MRM actually helping or preaching to the choir?

[Bumsniff]

Is the MRM actually helping men or just flapping at the gums preaching to the choir?

What actions are being put in place besides blogs?

 

[( . )( . )]

Ex blue pillers need at least something after they come out of the grinder with no house, stolen children and 70% of his net worth missing. It's not like anywhere else is going to give him support, discussions, articles etc on how sh1t really works out there.

There's far better causes to take up than an anti-MRM crusade in my opinion. Leave that for the manjaws and manginas. Besides most of those guys there are already privy to other red pill facets such as getting laid with a variety of women (options) and self improvement, I'm sure the hapless beta will be steered in the right direction.

 

[Bokanovsky]

Is the MRM actually helping men or just flapping at the gums preaching to the choir?

What actions are being put in place besides blogs?

The main problem is that not much is being done other than blogs. There is no organization, no lobbying, no collective action as with the feminists...yet. But it's important to keep in mind that the men's rights movement is still in its inception. It took feminists decades to become a formidable political force. Just like male rights advocates, they were initially ridiculed and put down by society at large. So it's definitely a possibility that MRM will become a legitimate movement with serious political power. But it won't happen overnight.

There are clear signs of the fact that men are becoming fed up with the way things are. The sh*tstorm around Adria Richards is a perfect illustration of this phenomenon. 10 years ago, she would have easily gotten away with what she did. The fact that so many young men got pissed off enough to get her fired (google the story if you don't know what they did) is a promising sign.

I think that the new generation of men - those who have grown up in an environment that is largely free of chivalry and where hookup culture is quickly replacing traditional relationships (and where women are consequently seen as "activity partners" rather than life partners) is going to be the generation that finally rebels against feminism. A man who manages to tap into this brewing discontent and turn it into a political ideology is guaranteed to become one of the greatest political leaders of this century.

 

[Jitterbug]

The main problem is that not much is being done other than blogs. There is no organization, no lobbying, no collective action as with the feminists...yet.

That is its current strength, IMO. Can't kill a movement that has no apparent head / leader.

 

[Bokanovsky]

That is its current strength, IMO. Can't kill a movement that has no apparent head / leader.

That may be true, but at a certain point, leadership becomes essential. No movement has ever succeeded without a leader. Imagine Christianity without Jesus, the American Revolution without George Washington, Soviet Union without Vladimir Lenin...A strong leader is always needed to unite the movement and turn individual discontent into collective action.

 

[evan12]

In democratic countries lobbies who do a change, these MRM men has to have lobbies and show in rallies , etc .
I think they need more action men .

 

[Bumsniff]

MRM needs a leader like some have suggested. Talking about it is one thing

 

[zekko]

The main problem is that not much is being done other than blogs. There is no organization, no lobbying, no collective action as with the feminists...yet. But it's important to keep in mind that the men's rights movement is still in its inception

Right, the movement is still in its earliest stages, which is really nothing more than a lot of grumbling going on in the background. Compare it to the feminist movement. Women got the right to vote around the turn of the last century, and they were already well organized by then. It's over 100 years later and their movement is still going strong.

If the MRM is really going to get anywhere, as has been said there needs to be leaders, lobbying, etc. But its very, very early in the game right now. Whether any of this ever actually occurs is up for debate, because men have been hardwired to protect women and children, to self-sacrifice, and to bear their own burdens silently without complaint.

Do you want to get p*$$y or do you want to spend your time organizing, picketing, rallying, and writing manifestos hoping it will change minds over a generation or two?

Do you want to get p*&&y or do you want to go out and get a job? Do you want to get p*$$y or do you want to go build a life for yourself? The two are not necessarily mutually exclusive. The fact that men are such slaves to p*$$y is part of the problem in the first place.

 

[Bokanovsky]

Whether any of this ever actually occurs is up for debate, because men have been hardwired to protect women and children, to self-sacrifice, and to bear their own burdens silently without complaint.

I don't know about that...I can't say I've ever felt a particularly strong urge to sacrifice myself for some skirt. Men are hard-wired to protect their families, not the womankind in general. The whole "women leave the sinking ship first" thing and similar white knight concepts are not part of a man's natural modus operandi. Chivalry is a product of societal brainwashing; nothing more.

 

[zekko]

Obviously, if you get a group of husbands and fathers together, they are going to band together to protect the women and children. If it is the "male gender role" to protect his child and the mother of his child, then they all have a mutual interest. That's where ideas like "Women and children first" come from.
Old rules, of course, not Alpha Player DJ rules. The traditional family barely even exists now. But if primitive hardwiring is there in women, it must be there in men as well.