Why Feminists and the MRA’s Are Both Wrong

Something finally dawned on me. I was talking to a feminist the other day (you really don’t need to know who that was), and I mentioned MRA’s, or Men’s Rights Activists. She saw red and became absolutely furious at the very mention of the phrase. Apparently MRA’s are simply evil, or wrong, or assholes, or something. Anyway, she made it clear that MRA’s suck. This is the attitude of almost all feminists: that MRA’s are evil, it is a misogynistic, wicked movement, etc.

However, the more time I have spent around MRA’s, the more I noticed that they are just like feminists. MRA’s are the other side of the feminist mirror. Turn a feminist around, make her into the exact same thing as a feminist except her direct opposite, and wa-lah! You have an MRA. Now, I happen to think feminists suck. As a man, I have good reason to think that, as feminists are pretty much the enemies of the men. Now this feminist may well believe that MRA’s are the enemies of the women. And sad to say, that is exactly how some of them come off.


Feminists are the enemies of the men,


MRA’s are the enemies of the women.

See what I mean? You are just turning the mirror around. It’s the same person. Turn an MRA around, and you have a feminut. Turn a feminist around, and you have an MRA kook. Get it? They’re the same damn people! One type is just the mirror and completely opposite image of the other side’s kookery.

Personally, I think if women ought to fight for their equal rights, then feminism is justified (at least the equal rights type).

But why must only females fight for their rights? Don’t males have a right to fight for their equal rights too? Well of course they do. Then MRA’s are justified at least as a movement that fights for equal rights for men.

Now feminists will counter this with an interesting argument that bears listening to (not all feminist arguments are crazy): Feminists simply argue that women have to fight for their rights because they are oppressed or slaves, while males are on top and already have all the rights they need, so they don’t need to fight for their rights, and indeed, Men’s Rights just means giving oppressors or slaveowners more rights. Obviously only slaves need liberation. Surely slave owners do not need liberation too! We took that argument out in 1865.

However, this argument is problematic because with the coming of Female Rule (an Oppressive Matriarchy that openly assaults men), it is becoming increasingly obvious that men are definitely in need of equal rights as women take away more and more of our rights and oppress us more and more, which has honestly been the result of feminism political power in the West.

So probably in the West women and men are both systematically oppressed either by society or law, and both are in need of equal rights, so both feminism and MRM are justified on an equity basis.

But then I observed something else. This feminist absolutely hates misogynists and misogyny. There is literally nothing worse than a man who hates women. That is just pure, sheer evil. Now misogynists are pretty nasty creatures, let’s face it. It’s an ugly philosophy, and women have a right to dislike their haters. But this feminist also completely rejects the argument that men who have lots of bad experiences with women have a right to be misogynists. Fair enough.

And yet…and yet…

I have brought up women who hate men to this feminist before, and she has always tried to justify them. “Well, she had a lot of bad experiences with men,” or “Yes, Simone Beauvoir was a man-hater, but Sartre was her husband and he didn’t treat her very well.”

In other words, feminists justify women who hate men on the basis that men treated them badly but then refuse to justify men who hate women on the basis that women treated them badly.

Rational? Of course not.

Now MRA’s are the same way. MRA’s are always railing against misandry and women who are man-haters, and for good reason. These are some pretty damn nasty creatures. On the other hand, one major theme of the MRM is that misogyny in men is completely justified.

Ok, now how can these views possibly make sense? How can this feminist possibly believe that women being man-haters due to bad treatment by men is understandable and even laudable, while men being woman-haters due to bad treatment by women is the ultimate in evil? This cannot be reasonable. Or can it?

In a proper moral philosophy, either:

1. Women who hate men due to bad treatment by men and men who hate women due to bad treatment by women are both acceptable,


2. Women who hate men due to bad treatment by women and men who hate women due to bad treatment by women are both unacceptable.

Either they’re both ok, as we figure damaged people are understandably haters, or they are both no good, as we figure that no matter what you go through, you don’t turn into a bigot.


But what you can’t have is a universe where one is ok and the other is not (the worlds of the feminists and the MRA’s).


Such a universe,

where misandrists are understandable and even laudable and misogynists are Satanic,


misogynists are understandable and even rational while misandrists are wicked,

can only be true under one condition:

And that condition is that the other side is Evil.

Now let us examine what feminists and MRA’s are really saying.

When a feminist says female misandry is understandable and even a good thing, while male misogyny is wrong and despicable, what she is saying is this:

Female misandry is acceptable because Men are Evil. Male misogyny is wrong because Women are Good. Surely it is correct to laud those who hate Evil and despise those who hate Good, correct?

And of course, on the other hand, when an MRA says male misogyny is understandable and even logical while female misandry is deplorable and disgusting, what he is saying this is:

Male misogyny is acceptable because Women are Evil. Female misandry is wrong because Men are Good. Once again, we are back at Square One of Moral Philosophy, that those who hate evil are proper and even heroic while those who hate Good are wrong and even malevolent.

Once again, we see the same person switching genders and reversing the mirror, no?

Do you follow me here?

Please follow and like us:

27 thoughts on “Why Feminists and the MRA’s Are Both Wrong”

  1. I don’t really care who hates who, as long as they mind their own fucking business, but they never do. Again, more character building for everyone. 😆 These douchebags are always on the lookout for more punching bags for all thier rage, in which the punching bag didn’t cause.

  2. I think women tend to gang up and attack men they don’t like, for instance, one accused of being a perv or something. You might look at a girl, she doesn’t like it, and then tells all her friends.

  3. Yeah you’re probably right. Female interest group vs male interest group.

    We need fair minded people and we need the ying and yang. The ying isn’t better and the yang isn’t better. Don’t deride femininity or masculinity but make sure they are in balance. I think that’s a good principle.

    This also invovles accepting that gender is not socially constructed; that, for biological reasons, males and females on average are mentally and emotuionally different and that’s a perfectly fine thing.

  4. MRA and redpill = stupid.

    Gain 20 pounds of muscle, drop to 10% bodyfat. Your problems will be over. In fact, I’ll go even further: even if you’re a short or not the most facially attractive guy I still believe that advice holds.

    Gain money and wealth (more long-term than the above). Always focus on your net worth. Try to OWN SOMETHING. Never undertake any course of action (like education) without a clear plan for how to make that CoA a good investment.

    If you’re in your mid 20’s and still worrying about how to get a girl, you have made a mistake. Now is the time to start getting rich and start taking on the world. Mixing in some well-deserved R&R of course.

    1. Yeah Swank. All men can get “rich.” All men can accumulate lots of “wealth.” All men can acquire a great “net worth.” All men can “own something” other than a fucking car, if they can even afford that.

      1. Where did I say all men can get “rich” or accumulate lots of “wealth” or a great “net worth.”

        Nowhere, so you are misrepresenting my positions as usual.

        The fact is that there are ways to accumulate net worth, wealth, and money. However, the current trivial-information-bullshit sphere of society effectively hides that ball from most Americans.

        America is a place where the reality is great but the society pumps constant anesthesia into your blood and programs your dreams.

      2. So I agree with you that society plays a great game of “look over here!” And society gets you to look that way for so long that by the time many wake up, it’s too late.

        But, you’re falling for it too, so…

        1. Most people can acquire some net worth and wealth. They are just tricked into giving up their value and potential.

          America is a paradox where the reality is indeed grand, but the society pumps everyone with anesthesia and programs their dreams.

          My advice is useful because it is the first step to waking up.

    2. Redpill is all about getting laid Swank, pulling pussy, PUA’s. Right Swank, that’s why there’s a MARRIED MAN’S RED PILL on Reddit. A lot of redpillers are conservative guys and many are older married men. The Redpill sub doesn’t even advocate cheating. Formally they are opposed to both men and women cheating. A lot of men on there are opposed to males cheating in marriage and say they would never cheat on their wives. They also say they believe in monogamy.

      Redpill is about men learning how to make their relationships of whatever sort of with women work and go as smoothly and successfully as possible, while minimizing conflict, drama, chaos, fighting and bad energy. It’s about how to keep your relationships with women, whether one night stands to monogamous marriages, on the up and up so they work most smoothly for you so you can fulfill your needs and desires to the maximum.

      1. Redpill is about men learning how to make their relationships of whatever sort of with women work and go as smoothly and successfully as possible,

        Blah blah blah. Look good and have status and be like the people you are around and your ‘relationships’ and ‘social status’ and whatever other nonsense terms will improve.

        That’s the real “red pill.” It isn’t rocket science. It isn’t difficult. People are just looking for a there where there isn’t anymore there.

        1. I have to agree with Swank. Let’s not over-study the problem. It’s all about projecting an attitude, and you don’t have to be an alpha male jackass to do it.


          I can’t even put into words how wrong he is. This is what the feminists and women will tell you. Just shave, wear clean clothes, be yourself, and all the women you want will fall right into your lap. It’s a LIE. Not only that, but it’s the biggest lie on the face of the Earth.

          You CANNOT overthink this stuff. It’s not even possible.

          How many relationships with females have you been in, Jason? They’re not easy. Not easy at all.

          They pretty much require constant work (I mean 24-7) just to keep them on the straight and narrow, maximize your happiness, and achieve your goals. Little problems, crises, and fights come up on a very regular basis, and you have to figure out how to deal with this stuff in the best way possible.

          You need to be calculating all the time. You have to think about every single thing you say to and do with a woman, so you maximize saying and doing the right things and minimize saying and doing the wrong things.

          You deal with these problems the wrong way, and it’s over. Women can turn on you like a dime. I’ve seen it happen. I have blown up whole relationships with ONE SENTENCE. You hear me? I said one fucking sentence. One stupid sentence that I should never have said.

          You know what I did? She asked me a question and I laughed and told her the truth. Which was stupid and I will never do it again. You know what I was supposed to do? Lie. If I would have lied like I was supposed to, that blowup never would have happened.

          The relationship was on the downhill ever since I said that one sentence, no matter how many times I apologized for it. It was a slow downhill slide. It ended when she told me she wasn’t attracted to me. This was a woman was was raving about how sexy I was, what a great body I had, what a big cock I had, on and on, just before.

          Somehow she claims it went from total physical attraction to total non-attraction. I don’t really think that happened because that never happens, and she was lying like women lie all the time.

          She didn’t really lose her physical attraction to me because that’s not even possible in any universe unless your looks change. What she lost was her emotional attraction to me, which is extremely important for women.

          She didn’t want to say I lost her emotional appeal to me, so she lied and said she lost my physical appeal to her. Well not really a lie, but once again, a self-delusion, the female specialty.

          She actually believed that she lost her physical attraction to me, but really it was her emotional attraction.

          For some reason she couldn’t handle that, so she hamstered until she decided I no longer appealed to her physically, which wasn’t even true. But hamstering pretty much justifies any crazy thing any woman wants to believe. It’s just a justification machine that spins round and round.

          This was two years ago. She was less than half my age, and she was a total knockout. She worked as a model. And I lost her. Over one fuckin’ sentence.

        3. I said gain 20 pounds of muscle and drop to 10% bodyfat, not “be yourself.” Could you for once correctly restate what I say? You can’t put it into words because I am right.

          There is no way someone was lost over one sentence. These games are won or lost at the outset: is she attracted and are you two similar enough culturally. The continuum that arises from the combinations of answers to those questions tells you everything you need to know.l

          It’s simple and easy.

  5. So probably in the West women and men are both systematically oppressed either by society or law, and both are in need of equal rights, so both feminism and MRM are justified on an equity basis.

    Not that I’m saying you’re wrong per se, but can you list concrete examples of how men are systematically oppressed? While I don’t like feminism, I also don’t feel oppressed in any way as a man. I find feminists to be more of an annoyance than a threat.

        1. Feminism fucks men at every turn. Capitalism was the Left’s enemy but the New Left’s focus is against men.

          Feminism took elements of the Patriarchy that catered to women like no draft for women but then rejected anything good for men. Feminism is the epitome of having your cake and eating it too.

          Warren Farrell, author of The Myth of Male Power, seems to love women in The Red Pill documentary. He was a feminist – the goodhearted sort – back in the day but evolved out of it likely because he didn’t turn a blind eye to men. He cared about both genders. Men and women should have a partnership. Radical feminism rejects this.

          The feminists are supported by the system.

          Male Jewish truth-twisters and a group of women who are wrong seem to lead feminism today. The Jew deflects and says we can’t blame women and gays for everything. That’s true but it’s not the point. Jews like those shouldn’t be allowed access to women. I don’t feel their effect on Gentile women has been positive.

    1. Male oppression is a myth. Female oppression makes a bit more sense as you get more and more into the conservative areas, especially the hinterlands, but even there, women aren’t exactly oppressed. They are discriminated and do face societal shit constantly, but none of it mounts to oppression.

  6. When I was a child, I was far more impressed by adults than I am now. I was always aware that some of them were stupid, cruel, inept and so forth. However, I had the impression of most of them being wiser, smarter, kinder and more able than they seem to be today. Even looking back from where I am now, they seemed better people.

    The growth in incompetence is striking. Not far from where I live it took three years of “construction” and interference with traffic to put in two miles of sidewalk in an area where we thought they were fixing the road. Aside from parking on it and walking on it, they did nothing to the roadbed.

    My bank moved from a convenient location where vacancies are seldom to one so inconvenient that only the bank and a chain drugstore can manage continuous business.

    A lady I know who leased a shop had a leak in the roof, last September. The managers had a gutter installed between the roof and ceiling to carry the drops to a less troublesome location. It’s August and they still haven’t mended the roof. This was not some back-country building with uneven floors but one less than twenty years old.

    Most of the people in their twenties I meet socially are only marginally employable. When I was twenty, it wasn’t that we were such wonderful workers. It was that employers had firm work-or-get-fired policies.

    I think that between participation trophies, affirmative action and other pretenses that competence is no longer rewarded. Hence we see less of it. We ARE going backwards in the sense that we are becoming less capable as a society.

  7. One thing is for certain, shouting either philosophy from the rooftops are probably the absolute worst ways to find a mate.

    Men: Women are evil, manipulative cunts. I tell them this and they won’t talk to me anymore. Why? Probably because they are evil, manipulative cunts.

    Women: Men only want sex. Patriarchy destroyed the world and all men are rapists. I tell them this and they stop talking to me. I wonder why? They must just want to rape me.

    Jesus Crisp people. What the hell do you think is going to happen? How about treat others as individuals? Naa, will never happen.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)