In the vein of other political octopodes, this movement started with the apparently benign quest of countering toxic feminism, yet quickly developed into its “other side of the coin”, joining members not through calm and rationality, or hope for a better world, but anger, frustration, residual disappointment, entitlement,regressive thinking and in some cases, pathological hatred.
It is thus fair to claim that this movement, just like feminism, plays an active part in a manufactured tribal war of the sexes, as opposed to simply countering the extreme views it claims formented it in the first place.
If we engage in a rather grotesque exercise of imagination, we can compare both these movements with the human centipede envisaged in the creepy film bearing the same name. Once the tribal bond is established, the head of the centipede merely engages in an act of bowel relief, the contents of which pass through everyone attached. Such is the case with toxic ideas. I am attached, therefore I receive and pass on the message, without processing (digesting) it first.
The octopus analogy refers to the many subdivisions of this movement, each emphasising a different issue. On the whole, the MRM pushes forth the following ideas:
- Western societies favour girls and women over boys and men, in terms of declaring them superior in nature;
- Education is geared towards the needs and formation of females;
- Women have legal advantages over men in terms of conceiving and raising children;
- The job market favours women;
- Women often make false claims of victimisation by men, especially when sexual misconduct is involved;
- Feminism seeks to infiltrate Marxist ideas into western states;
- Women have become undesirable to men through fashion fads and their lack of interest in pleasing men through their image or behaviour;
- Women are deluded in thinking they can fill positions only men can;
- Women are generally labile, hysterical and untrustworthy;
- Women have unwarranted and delusional demands of men;
- Women use their sexual prowess in order to prey on men;
- Women seek to demean and demonise men;
- Marriage is a prison;
- Masculinity as a concept is under threat.
Needless to say, as in the case of feminism regarding all men with suspicion, there is only a thin line between making these assertions about some women and ending up making them about all women, not to mention male feminists (“betas” or “castrati” as they are sometimes referred to, the latter referencing eunuchs).
What is so disengaging about feminists today is precisely the generalisation and acrimony; the intention to dominate. Sadly, the same is present in the men’s rights movement.
It seems that neither side is actually looking for a better understanding and a harmony-conducive compromise through open discussions, but plain and simple dominance. This is achieved through righteous anger, demonisation, derision and solipsism.
The blind fighting the blind, so to speak.
Perhaps no advocate of this movement is better known than Paul Elam. To see the drive behind this individual one only needs to read a few of his “best quotes”:
Should I be called to sit on a jury for a rape trial, I vow publicly to vote not guilty, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that the charges are true.
There is nothing left to interpretation or fit for whitewashing. Fortunately, such declarations might see Mr Elam permanently excused from jury duty, yet the encouragement given to others, to do the same, is very poisonous.
Below I will expand on two offshoots of this movement, on a gradient of harmful prejudices and intentions.
Along the way, the men’s rights movement developed a radical branch known as MGTOW, short for Men Going Their Own Way. This particular group, though not disavowing sexual interactions with women, for short-lived practical purposes only, does swear them off in the sense of commitment and forming families, as apparently, all women are ravenous, manipulative parasites who can exploit men more than ever before due to our current culture of female empowerment.
It’s safe to say personal experience along those lines is a prerequisite for men who adopt this radical declaration. Both in being disappointed and looking for a justification for disappointments caused (that does, indeed, happen).
For a taste of the group’s attitude (rather reminiscent of bile), here is a collection of fine quotes.
Although the term itself is gender-neutral, Incel, as in “involuntarily celibate”, is mostly circulated in online discussions between young men who find it difficult to find a female partner. It is often associated with the men’s rights movement and at some point spawned a radical offshoot known as Truecel, which in turn, spawned Elliot Rodger.
In other words, this group is a glorified case of blue balls, pardon the frankness.
They tend to focus on the superficiality of women and their preference for overtly alpha males (the MGTOW type perhaps), arguing women have materialistic and self-gratifying selection criteria when it comes to male partners, and some, such as Rodger, argue the female sex is animal-like in pursuing assholes.
They blend in with the rest of the select MRM gathering through their awful views on women; the only difference is their lack of dignity about it. Whilst the MGTOW crowd tries to display some type of spine, even if the result is members’ own loneliness and nothing more, Incel types declare their desire for vaginas (artificial ones will do, some claim). An infamous Truecel member even came forth with the proposition that it’s the government’s responsibility to provide men with sex, as some kind of social program.
For a taste of this group’s attitude (with a tinge of sour grapes), here is a collection of their intellectual produce.
Identity politics are not limited to the left. To counteract the plethora of labels and categories the left has consecrated in popular jargon, the right is slowly building a system of its own.
Those who are willing to share their lives with women provided women always obey them.Those who hate women to the point of wanting little or nothing to do with them. Those who hate women but demand sex of them.
And on it goes; it seems all these attitudes, temporary as they may be for each individual, are identities and chosen paths in life now.