Thursday, November 01, 2012

I Have a Confession to Make

I, your humble preceptor-general, have a confession to make. I am sick and tired and bored spitless by most of the  nomenclatures and categories which the so-called "MRM" has spawned for its use over the years. And you know what else? I've a mind to fling the lot of it into the scrapyard and start afresh with something radically new.

I would begin by crunching and chucking the word "MRM" itself, with "MRA" and "MGTOW" following close behind. Then "masculinist" and "masculist" would need to go. And thereafter we would undoubtedly think of other items to throw away as well.

I realize it would be difficult for most people to re-imagine and re-conceptualize EVERYTHING in the way I am suggesting here. And so I don't realistically expect that of them. But then, they are not the intended audience here. . . are they?

Al right, here's what I recommend. When you settle into a philosophical tête-à-tête with your political cohorts, make it a rule to outright banish all labels (MRA, MRM, MGTOW, etc..etc.) from the talk, and discipline yourself to get along entirely without them.

I expect you'll find this like throwing away intellectual crutches and learning to walk on your own legs for the first time ever. I think we all need to undertake this exercise. I really, really do. I think we have gotten intellectually paralytic and sclerotic, and it is killing us. We need to think outside the box and see the game in a MUCH bigger way. In other words, we need to go for the mountain-top view. Don't you agree?

4 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

You explain your position very well.

You appear to be concerned primarily (exclusively?) with politicized feminism. The men, including myself, who were taken aback by your statements on that Avfm interview view feminism only as the most acute problem and believe the problems run much deeper.

For example, we do NOT want a return to traditionalism because we view it as a different, more concealed form of "innate" feminism in the sense that the man is subservient to the woman and is disposable. The man is driven into the provider and protector role often against HIS best interest.

We want to see not only the rejection of politicized feminism, but a rejection of traditional male roles as well. It's a tall order for sure.

We believe exclusive focus on feminism is not nearly enough. I would be very curious to hear your thoughts on this.

Do you think we should fight one battle at a time or do you see the battle against feminism as the only battle men need to fight?

P.S. I have read much of your writing and agree with nearly all of it as concerns politicized feminism. You are the best at breaking down the anatomy of feminism.

6:28 AM  
Blogger Aaron Thawe said...

A wonderful idea. I have already taken to referring to myself as a pro-male egalitarian.

9:19 AM  
OpenID Eric said...

Fidelbogen:
I think it's an idea whose time has come. Count me on board with it!

3:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree too, but then I hate labels anyway. I just think what I think, people use labels to box you and attack you.

5:07 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home