[Disclaimer – Please note, the idea of this article is not to find fault with anyone. It is only to clear perspective for everyone fighting for a cause so that we don’t make such mistakes in future]
Recently I have written an article criticizing an event organized under the umbrella of an MRM group and some MRAs have asked me questions on that as in their view this article contradicts my earlier article “Indian Men’s Rights groups need more women activists”. MRAs commented this article is in direct conflict with my statement in my latest article – “We don’t need women’s approval for our rights”. This blog is to clarify between these two points and to show how these two are not contradictory statements.
To understand this we need to understand the prime cause and the allied causes of MRM. The reason any MRM group exists today is to ‘work for Men’s Rights and fight against misandry’. So this becomes the primary cause for any such group.
There are many allied causes that may be related to men’s causes. For example – Father’s Rights, Child Rights or the Rights of our mothers and sisters. But these are not direct causes for any MRM group and hence these can be termed as allied causes.
Any MRM group that exists today need to understand that they exist only because of the prime cause and NOT for any of the allied causes. If any of the allied causes that I have mentioned above is the prime cause for any organization to exist then that organization cannot be called a men’s rights group in the first place.
All MRM groups need to understand the concept of branding very much to understand the nuances of this issue. Any such group position their group brand as MRM group only based on the prime cause and hence they always need to position that prime cause above all the allied causes. So the group identity is not at risk. Allied causes should always remain and dealt with as allied causes so that they don’t become of primary importance.
To explain the first two statements I made on my different blogs and the statements that have created confusion in the minds of many MRAs I will take a different example.
Take for example the cause – “Street children should get free education as this is their fundamental right”.
Please note, that these children do not need my approval to get the free education they should automatically get it as a human being. If they are not having it today, that means they are deprived of it.
But it is important for these children that they get support from people like me so that their issues are looked into and they get their right easily. I need to support this cause just to show that I am a human being and nothing else.
On the contrary, if I oppose this cause that will only mean I am trying to show my inhuman face to them and I need to be arrested for that.
I hope with the above example I could clarify the point how someone’s support becomes important and at the same time approval becomes unnecessary.
Please note, simply because this cause is important to me that doesn’t mean I will promote this cause under the banner of an MRM group because this is unrelated cause to an MRM group. There may be many other such important causes that may be required for the society and if we want to support them we need to form separate groups with those objectives to fight with those issues. These issues even if important can’t be taken up solely under an MRM group.
It is also important to note that no group/person can actively support contradicting causes. For example, I can’t be an MRA and a Feminist at the same time. Because these two causes have conflicting interests. I may be either an erstwhile feminist turned into an MRA or an MRA turned into a feminist. But I can’t switch my stand every other day. This is harmful to any brand, be it a personal or an organizational brand.
Now consider my statements in two of my separate blog posts and you will know what I meant in two different situations.
When I stated that MRM movement needs more women activists, I meant more women who will talk about men’s rights and NOT about mother’s and sister’s rights. This is because I consider that as an important factor but we definitely don’t need approval from any woman to get our rights, because our rights should be an automatic phenomenon. So you know what I meant in these two different situations and these two statements are not contradictory to each other.
Now let’s consider the recent event that I have criticized.
This event showed only women talking about cruelty against mothers and sisters from a Men’s Rights podium. Now consider the following points –
- If the group proclaims that it is a Men’s Rights Group then showing any other cause other than the prime cause of MRM is completely wrong. If they need to show any other allied causes, they could have shown them AS allied cause only and NOT as the prime cause as they have shown.
- If they proclaim themselves as a group that promotes family harmony (as their tagline says) then too this program gave a completely wrong picture to the world. When they talk about family harmony how could they keep Fathers and grandfathers out of the function? Aren’t they a part of the family system? A group that promotes family values giving importance only to mothers and sisters and completely ignoring fathers and brothers is NOT acceptable from any standpoint. In a way, they have spread misandry to society by not keeping an equal number of men and women on the podium. They themselves have shown men are not important in terms of family harmony.
Now let me state how this program could have been organized –
- This program could have been organized in association with a group like “All India Mother-In-Law Protection Forum” or “All India Forgotten Women Association” banner where these organizations should have been the primary organizers and MRM group supporting it from outside as the allied cause to Men’s Rights.
- This could have been a small part of the program organized by an MRM group and talking only on men’s rights (women talk about men’s rights and NOT suffering from mothers and sisters). So that the cause is shown as allied cause to Men’s Rights or allied to the group’s cause.
One point to note is that if a group position itself as a Men’s Rights Group then in any such podium people need to talk about cruelty against fathers, brothers too and can’t have a discussion only on mothers and sisters (even when showing allied cause). Also, the podium needs to be shared equally if not more by men compared to women.
If a group proclaims itself as a family harmony group, it essentially needs to show the harmony on the podium by having a balance of men and women. By not having men on the podium means this group thinks men are NOT important in our families and that is spreading misandry in one form.
H is a front runner of MRM movement and has done more and enough actions, activities and innovations to hit new high’s on Men’s Rights. Since, I wasnt there, I am not commenting about this event but knowing H well, Nest of Family Harmony would include all and this event could be well perceived as why “Men’s Rights are important for Women”.
Your thoughts are personal and I agree on 1 point that conflicting or exclusive ideologies can not coexist. i.e. we dont expect PETA activists to join our protests.
HI JB..I have removed all names from my article as my intention was not criticize the same group that I like for the reasons u stated. But this was how this was projected on networks, and I have observed the trend in some ppl in different forums..so I was concerned..
H has done a good job and the press conference theme as much as I know is very much aligned with our own movement. It was a moment to grab focus on the women in our movement, which it tried to do with all honesty. Your concerns are legitimate but misplaced, The fighter for innocent people who was once a feminist but now a crusader, got this one a bit off mark 🙂
Cheers, keep blogging!
this post is not to find fault with anyone..but this is how the event was positioned by the group on networks. I have removed all references and names as this is purely to raise a concern to show a growing trend among some ppl..and not malign the group that I belong to..Please note that I will be more than happy if I am wrong
You can call me Partha..its ok if you are criticizing me..my name still remain the same. 🙂
I have just started doing my research on MRMs. I feel disappointed because i don’t really see MRM’s working in favour of men’s rights. It seems they’re fighting it against women. Also i was curious to know that what is MRM doing in cases where a man is raped by a man?
Found the link to your blog via twitter.
Man raped by a man can be booked under IPC 377. That is a miniscule issue for us to look at now. Go through my blog and then you will know that MRM is not fighting it out with women..only you need to have clarity of thought..
I did actually. But its not just about you . Its about other members too. The movement will lose its momentum this way.
To understand what MRM is, first you need to learn what is misandry and how it manipulates your beliefs! Once you’ll learn it, you’ll feel that you are also a victim of the same and the MRM will start making sense to you 😉
All the best
Well said..crisp and clear. Misandry is explained in my blog in a different article..read that
These are disturbing :
After reading these , don’t think can get any clarity. Also as an educated man myself , i feel pathetic that most men if not all , who are a part of this group are misogynists and abusive misogynists. Its like sort of gender war. I feel most men are better than that.
Half knowledge is dangerous dude…this link is from international men’s rights groups..for rape law analysis check my blog..u can search any topic of your interest
The most distasteful aspect of the MRM is that they undermine (or, at best, neglect) the causes they purport to care about.
Quoting from http://jezebel.com/no-i-will-not-take-the-mens-rights-movement-seriously-1532799085-
These are men who would rather spend their time on the internet terrorizing women and wasting the time of domestic violence counselors than actually take action, on the ground, to help men.
Here’s what they care to do instead:
In the name of equality and fairness, I am proclaiming October to be Bash a Violent Bitch Month.
I’d like to make it the objective for the remainder of this month, and all the Octobers that follow, for men who are being attacked and physically abused by women – to beat the living shit out of them. I don’t mean subdue them, or deliver an open handed pop on the face to get them to settle down. I mean literally to grab them by the hair and smack their face against the wall till the smugness of beating on someone because you know they won’t fight back drains from their nose with a few million red corpuscles.
And then make them clean up the mess.
[T]here are a lot of women who get pummeled and pumped because they are stupid (and often arrogant) enough to walk though life with the equivalent of a I’M A STUPID, CONNIVING BITCH – PLEASE RAPE ME neon sign glowing above their empty little narcissistic heads.
Women are the natural enemies of men. No matter what anyone says and how good women claim to be, that is just the truth. This will never stop and men will continue under the tyranny of women. … We are called rapists, abusers, bullies, and even homophobes because we don’t embrace the faggots biologically backward, queer-ass culture. … I am so fucking tired of this shit, that I really wouldn’t mind shooting a bitch dead in the face. … They are evil. ALL OF THEM!!! … This is a gender war, and women, ALL WOMEN! are the enemies, there is no compromising.
Those quotes are not cherry-picked or mined from some deep dark corner, they are commonplace in the manosphere to the point of dullness. So no, I don’t believe that those are human beings worthy of good-faith engagement. They’re rigid, embittered ideologues attempting to play dress-up with genuine, grown-up discourse. And their views should be acknowledged by mainstream intellectuals about as much as the views of people who think “reverse racism” is as big a problem as racism, people who think we should be concerned about Jews running world banks, and people who think that gay people holding hands cause hurricanes.
Matchar says it herself, in her brief overview of Elam’s bizarro worldview:
The way Elam sees it, college campuses are hotbeds of feminist bias where all male students are shamed as potential rapists in endless anti-rape orientations and workshops.
This is again from international arena..international men’s rights and Indian ones is different in their approach..you need to learn a lot
Not that i was even remotely interested in having any sort of interaction with you again, and i’m sure neither did you, i thought i should interact one last time so that you get out of your fool’s paradise . I’m forwarding you the official document of the government of India, from the Lok Sabha Secretariat containing the official statistics of crime against women.
I don’t know whether you too are a part of those MRM activists who’ve been providing fraudulent ‘self created’ statistics to prove them right . If you are ,bow down in shame and if you are not and are actually working in the direction of men’s rights , and not being misogynist (which is highly unlikely) , even then check this out :
98% of dowry cases against them are proved false
– 75% of rape cases against them are proved false.
– Higher number of male child labour
– More sexual violence against them.
– More violence against them
– 95% of crimes are against men
Click to access Crimeagainstwomen.pdf
Now we’re done !!
I assume it was for me to react to the fact that we from MRM are spreading lies. My reply is short and simple –
The document that you have attached talks about reported cases and NOT cases that are convicted. To know the convicted cases you need to visit NCRB website and check all the statistics there. You will know convicted percentage.
I am not sure if you have seen more sexual violence against men in my blog. If yes, let me know, I will clarify. More violence against men – check the murder, accident and suicide stats you will know (from NCRB website).
Simply because there is a separate category of Crime against women and the definition of crime created in favour of women that does not mean those crimes (e.g. domestic violence, rape, harassment etc) do not happen against men.
Writing a mail because the last thing we want is create confusion or falsehood. We don’t without stats or understanding the stats. If you want to know the same study different reports, and yes don’t conclude based on emotions.
I don’t hate women, I love them. Only I hate feminists, I hate liars. This does not mean I support rape, but I oppose terming every sex as rape. You will probably not understand this now. So please read my blog more and raise your questions there. I have never moderated anyone’s comment, you have seen that. I blv in freedom of speech and debate.
Your views welcome.
Compare the stats stated by MRM folks in comparison to the reality!!!
[…] if they are in the formative years of existence like the Men’s Rights are. The value of the brand or the cause is built in these formative years and hence the leaders’ moral standards need to be […]