The Problem with the Men’s Movement (MRA)

There is a comparison going around the so-called ‘Men’s Movement’ that the Forbes article was a grand ‘battle.’ Some compare it to the ‘Stonewall Riots.’ First, the ‘gay movement’ is a political joke (gays rely on persuading judges more than people). Second, comparing and fashioning the ‘men’s movement’ with the ‘gay movement’ is a good way to completely destroy any ‘men’s movement.’

Discontent is no political cause. And annoying women is no political victory. The Forbes article was interesting. If it persuaded any men to not marry career women or to second-guess it, then it was worthwhile. But sticking twigs in a hornet’s nest is not the definition of victory.

Let me use an example. Take the lesbian kiss Madonna gave to Spears and Aguilera. It caused much commotion. People talked about it on television shows. Commentators bemoaned what was going on. But did it do anything to advance, say, the Gay Movement? …Of course not.

Getting people stirred up is not the same as victory, though political novices think so.

 Let try another example. On the American Left, there are many bloggers who are now the main influence on the Democrat Party. They raise lots of money. They network. But they are thrilled with the idea of making a commotion, not in actually winning. They haven’t won anything. They are full of anger and rage. But they are not tuned to tactics of politics. Being angry and writing on blogs does not persuade many people to your cause. It just keeps you angry and other likeminded people angry. Many Democrats within the party want these bloggers’ influence out.

In the same way, many in the MRA are reading the Forbes issue all wrong. It was no victory except perhaps educating more men on what is going on. There was no ‘battle.’ It was a commotion. That is the huge difference.

The real battle is going to be IMBRA. Those who are serious about winning are those fortunate souls working in basements around the nation trying to destroy this law. Those lawyers who are educating people about this law, how to deal with it, are the current warriors, not those writing essays on message forums.

Feminists are not in crisis, politically. They are all united on the political front. It is the Men’s Movement that is in crisis. There is no organization. There is no set of priority. If you want to sum up the Men’s Movement, it would be this: lots of anger and rage. But anger and rage are never persuading. Even stranger are the chants of doomsday emerging from MRA sites. Why on earth would someone want to join a movement that believes the end is near? And what does any of that have to do with marriage, divorce, and IMBRA?

“There is no direction, Pook, because the MRA is like the Libertarian Party.” If so, then the MRA has no future. The Libertarian Party is a series of political failures. It is as if they are more interested in being ‘right’ than in actually trying to ‘win.’ It is easy to be right when you are never elected to anything.

“But that is because of conspiracies of the other two parties keeping the Libertarian Party down.” No. The reason is because the candidates don’t try. Check this out: look how much money the libertarian candidate actually spends on his campaign. It is a joke. They just want to be put on the ballot. This way they can hope to be invited to interviews on TV or slap on their book that they were “a candidate for senator.” These guys just don’t want to win politically.

I think the best bet is for the MRA to become a special interests group. “But Pook! Special interests groups are bad! Evil!”

No, they aren’t. They are necessary for a representational government. Special interests groups represent interests of the people. NOW (National Organization of Women) is a special interests group. NRA (National Rifle Association) is a special interests group.

“Why are they necessary to a representational government?”

Let me tell you a story. In the Texas Senate, while the legislature is in session, there are representatives of special interests listening in. I met one. He represents all the beer interests in the state of Texas. His job was to listen to something that would affect his industry. Then he would bring it up to the legislators in private meetings. The concerns for this guy would be the obvious (like a tax on liquor) but also the not so obvious (like taxes on fuel which makes transportation of beer more expensive).

A Texas legislator told me, “I trust that guy [the beer guy]. No legislator can know all the details of the economy. It is up to him to tell me if the Senate has impacted his industry somehow. As soon as he lies to me, he is gone. But I need him to keep informed.”

And you thought all this time special interests were corrupting the republic! Well surprise, surprise. The special interest groups are there to inform the legislators of the public’s or an industry’s interest. They are not evil. They are informational. They also tend not to be on one party or another. The NRA would advocate candidates that were pro-gun, pro-Second amendment whether they were Republican or Democrat. The special interest’s job is to be all about the cause. They have the task to teach the legislators about the issues at hand (because, despite what conspiracy theorists think, politicians are more stupid than they are evil.

A Men’s Rights Advocacy group, the MRA, could have the focus of…

First, educate the masses of men, women, and current politicians through persuasion.

Second, fight to tear down oppressive laws such as IMBRA, paternity law, family courts, and so on.

Third, focus to change the media and culture (wake up to the fact that the media will NEVER change. They are who they are.)

What do we have right now? It is this:

Forbes puts out an article on career women. Many women are angry about this. MRA declares it a ‘great victory,’ the equivalent of a “Stonewall Riot.”

Now do you see why I say the Men’s Rights Movement is in crisis? There is no Battle of Forbes. But there is the Battle of IMBRA.