a male companion she eventually married (John Stoltenberg, a MacDworkinite feminist and practically a poet of male self-loathing). But no one would absolve a male misogynist on the grounds that he loved his mother and sister, or had a
        devoted wife who embraced his ideology.

        Whatever her defenders say, Dworkin was anti-sex. No, she may not have ever written the actual words “All sex is rape” or “All sexual intercourse is rape.” But she did extensively argue, in particular in the 1987 book, Intercourse, that (1) all heterosexual sex in our “patriarchal” society is coercive and degrading to women, and (2) sexual penetration may by its very nature doom women to inferiority and submission, and “may be immune to reform.” A chapter from the book, filled with such insights as, “Intercourse is the pure, sterile, formal expression of men’s contempt for women,” can be found here. (Again, if a male writer had written book after book arguing that women were evil creatures whose sole purpose in life is to sexually manipulate and destroy men, would we spend a lot of time quibbling over whether he actually used the phrase, “All women are whores”?) In the 1976 book, Our Blood (p. 13), Dworkin had this to say about a feminist transformation of sexuality: “For men I suspect that this transformation begins in the place they most dread — that is, in a limp penis. I think that men will have to give up their precious erections and begin to make love as women do together.” (Gee… can you say “castrating”?)

        • Caroline K. Gorman

          That’s an impressive amount of research. It appears that you know a lot more about Dworkin than I do.

          I think this just proves that, in a discussion, you should go straight to the real issue, not what seems like low-hanging fruit. Dworkin, even back then, was viewed as radical and disliked by plenty of other feminists. I don’t think her views were commonplace then or now. She’s an outlier. The MRM, however, seems to consists solely of radical and hateful views.

          • Yeah. Dworkin’s teh cray cray.

          • AuntMerryweather

            Ableist slur!!!
            Jk. Dworkin may be extreme, but I don’t think it’s crazy to point out that the vast majority of instances of hetero-, p-i-v sex don’t, in fact, occur inside a patriarchy-free vacuum.

          • Certainly, but there’s a difference between saying that and the conclusions that she draws from them. It strikes me as a little ridiculous to think that any kind of individuality or individual consent is revoked because it exists within patriarchy.

          • AuntMerryweather

            I don’t agree with her conclusions, and I don’t agree with dismissing her so casually. She contributed some real insight.

          • That’s totally fair, and you’re right. I have studied her, but I realize not everyone has.

            You should hear me talk about Kant. 😛

          • Matěj Šuster

            Another fairly well-known RadFem, Sheila Jeffreys, apparently believes that under (ill-defined) patriarchy, female orgasm within a heterosexual relationship is a counter-revolutionary and anti-feminist act. 😉 The same goes for BDSM activities and use of pornography in lesbian communities (including porn made by lesbians for lesbians). 😉

            How Orgasm Politics Has Hijacked the Women’s Movement by Sheila Jeffreys
            http://www.ontheissuesmagazine.com/1996spring/s96orgasm.php

          • Mr. E

            No, she’s no outlier. That’s just wishful thinking on your part. All you have to do is cruise any “Feminist” site as a male on any day of the week and you’ll discover far worse than those.

            I remind you that Feminism is SUPPOSEDLY about EQUALITY and ACCEPTANCE. It is IRONIC IN THE EXTREME that Feminist sites are some of the most GOD-AWFUL, ONE-SIDED, INTOLERANT and MALE-BASHING places I have ever visited in my life. And that’s just from reading the existing comments.

            There is a REASON why men are angry. We’re sick and fucking fed up with being your whipping boys.

            EDIT – Here’s an exercise for all you Feminists. Sign up for any of the major Feminist sites with a MALE NAME and try making simple statements about Feminism (positive or negative) and see how long it takes to get YOUR head bitten off. And GOD HELP YOU if you say anything that even REMOTELY SOUNDS like it’s sticking up for men.

            Go ahead, I DOUBLE-DOG DARE YOU to go on one of those sites and talk about wanting to have YOUR CHILDREN after a Divorce, or why women deserve alimony these days, or why WOMEN get second-chances after getting pregnant and men don’t, or how about why men are forced to PAY for ANOTHER MAN’S CHILD, or why Men get their names dragged through the mud if a woman cries “Rape” before he even gets CHARGED? Or any of a dozen other MALE-related issues.

            Then you’ll see incredibly quickly how “Tolerant” and “Accepting” Feminism really can be.

            Go ahead. I fucking DARE you.

          • Matthew Alexander

            “The MRM, however, seems to consists solely of radical and hateful views.”

            The ignorant conclusion of a little girl who has done nothing but seek to confirm her own bias. Grow up.

      • Arvid Persen

        Feminism is 99% womens rights, 1% “Ok we can maybe agree to help you with this”. I never said male loneliness is caused by feminism, just that feminism will not get traction with men, especially third wave feminism.

        Oh come on, feminists always use the “You’re a man you can’t understand how we women feel” so please don’t use “it’s lonely to be appreciated for our looks” as being in the ballpark of being comparable to male loneliness. There is loneliness in being talked to only for your looks? Really? You feel lonely because people talk to you…

        I don’t know if you’re trying to be obtuse, but human interactions only happen when there is a point to them. People only seek other people because they want something from them and sex is one of them and the motivation for being selected for sex is attractiveness. I’m an attractive man and I only exist to those that want something from me, friends that want my company, strangers that bump into me and need me to move out of the way, women that want sex or find me interesting.

        No matter how much people want to think we’ve evolved past a certain point or are such intellectual creatures sex will always be one of our instincts and reasons to exist. We are still animals, a species that exist and as such to procreate and continue our existence. Attractiveness and availability will always be the main qualifications for a womans sexual qualifications. And so what? Yes, you will be talked to and sought out if you’re attractive, because your looks. And? It changes nothing. It doesn’t mean you are any less intelligent, funny, smart, that you don’t have lots of great stories or memories. On the other hand, it doesn’t mean anyone has to care about those things and you choose who you wish to engage in sexual activities with. If you don’t think the person is interested in those things? Then don’t have them in your life. Or you could date someone that seems interested in all of that and leaves you at the alter because he faked that interest. You never actually know. Not to mention, how on earth would a person know those things about you before talking to you? You want truly blind dating just to appease some self victimization over being attractive? How good you look will always be the main factor over “who wants to have sex with you” and in that part women are much more sexist than men as women judge if they find someone sexually acceptable or not within seconds while men are much less judgy.

        What is a genuine human connection? It is perceived state, not something you can quantify or even be sure is real. Humans are social beings, but you never truly know what someone else wants from you or feels for you.

        “Even when pleasant, they do nothing to assuage the deep existential loneliness that all humans feel at times.”

        You can’t live of cookies either but if you’re hungry enough someones garbage can will get you through the week.

        “It’s “man vs world” because of outdated gender roles about the lone wolf man who has no emotions and handles everything with a glass of whiskey. ”

        Yea, no. Gender roles are not outdated, they’re just less rigid and people feel less like following them. And sorry, there is no such “hande emotions with a glass of whiskey” bs, that’s a sexist idea. Sure there are some cultural differences, but one cannot completely ignore and overlook biological differences like brain structure, hormonal differences and so forth. I’m a man, I’ll cry over a damn dog dying in a movie, I’ll cry over this and that but I’m not depressed and crying because men in movies and tv shows have sixpacks and are rich.

        The first thing third wave feminism needs to do to gain ANY traction with men is trying to use circular logic to blame men/patriarchy/whatever for the issues men and women feel, because it’s clearly wrong. No man feels like he can’t show emotion to other men. You know who many men feel they can’t show emotion to? Yea you guessed it, women. There are enough anecdotal instances of it that you could write books for the rest of your life. Stories of women going “Please open up”, men doing so, sharing painful memories and crying and getting dumped because “It wasnt manly” and don’t come here and say that is due to patriarchy programming women to like manly men.

        It doesn’t matter where the quote originated, that’s my point. The point is ANYONE can identify as a feminist and state their views in the name of feminism. Feminism doesn’t have a centralized charter or declaration, it is a self-identified grouping not to mention those radical views actually have a lot of followers and people agreeing. I even saw a discussion on reddit not so long ago where feminism was being discussed and someone stated they liked feminism but not the radical feminism and several feminists said the radical feminism is the right one and what everyone should identify with, no one spoke against them.

        I don’t have any particular problem with the base premise of first and second wave feminism or wanting equality, but I prefer egalitarianism and less self victimization and “Oh, this fits our cause lets umbrella it under our name!!” not to mention the circular logic where women can do no wrong and everything is somehow created by patriarchy/men.

        • Mr. E

          “The first thing third wave feminism needs to do to gain ANY traction with men is trying to use circular logic to blame men/patriarchy/whatever for the issues men and women feel, because it’s clearly wrong.”

          Absolutely. Not only is it WRONG but it presupposes that WOMEN have done absolutely NOTHING in the history of the world to contribute to anything. That they have been docile, passive, controllable creatures with no thought, willpower of agency of their own, and are simple baby-making machines.

          Is that REALLY what you wish to imply about WOMEN? Because THAT is what the PATRIARCHY really means. You can’t have it BOTH ways.

          Blaming everything on MEN is just plain insulting.

      • Mr. E

        “But it has nothing to do with feminism”

        EXACTLY – which is why FEMINISM will NEVER, EVER, EVER include MEN’S issues. Feminists always try to say that Feminism includes MEN’S issues but it just fucking DOESN’T.

        The REAL problem with MRA’s is that it represents a DIRECT THREAT to Feminist BULLSHIT.

    • “Comics/Games should not be sexist towards women because Im a women and I wont buy something I dont like….”

      Are you implying that comics and games should not be sexist is a crazy notion?

      • Arvid Persen

        It is.

        First of all, comics/games is art and is a part of capitalism, you create what you want and what people want to buy.

        Comics/games is a fantasy, another world to delve into. If someone wants to jump into a world where women are like the 1950s Jayne Mansfield so be it. If someone wants to read BDSM fiction where a woman ties up men and has her way with them, so be it. As a creator you realize the idea you have and you ignore dissenters because your vision is more important, or you cater to a demographic and try to make good money of it. Either is valid, peoples opinion about the product is irrelevant as long as it sells.

        In 99% of cases where people complain about sexism, there is none but simply insecure self-victimization. And for some reason it almost solely comes from women. I have never in my life heard a man victimize himself over men being too hot/trained in movies/ads. Never have I ever sat and thought “Shit, superman is simply not someone I can live up to, I need equality!!!”. I constantly read feminist comics that are distributed in my country (Nemi and Zelda) and even though I disagree with some of the strips and storylines and generalizations and “sexism” I have never gone into a headspin forcing me to write about “sexism in feminist comics”.

        What women needs is a better upbringing that builds character and confidence.

  • ejdalise

    I don’t know, but my opinion still leans toward ‘most men are jerks’ . . . then again, I think humans in general are jerks, and that encompasses women.

    Still, an interesting read touching on a point I often stress. You need to understand the people you argue against, intimately and deeply.

    Most people don’t bother sorting what is right or wrong, useful or useless with the views of the opposition; the assumption is that it’s all crap, and that whenever their own self-identified group sits on the crapper all that comes out are golden eggs.

    Thank you for sharing what you learned from actually deep-diving into the writings of people you do not agree with.

    It’s what we should all be doing (instead of, you know, arguing about where you are or may be wrong).

    • Mr. E

      That’s funny, because I have the opinion that many women are jerks.

      Present company obviously excepted of course.

  • Christopher Shafer

    For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. MRA’s are the pushback against feminism just as feminism was a reaction to societal repression(to say that men alone are to blame is inaccurate- there are plenty of women today who take a ‘the way it was meant to be stance’, if you will).

    And make no mistake about one thing: even starting this discourse is something. To dismiss them on the grounds that they are doing nothing is not wise.

    Not taking sides here, just calling it as I see it.

    • Mr. E

      I agree. Men are tired of their issues being pushed into the back corner. Women are wonderful creatures and they deserve all the loving and respect they can get. But Men are too.

      And it always BLOWS MY MIND that FEMINISTS, who are the self-acclaimed guardians of “Gender Equality” go out of their way to belittle the efforts of men when they try to discover their own voices.

      Unless of course, it is because they are AFRAID of what those voices might have to say.

  • joni sony
  • Stephen Arnquist

    You should hate-read MGTOW stuff next 😉

  • Stephen R

    “This contradiction may be unique to the men’s rights movement; after
    all, it’s always going to be difficult to extend the hand of friendship
    to people who compare you to dogs who must be trained (only one recurring example of the dehumanizing language often applied to women by MRAs).”

    No, it exists in other divides. For example, conservatives are routinely accused of “hating”… well, everyone. Old people. Young people, Minorities. Women. Gays. To listen to the left-wing, the right “wants to starve schoolchildren” (direct quote from a member of Congress). We want sick people to die and old people to starve (we’re big on starvation — or so we’re told by the other side.) We want to “put black people back into chains.” It’s pretty mainstream. That last is paraphrasing Vice President Biden. Much of the left believes the right should simply be silenced. It’s pretty despicable rhetoric, and all very routine.

    • Mr. E

      It’s part of the Feminist playbook. Deride and belittle anything that represents resistance.

  • Anon6969

    What a filthy feminist demonizing MRAs when she’s the real sexist. Lmao.

    • Mr. E

      Yes, but she’ll never be able to see it in herself. That is the beauty of Feminism.

  • Mr. E

    Really? You think it’s just MEN? Let’s review some of those inspiring MAN-LOVING words from the FEMINIST leadership:

    “I feel that ‘man-hating’ is an honourable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them.” – Robin Morgan, Ms. Magazine Editor

    “To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he’s a machine, a walking dildo.” -– Valerie Solanas

    “I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig.” — Andrea Dworkin

    “Rape is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear” — Susan Brownmiller

    “The more famous and powerful I get the more power I have to hurt men.” — Sharon Stone

    “In a patriarchal society, all heterosexual intercourse is rape because women, as a group, are not strong enough to give meaningful consent.” — Catherine MacKinnon

    “The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race.” — Sally Miller Gearhart

    “Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes gain from the experience.” – Catherine Comins

    “All men are rapists and that’s all they are” — Marilyn French

    “Probably the only place where a man can feel really secure is in a maximum security prison, except for the imminent threat of release.” — Germaine Greer.

  • Mr. E

    You women wouldn’t DREAM of letting MEN dictate YOUR issues, so why do YOU all of a sudden think that YOU have the RIGHT or PRIVILEGE to DICTATE OURS???

    I respect your site. You seem to have a level head on your shoulders but you have your head as firmly planted up your ass as any MAN.

  • Mr. E

    “These websites are cesspools of anger, entitlement, and poor reasoning.”

    How can you sit and write this stuff with a straight face? Even though I completely agree with your assessment– YOU WOMEN have said and written HORRIBLE THINGS ABOUT MEN in your quest to discover your voices, your issues and your base. And then you sit there and LOOK DOWN YOUR NOSES at other beings who want nothing more than the SAME OPPORTUNITY to come together, discuss their feelings and find out who they are.

    YOU FEMINISTS are fucking PATHETIC. You wouldn’t know what EQUALITY or EQUANIMITY was if it smacked you in the face. And Yes, I do understand the irony of that statement.

    MEN are SICK AND TIRED of serving as your PUNCHING BAGS and taking the blame for everything you think is wrong in the world.

    So if Men are saying and writing some bad things about women while we get our act together– well, I guess you’ll just have to grin and bear it. Just like we have had to do.

  • Mr. E

    “feminists vs. sexists.”

    LMAO!

    You mean “Feminists AS Sexists”

  • Mr. E

    “hate-reading”

    You Feminists invented the concept.

    Help me out here… did Valerie Solanas SHOOT Andy Warhol BEFORE or AFTER she published her “SCUM MANIFESTO”?

    Wouldn’t want to be in the same room with HER! Too bad ANDY wasn’t safely abstracted in a non-physical locale.

  • Meh

    This is all very interesting, but I highly doubt any MRA would read YOUR work and view women more sympathetically, treat women differently (hopefully better), get a greater sense of us-vs.-them thinking, or better fight his own biases. And that’s the problem. You may empathize with them, but there is no reciprocation. They don’t want a more just, equal world for all. They want a world in which they can reassert their domination and spread even more hate and misogyny. And you’re doing exactly what they want–feeling bad for them while they continue to hate you. They’re preying on your tendency, as an emotionally mature woman, to extend compassion and grace to others. Meanwhile, they have none for you or any other “female.” As for me, I’m not going to sympathize with someone who doesn’t even see me as a human being.

    • Meh

      P.S. The comments below mine are an excellent illustration of what I mean. You present a thoughtful, empathetic take on this topic, and the MRAs respond with condescension and vitriol. You reply in the same civil, rational tone, and they slam you with more of their rage. Don’t you see? Nothing you say or do will ever be good enough for them because they despise you and all women. They are showing you their true colors right now. Believe what you see.

      • Matthew Alexander

        Gee, why would we get angry about being lied about? Who does THAT?

    • Matthew Alexander

      You may empathize with them, but there is no reciprocation.”

      Citation needed.

      “They don’t want a more just, equal world for all.”

      Citation needed.

      “They want a world in which they can reassert their domination and spread even more hate and misogyny.”

      Citation needed.

      “They’re preying on your tendency, as an emotionally mature woman, to extend compassion and grace to others. Meanwhile, they have none for you or any other “female.””
      Citation needed.
      Geez, Meh, it’s almost as if your entire post is a steaming pile of bullshit.

  • Tir

    Lewis’ Law

  • Matthew Alexander

    It’s disappointing to see the liberty movement filling up with people like this.

    Everyone has their biases; everyone has an urge to accept unquestioningly assertions and arguments that flatter their biases while looking for any pretext to dismiss the ones with which they disagree. Every human has their own natural inclinations.
    But it concerns me that a person with Caroline’s natural inclinations would think herself a libertarian without any sort of real affect on these natural biases.
    Caroline: how ’bout you look into that 2-8% false rape figure you cited just a little bit deeper than not at all? If you love to hate read, maybe you could do a little hate research as well.

  • pokwok

    Yeah… MRA sites are usually pretty stupid, angry and sexist. Feminists sites are the same way. Nobody takes MRAs seriously. Somehow misandry, collectivism and sexism are now considered ‘higher education’ in the form of third wave feminism classes. It’s pretty typically feminist of you to assume browsing MRA comment sections is going to give you a good idea of what men are like. Can you imagine if men based their opinions of women off of what feminist forums are like? Nobody would ever have sex or even hang out with members of the other gender. Ever.

    Thank god the most of the women I know have more contempt for modern feminists than even I do. That’s what happens when you live in Montreal – feminist fascism has been shoved down everybody’s throats since we were children, so thankfully anybody who doesn’t have Hitler Youth desire to bully and shame people while simultaneously crying to the state that they are a victimm, won’t buy into that shit anymore, and to ‘rebel’ from the status quo would mean rejecting intersectional feminism.

    MRAs are a non-issue. MRA =/= feminist critic. MRA’s aren’t mainstream. Hating feminism is quickly becoming mainstream, in large part because most women don’t feel any allegiance to so-called feminists of today.