Masculism logo

Towards a Masculist Movement

Matt D. Harris Anarchism, Featured, Gonzo 28 Comments

Feminism doesn’t speak for me. Feminists often claim that they speak for all gender oppression.  They claim to be true gender egalitarians, and that they’re opposed to heterosexism, transphobia, and discrimination against men, in addition to fighting against gender oppression targetted at AFAB [Assigned Female At Birth] people.  They also quite commonly make the point that “men” don’t understand the oppression that women face, and that all “men” are sexist.  That’s right.  Every single one.  So I have to ask feminists: if you’re sure that I don’t understand your oppression (and I suspect you’re right about this, at least some of the time), then how can you claim to understand mine?  How can you lay claim to the territory of fighting oppression against AMAB [Assigned Male At Birth] people while simoultaneously proclaiming “men” the oppressor?  How come, if you really care as much about issues affecting men (for example, domestic violence where the victim is a man), then you never use gender-neutral pronouns when discussing violence?

I recently read a pamphlet put together by an anarcha-feminist collective addressing sexism in the anarchist/radical/revolutionary movement.  In virtually all of the pieces addressing violence, sexism, domestic violence, sexual assault, sexual abuse, and sexual harassment, each and every single piece focused exclusively on issues where the victim was a “woman” and the perpetrator was a “man.”  This erasure of AMAB victims of sexual and domestic violence, from the anarchist side of the spectrum, no less.  What can we expect from feminists who are not even interested more generally in anti-oppression causes?  That erasure of AMAB victims is common in feminist circles and literature, however.

So just what about a movement to advocate for AMAB people?  Do AMAB people who are victims of domestic violence deserve equal access to resources such as shelters where they and their children can be safe from a violent spouse?  Do they deserve access at all?  Should AMAB rape victims be given the same support that AFAB victims are, or should we keep the problem in the closet; relegated to the realm of jokes about buttrape in prisons and altar boy molestation?

Sure, we have the “MRA movement” now, but it’s hardly a movement at all.  I’ve never seen them speak out about anything other than family law issues, and those aren’t my issues, nor are they the issues which I see as being most dramatically destructive in the lives of AMAB people.  I’m interested in addressing my own problems and concerns and likewise creating an inclusive movement that addresses the problems and concerns of others, as well.  So far, the “MRA movement” has failed to do that.  It’s been a bunch of white dudes complaining and whining to eachother about their ex-wives and child custody settlements.  I’m an activist, and that isn’t activism.  The feminist movement has tons of gains under its belt: real tangible victories which have served to enhance the lives of AFAB people.  These MRA folks have nothing to show for their blogging and whining.  I want results.  I want domestic violence shelters for AMAB people.  I want queer men accepted by modern society – even poor urban minorities.  I want to call the state out and stick it to them when they hold policies akin to the rhetoric coming out of the Westboro Baptist Church.  Finally, let’s face it: the existing “MRA” circuit doesn’t talk about queer men.  Which is a shame, because queer men face more oppression in daily life than most AMAB people.

Another issue worth considering is trans-women.  I have come to most-often use the term AMAB when defining the specific people whom this movement seeks to represent the interests of, and that includes trans-women.  Trans-women are women.  Despite that fact, all too often they are ignored, dehumanized, and thrown under the bus by modern feminist movements.  We seek to represent trans-women and their needs as well, as an underserved group with regard to fighting against gender oppression.  As the modern feminist movement primarily/exclusively represents AFAB people, transwomen are welcome in the masculist movement.

Another goal which I have in mind is to form a broad coalition with feminists and others who oppose oppression.  In order to oppose gender oppression, we should team up with those promoting the advancement of intersexed and AFAB people as well, with the ultimate goal being an egalitarian society free of all oppression.

I think the first thing we should do is to start asking the tough questions.  How does the availability of resources for male victims of sexual and domestic violence affect how we are able to deal with these issues? How do sexual harassment issues affect us in school, at home, and in the work-place? How can we move towards acceptance of queer AMAB people in the way that queerness is now far more culturally acceptable for AFAB people? How does stereotypical masculinity in racial minority communities impact AMAB people in those communities who just don’t fit in? Why is sexuality a driving force for masculine self-esteem?  There’re lots more, too.  Lets tackle them together and begin to address the issues.

Masculism logo

So I think that what AMAB people in general need to do is stand up and simply declare: “feminism doesn’t speak for me.”  Then we need to move towards creating a masculist movement that does.  I’ve got an idea for a campaign we could take on, too.  As mentioned above, the FDA currently regulates blood donations.  They have a regulation, in place since the 1980s, which essentially says that any AMAB person who has ever had sex with an AMAB person is banned for life from donating blood.  This is an awful regulation, laced with “gay plague” thinking, put in place because of rampant homophobia.  It’s an easy victory in today’s political climate, and a big victory against a homophobic federal regulation is just what out fledgling movement could use to take off!  Who’s with me?

Join us over on facebook at Masculism!


Jaguar xj: get ready to be seen.(Auto Weekly)

The Virginian-Pilot (Norfolk, VA) March 25, 2011 By Larry Printz The Virginian-Pilot CLIMBING INTO a really fine automobile is like wearing a bespoke suit. It’s transformative. For if clothes make the man – and woman – then so does a car.

If you’re stepping out of a Ford F-150 in a pair of overalls, no one would notice. Do that in a Jaguar XJ and it’s a different story. go to site bowers and wilkins

OK, now maybe there’s a wealthy farmer or contractor who owns a pair of overalls and drives a Jag. And to all five of you, I say, “No offense intended.” But having sampled Jaguar’s finest sedan, the XJ Supersport, I would suggest trading in those Carhartts for a bit of Saville Row.

XJ drivers have to get used to being stared at; these cars are uniquely gorgeous.

Beyond their scarcity, it’s the XJ’s distinctive beauty that merits attention.

Jaguar no longer slavishly imitates past styling. Its new designs are thoroughly modern, but do pay homage to the past. The front grille comes straight from the 1968 XJ6. The rounded greenhouse appropriates its shape from the sexy XK coupe, while its thin supports contrast with the substantial lower body, a constant in Jaguar design. The effect is enhanced by the panoramic sunroof and dark-colored rear roof pillar, which give the illusion of a floating roof.

It’s a bold stylistic leap. Unlike the previous XJ, which looked like an old Buick, the new one looks unmistakably like a Jaguar.

Inside, the reinterpretation continues. There’s beautifully soft leather, plush carpets and unique Zebrano wood trim, just the sort of thing anyone would expect in a Jaguar. But look closer.

The instrument cluster is truly radical: It’s digital. Three round dials mimic the look of analog gauges and, aside from the speedometer, they can be replaced by other readouts via toggle switches on the steering wheel. These toggles, while convenient, are too easy to accidently activate while turning the steering wheel.

It’s not the only electronic screen nestled on the instrument panel. A screen in the center of the dashboard controls most of the other functions of the car, including climate controls, audio system, navigation and phone. If this sounds suspiciously like “My Ford Touch,” it is. Keep in mind that while Tata Motors of India now owns Jaguar, Ford Motor Co. did most of the development work on this car. So the systems are identical in function, but different in look.

This makes, say, synchronizing your phone to the car easy, so that you can use the cars controls to chat. However, the system can be bothersome. The voice activation is a hit-and-miss affair. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t. Many functions require you to hit a very specific spot on the screen to activate. When you are successful, some functions respond slowly. These are all minor gripes, and very easy to accommodate.

But car designers should rethink how many functions to put into a system like this. For example, while most cars require hitting a simple button to activate a heated seat, the XJ requires you to hit three separate places onscreen before it’s activated. in our site bowers and wilkins

Kudos should go to Jaguar for its audio system. The Bowers and Wilkins 1,200-watt, 20-speaker surround-sound audio system features a CD/DVD player, two USB ports, Bluetooth 2.0 audio streaming and a 30-GB hard drive. The sound is some of the finest I have ever heard in a car audio system.

But what really matters is where the rubber meets the road. And just as the XJ’s styling differs from its German and Asian competition, so does its performance.

All XJs use an updated rendition of last year’s XJ chassis. It’s built from aluminum to save weight.

Likewise, all models use a 5.0-liter double-overhead-cam V8 engine. In the base XJ, it’s rated at 385-horsepower, and returns 16 mpg in city driving, 23 mpg on the highway, according to the EPA.

One step up is the XJ Supercharged, with a supercharged V8 developing 470 horsepower. The test car, an XJ Supersport, uses the same mill, but with 510 horses. The supercharged V8 is rated at 15 mpg city, 21 mpg highway. A six-speed automatic transmission is standard.

This large rear-drive car acquits itself well, as you’d expect. The driveline is ferociously quick, effortless even, and the supercharged engine shaves a half-second off 0-60 mph sprints. Speed comes on quickly, but smoothly.

The ride retains some of the softness of previous XJs, but overall, it’s noticeably, but not objectionably, firmer. As you’d expect, body roll in corners is well-controlled, but it does crop up suddenly when this big cat is pushed hard.

Thankfully, the cabin is blessedly quiet, no matter what the speed. As for the cabin’s spaciousness, you might want to consider the long wheelbase version of this car if back seat legroom is a priority. The short wheelbase test car had adequate room, but not without some compromise from front seat passengers. Count on spending an $3,000 for the extra space.

Like any true luxury product, the XJ is exclusive, exquisite and exceptional – like a fine suit of clothes.

Larry Printz, (757) 446-2220, s tats Engine Supercharged 5.0-liter V8 Wheelbase 119.4 inches Length 201.7 inches Weight 4,281 pounds Cargo space 15.2 cubic feet EPA rating (city/highway) 15/21 mpg Fuel consumption 22.4 mpg Fuel type Premium Base price, base model $72,700 Base price, test model $110,200 As tested $111,075 Where to find it Checkered Flag Jaguar, Virginia Beach what we say A seriously sexy sedan Pros Speed, comfort, agility and surprisingly good fuel economy Con Frustrating electronic controls what they say Dan Neil, The Wall Street Journal “The Jaguar XJ Supersport thus hits a sweet spot between galling luxury and serious performance. Think of it as a car that drinks Champagne and then eats the glass.” CAPTION(S):

photos courtesy of jaguar Inside the Jaguar XJ Supersport, there’s beautifully soft leather, plush carpets and unique Zebrano wood trim, just the sort of thing anyone would expect in a Jaguar. But look closer.

The instrument cluster is truly radical: It’s digital.

Unlike the old XJ, which looked like a Buick, the new one is unmistakably like a Jaguar.

Matt D. HarrisTowards a Masculist Movement

Comments 28

  1. Michael

    I’ve observed feminist blogs over the past while, and I can say that the feminist movement is something that I don’t agree with. I think they would be better off calling it the Women’s Rights Movement, because that’s what it is. (and there is nothing wrong with that) However, to claim that they are there to represent both genders equally is laughable to me.

    By the way, it’s nice to see Gonzo Times with this amount of traffic lately. I hope you keep posting.

  2. Eoghan

    There are some fairly erroneous claims made in the article, the “mra movement” has got female perpetrated dv and abuse, male circumcision, false accusations, male gender role disposibility, cultural misandry, ideological feminist misandry, masculism etc, on to the table.

    Perhaps the OP has bee reading too much of David Futrelle’s and Amamda Marcotte’s tabloid journalism?

    1. Matt D. Harris

      I don’t feel that website represents my views for three reasons:

      1> It’s very negative towards feminists, and has a negative tone in general by virtue of how much of its real estate is taken up by bashing feminists and feminism.  I have issues with the modern feminism movement, but critiquing those issues and distancing myself from them are difference from just sitting around bashing feminists. 

      2> One of their top stories talks about “false rape accusations” in a way that I feel isn’t helpful to fighting for victims.  I am interests in fighting for all victims, I just feel feminists are not interested in fighting for AMAB victims.  However, when people insinuate that “false rape allegations” are this huge problem to address, they seek to create a culture that is hurtful and problematic for victims.  This is directly counter to my goals.  I no more wish to disenfranchise female victims than I wish to see male victims disenfranchised. 

       3> Worse, one of the stories on their main page attacks slut walks and engages in rape apologism.  I have zero tolerance for rape apologism. 

      1. Eoghan

        1) Well its somewhat difficult to approach misandry without approaching feminism.

        2) Victims of false rape accusations are different from rape victims and dealing with and stigmatizing false rape accusers is actually beneficial for genuine victims and the capturing and punishing of rapists.

        3) Slut walks themselves are inherently rape apologist and rape denialist, far more so than the criticism of them on AVFM. Feminism is the largest and most vocal source of ideological, systematic and academic abuse denial. So you are operating a sexist double standard, you want to work with feminism, which deliberately hides certain victims and certain abusers behind fatoids and biased research and excludes them from services, but wont associate with AVFM because its critical oif the logic behind slutwalks.

        So its not that you have zero tolerance for rape apologism , its that you have a bias.

        1. Matt D. Harris

           1> I understand that, but I don’t like focusing on negativity in general.  I’d rather focus on positive goals rather than just addressing other peoples’ negativity.  Essentially, arguing with misandrists and feminists just doesn’t gain us anything useful.  They’re deeply ideologically entrenched and have no real interest as far as I can tell in discussing critiques of their ideology.  So why waste our time when instead we could be doing something useful like creating resources, fighting bad policies, etc? 

          2> I understand, but it’s an impossible subject to address unless you or I were there personally.  Which we aren’t.  So we can’t really know what exactly went down in any given case.  Thus it becomes a matter of “taking sides” and potentially being wrong.  I understand that some people want to, but personally, I don’t feel comfortable potentially being wrong about something like this. 

          3> How do you feel slut walks are rape apologist?  I don’t see that at all, and I’ve been around lots of people in that movement.  They tend to be the sort of feminists I can get along with most easily. 

          1. Eoghan

            1) Well feminism is responsible for the bad policies, eg. you can’t have abuse shelters for men, until the lies that feminism has told about gendered abuse are killed off and its forced to accept that the ideological view of DV is false, this suggests that the ideologues are a problem that need to be dealt with. Did you know we challenged “Dr. Phil” on lies recently and the up shot is SAVE are now going to be on his show, or that we have gone from being unfunded bloggers to that? Thats not doing nothing.
            2) Its not a matter of talking sides, rape is wrong, false rape accusations are wrong. Its not a zero sum game.
            3) Slut walk is rape apology and rape denial because they reinforce ideological feminist views on rape. Slutwalk aggressively promotes stats. that don’t include female on male sex crimes, which is the deliberate oppression of certain victims and protection of certain abusers. 

          2. Matt D. Harris

            1> OK, fair enough… but I’m sticking to the idea that I’d rather keep it positive. 

            2> I agree that both are wrong.  However in specific instances, one must pick a side.  In doing so, one risks being wrong.   If you just say “false accusations are wrong”, then that’s one thing, but it’s also obvious, so I don’t really feel that it’s something that needs to be central to activism.  It also doesn’t lead to tangible gains. 

            3> Slut walks are a reaction to a specific problem.  That specific problem is a womens problem.  I support women in addressing their genuine problems.  I understand that it’s not about male victims, but at this point, nothing is.  Just because I want a more egalitarian movement doesn’t mean I don’t support female victims, though.  I’m still not sure how this equals rape apologism?  Can you be more specific in your argument so that I can understand better? 

          3. Eoghan

            2) False accusations is tied into the erosion of the presumption of innocence. The present situation, where a woman can just point her finger and the mans life is destroyed is a serious problem and akin to Jim Crow era treatment of black men. Its not something that should be dismissed. Civil and human rights are important. Restoration of and protection of those civil and human rights would be a gain.

            3) Slutwalks promote lies about rape which protect certain rapists and denies certain victims. I can’t say much clearer than that how its rape apology.

          4. Anonymous

            Slutwalks are deliberately promoting misinformation about rape in a misguided attempt to promote freedom of expression and fight misogyny.

            Genuine victims of rape are not at fault, and women who dress provocatively don’t deserve to get raped, but there are steps people can take to minimize their risk. This is true for all crimes, accidents, natural disasters, etc. The slutwalks are in massive denial of the utility of risk minimization. In fact, they are consciously labeling rational discussion of risk minimization as misogynist. 

            Saying “only rapists can stop rape” is true, but no actual rapist is going to give a damn what a placard or a PSA campaign says. Because of this, we need to be allowed to have a rational discussion about minimizing risk, and thereby lessening the chance that people are raped.

  3. Anonymous

    Matt Harris- Ignorance is not shameful as long as someone keeps their mouth shut about the subject until they bother to learn about it. You, obviously, have not even spent 20 seconds educating yourself on the men’s movement. You should be embarrassed at your complete lack of knowledge about something you have no problems throwing under the bus, but i suspect you are too stupid to even feel embarrassed for yourself.

    If you had even bothered to educate yourself about this subject, you would learn that

    1. Gay men are welcome in the MRM. For example, Jack Donovan, a gay writer on men’s issues, posts regularly at  There are a number of gays at the Men’s Rights reddit as well as an openness and friendliness to LGBT issues.

    2. The MRM tackles WAY more topics than child custody, including- male victims of DV/male reproductive rights/ anti-male bias in media, education, and culture/ false rape accusations/ male rape victims/ male employment issues/ male gender roles/ circumcision/ anti-male bias and it’s relationship to racism/ parenting/ male-female relations (romantic and otherwise) and I’m just scratching the surface.

    3. About the child custody- men’s groups are having success in changing laws and attitudes, so much so a feminist legal expert wrote an article calling us “alarmingly effective.”

    4. Domestic Violence is a very common topic at men’s sites, as is violence and bigotry against LGBT.

    5. If you have any interest in actually learning about the MRM, you are welcome to visit the following sites-

  4. Matt D. Harris

    On one hand, I have feminists telling me not to do this, and that I should instead join feminist groups for men, such as NOMAS at which talks a lot about how mens’ actions impact AFAB people.  This has nothing to do with what I’m trying to create here.  The masculist movement is about equality for AMAB people.  Further, none of the feminist groups or websites talk about the issues I’m trying to talk about.  I have come to firmly believe that feminism is by AFAB people, for AFAB people, exclusively.  This has been my own experience, and the experience of others. 

    On the other hand, I have the MRA crowd directing me to websites with rape apologism on the front page.  This does not represent my ideas or goals, either.  I am focused on positive change.  My critique of feminism was only an explanation of why I’m not interested in just folding into existing feminist movements.  It was not an attack on feminists. 

    Yet feminists have entirely taken it as an attack, and have attacked back. 

    I’ve come to believe that discussing gender oppression outside the context of how it impacts AFAB people will instantly trigger any feminist without earshot to fly into a rage.  At least, that’s been my experience over the past 12 hours since writing this! 

      1. Anonymous

        Who’s making similar statements? Is any MRA claiming that rape doesn’t matter when it happens to women?

        You correctly point out above that the Feminist movement has spent decades worth of efforts to shame, marginalize, and deny help to male victims of rape and domestic violence, especially when committed by a woman. I’m not sure why you’re rallying around a slutwalk movement that is spreading misinformation about rape and only acknowledging female victims.

  5. Anonymous

    I think you wrote some good stuff here, Matt, but I can’t “like” your article for one basic reason. A “masculist movement” or even a “men’s rights” movement in my opinion is a mistake and a disaster waiting to happen. As someone who has kept so much bottled up inside him and has felt so much helplessness and self-loathing for so many years, I understand exactly what you’re trying to do. In fact I went through a brief period about 5 or 6 years ago where I tried to do something similar. Not only will it not work, but males in general will end up stinking like dead skunk in the road (more so than they already do). Movements tend to incite people, which would be a disaster for men in general in terms of image.

    “Movements” are tied to concept of “empowerment” and since all males indiscriminately are regarded as having “the power”, any movement calling for ANYTHING for men will be perceived as perverse and as a form of bullying…. it doesn’t matter what you actually say, what causes you espouse, or anything of the sort. In fact, it will most likely cause feminists to work AGAINST you even on issues that they would otherwise agree with you on… “Movements” create an “us” versus “them” mentality… it doesn’t matter who “threw the first punch”…. this does not help. I am more interested in problem solving, than in “1-UPing” someone. If you’re going to do this at all, dump the whole “movement” thing.

    I eventually will be posting some stuff on related subjects, but I am sorry to say that I will at the same time be distancing myself from anything labeling itself “men’s rights”, “pro-men/male”, “masculism” or anything similar.

    1. Matt D. Harris

      Well, I’m not concerned with how you feel about it.  At the end of the day, people either care about male victims, about gender equality, etc… or they don’t.  Those people who do, realize that there’s a need for a masculism movement.  

      1. Anonymous

        If you’re not concerned, that’s fine, but implying to me that I somehow don’t care about male victims if I don’t agree with the idea of having a “masculist movement” is ‘out of bounds’ to say the least. You are stepping onto precarious territory, sir.

        1. Matt D. Harris

          Well, your post makes it sound as if you’re more concerned about how such a movement may be perceived, than about accomplishing the goals of said movement.  Of course it’s a movement.  It’s the AMAB equivalent of feminism.  It’s masculism. 

          1. Anonymous

            In a period of 10-12 hours, you’ve managed to accomplish the same that feminism has with regard to making me feel alienated and thus turned off:

            An implication that I have to be part of “the movement” in order to care about male victims roughly corresponding to the feminist implication that if I question the the explanatory power of the “patriarchy” concept, I somehow am denying that women are oppressed or that sexism exists.

            An implication that I don’t “truly” support the goals if I am not part of the movement. On the feminist side there’s the slight difference that I am supposed to join something like NOMAS since I risk the possibility of offending some feminists out there if I actually call myself one, but the fundamental idea is the same: I am somehow identifying with a movement by claiming to believe in the same goals while not actually making myself part of it. This makes me “ashamed of what I am”. I need to “show pride” and “assert myself”.  Fiddlesticks. I simply think it’s a risky strategy and the risk of backfire is too great.

            Anyway, Congratulations.

            On another note, “movements” aside, I wonder if  someday we can have a “wimp walk” where we have a peaceful march of men who have endured abuse by women. Although it is also risky because we may simply be accused of being “a large group of men sent here to intimidate us”, the risk maybe worthwhile since it would be helpful to feminists due to their bias: just as men have an instinctual inclination to “objectify” women, women have a corresponding instinctual inclination to “personify” men, meaning that in many social contexts the men of which you speak don’t even show up as blip on women’s radar since we do not “exist” as persons to them, at least not in real life; we are USED in feminist literature to prove points, but that has nothing to do with everyday life as we are basically a hypothetical construct USED in printed media to demonstrate the ills of “patriarchy” and then forgotten almost immediately. I think we can start saying “we exist” without being confrontational and thus appearing to be aggressors.

          2. Matt D. Harris

             And why shouldn’t we emulate the feminist movement?  It’s popular, wildly successful, and has had over a century of longevity.  Without a concentrated movement, also, we end up failing to reach our true potential.  A large group in a concerted effort has the power to change things.  A single individual acting alone rarely does. 

            I mean, I agree with your points to an extent, but I’m more interested in success than being somehow “nicer”, y’know?  People are counting on us. 

            As far as objectification goes, I think women sexually objectify men just as much as men sexually objectify women.  Men just let them get away with it because it’s about the only means by which men are allowed to feel attractive in modern society, whereas “feminine beauty” is all over the place to the point that it’s become damn-near oppressive in and of itself for women who aren’t able to fit into it. 

          3. Anonymous

            Yes, they do objectify men, just as men can also personify women. I am speaking of instinctual inclinations, not something that happens 100% of the time; human beings are, after all, rational creatures and I would be lying through my teeth if I claimed that every woman I ever interacted with or attempted to interact with has personified me. Personification of men should not be ignored, however, as I believe it reinforces the very things that feminists (and myself) oppose.  I plan to write on this topic as well in the near future.  I guess I can rephrase it using what you said in your article and hopefully this will serve to clarify:

            “So I have to ask feminists: if you’re sure that I don’t understand
            your oppression (and I suspect you’re right about this, at least some of the time), then how can you claim to understand mine?”

            I believe that this bias exists as a tendency among women which can be remedied in part by socialization as well as by aiding the feminist push for equality in the workplace.  I further believe that this is not an immediately obvious tendency (even to most men) because it is actually also conducive to capitalism and hierarchy, which is what our current society is based on; there is a “market incentive” not to acknowledge this.  It is also something in regards to which I am truly a minority: recognizing and speaking out against personification will potentially draw opposition not only women (possibly even women who are feminists), but from men who either meet (alpha males), or desire to meet (most men) the criteria needed in order to “be”.

            I think this is a point that you and I may end up differing on irreconcilably, but either way I will write on it and you can let me know what you think then, after I’ve gone into more detail about what personification is, why it exists, and what the implications are. 

            One last comment in response to what you just said.  I will start by quoting your article:

            “In virtually all of the pieces addressing violence, sexism, domestic violence, sexual assault, sexual abuse, and sexual harassment, each and every single piece focused exclusively on issues where the victim was a “woman” and the perpetrator was a “man.” ”

            Feminism, as you yourself acknowledged has a frequent tendency (consciously or unconsciously) to associate violence with being male….the two almost seem synonymous at times– except when you point this out, in which case the denials and apologetics will begin.  And, by the way, I believe the feminist tendency to write/speak like this also stems from the tendency to personify men.

            FOR THIS REASON, yes,  I think it is important that we always be the “nicer” ones. You say you are “more interested in success”, but I contend that you will not have success unless you are “the nicer one”.  

            Anyway, you wrote a good article. As AnarchoBlackMetal said, Kudos.

          4. Matt D. Harris

             And why shouldn’t we emulate the feminist movement?  It’s popular, wildly successful, and has had over a century of longevity.  Without a concentrated movement, also, we end up failing to reach our true potential.  A large group in a concerted effort has the power to change things.  A single individual acting alone rarely does. 

            I mean, I agree with your points to an extent, but I’m more interested in success than being somehow “nicer”, y’know?  People are counting on us. 

            As far as objectification goes, I think women sexually objectify men just as much as men sexually objectify women.  Men just let them get away with it because it’s about the only means by which men are allowed to feel attractive in modern society, whereas “feminine beauty” is all over the place to the point that it’s become damn-near oppressive in and of itself for women who aren’t able to fit into it. 

  6. Anonymous

    I also want to say that even though I still consider myself pro-feminist and agree with pretty much the entire feminist agenda (I even side with feminism and disagree with you on some things):

    “Feminism doesn’t speak for me.”

    And the sad part is…..I really, really wanted it to  :-(

  7. Anonymous

    Interesting. When I saw the title of this article, I was expecting something horrible, but it actually raises many great points, and is very well written. Kudos!

  8. Larissa Santos

    Hi, i’m brazilian, i saw your site while I was researching about masculinism in the U.S.

    I found 2 good sites, yours and the NCFM ( ).

    Please, if you can enter the site to participate,

    You are in Portuguese, can be translated to read, and even better if you can participate in commenting and helping us (masculinism is a recent phenomenon in Brazil) would be grateful.

    Note The site is not mine, but the retreat site from which to exercise my conclusions masculinism.

    Hugs.Translated by google tradutor, lol, sorry.

Leave a Reply