Stop inventing wrong definitions to the Men’s Rights Movement

| February 4, 2015

After seeing a comment posted for the article  “Woah! Gender politics makes a cameo in the movie of Spirituality”, I feel compelled to write this blog post in response.  This blog post serves as an answer to the commenter and also to anyone who has misconceptions regarding the Men’s rights movement.  Please read this post if you want to cleanse your soul from misandry (Am I doing the Baba talk correctly?? 😉 )

Dear Vijay,

I am deeply hurt to see the way you understand our movement.  The following definition of yours is pathetic.

My point is – this whole Men’s right activism is good. It tries to create awareness on legal issues pertaining to male exploitation – definitely good cause”

First of all, you do not understand what is the cause behind “Men’s Rights Activism”.  You just have imagined that MRAs talk only about ‘legal’ issues.  Pity! If you think that men’s rights activism is about ‘legal’ issues, you have COMPLETELY missed the point.

Let me explain you how men like you have been made to believe the “myth” of male power.  The people like Mr. Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev, by means of the talks like the one mentioned in this blog post, contribute to the society’s reinforcement of the myth.   Sadhguru belongs to a class of men called “Alpha” men, who have some people listening to them, and their power is solely because some people listen to them.  Take a second look at how he speaks only that today’s generation “wants” to hear!

In order to retain their power, alpha men have the logical necessity to talk only the things which people like to hear.  And, obviously, people (like the audience who asked the question about feminine worship), like to hear about “how it has been a terrible time for women” and get an emotional pride “Wow! I am not one of those low-lifes,  who treat women badly.  I treat my wife as a partner.  I am a very good person. ”  Women, as the attention-seeking clan, as the history has seen so far, like to be acknowledged of their victim-hood.  This is no way different from talking about how oppressed scheduled castes were once upon a time, to get votes in an election.

Why does no one want to talk about men’s issues?  This is because men have been socialized that way.  They do not have time (unlike me) to read some pointless articles, which define their victim-hood.  Also, they have been socialized to have an “ego of a man”, which is nothing but another name for “emotional castration”.  Now, who would get popular from talking about victimhood and exploitation “emotionally castrated” stones?  There is going to be no use of that.  Hence, these Sadhus, babas, politicians and almost all powerful alpha “Men” in the society end up talking things which appeal to the women of the society.

These alpha men very well know that the power of a modern household rests completely with the woman.  She influences each decision that the family takes.  She influences every thought her child has.  The modern ‘man’ is caught between the nuances of providing and protecting his woman and his children.  He is so deeply into it that he could not sit and listen to such victimhood propagating talks about him, which gives a dent on his self-confidence.  This is the attitude which the MRAs try to fight against.

We feel that the common man should come out of his shell of 16th century burden of “providing and protecting” and try to explore himself, try to explore his emotions, try to do whatever he wants to do with the one single life he has.  Man has to be allowed to make mistakes and learn from them.  Man has to get in touch with his emotions.  Every mistake of a man should not be blown up to an extent that he loses his self-respect.  Men are humans too.  The society should stop objectifying men as “success” objects.  Men should be given their own space.  Men should not be forced to do the work, which others think he should do.  Men should not be treated as unpaid body guards and servants.

The above paragraph gives a brief gist of what the Men’s rights movement fights for.  In the above paragraph, just substitute the word “Man” with “Woman” and “Success object” with “Sex object”, you will see feminism.   Actually, feminism demands much more than that.  Feminism demands that men should be penalized for not providing and protecting women.  Feminism demands that men be made to pay for women’s misery.  Feminism demands that men should “suffer” financially when a man/woman choose to leave each other.  Feminism demands that females should be treated as “Goddesses” and their words should be taken as “Gospel truth”.  Feminism demands that men should be punished for greeting women with a “Hello” on the street, when the primary societal role of a man is to “seek-out” a woman to be his wife.

Did you voice concerns against Feminism until now?  No?  How inclusive are you !   But, when a MRA talks about how alpha men put thoughts in to the society’s mind and how this leads to misandry (male hatred), you seem to be very much concerned.   It is another way of saying that you do not care when people hurl baseless abuses at men.  At the same time, when someone talks for men, and there is a chance that women would find it as non-supportive of their sentiments, you create a huge hue and cry!

If you are too much insistent on the context of spirituality, the demands of MRAs have spiritual inclinations too.  Anything that a man does, without being forced, lets him discover his own self, setting up a path of (supposed) spiritual improvement.

I cried foul when a self-proclaimed “enlightened” man, a spiritual guru, who many people listen to, exaggerated and misconstrued the history to get the following feelings from people:

From Men: “Wow! Women are really great!  They never had what they wanted! Let me follow this fellow to see what how I can help women.”

From Women: “Wow! This guy talks exactly how I feel.  I should bring my husband and ask him to listen to this guy.  May be he will learn his lesson then.”

At least, women were given the opportunity to get in touch with their feelings to realize what they actually wanted from life.  Women know what contributed to independent thinking.  The current generation’s men don’t even have access to these sentiments because they are being emotionally castrated early in their manhood.  Men don’t even realize that, while they toil to provide and protect their family as a 16th century male did, their female counterparts want so-not-to-be 16th century females.  But, when the male moves a wee bit from his role of provider and protector, a 16th century male role, towards an independent man (See? It is hard to imagine an independent man!), his women counterparts hurl abuses at this male for shying away from his “responsibilities”.  Isn’t this a targeted harassment with ulterior motives?

Yes, women of the history could not get ALL the things they wanted from a patriarchal family system.  And, they hold the men responsible for their wishes not being fulfilled.  But, could the men of history get ALL the things they wanted from the same patriarchal family system?  NO!   And, they never even had the time to organize themselves and fight against their wishes not getting fulfilled.  Men are so unemotional that they get adapted to the adverse conditions and “accept” the injustice meted out to them as a part of their life.

If you criticize the Men’s rights movement or its activists, make sure that you really understand what their intentions are.  Else, your comment, like the one you left, remains a sick monologue, akin to Sadhguru’s, whose purpose is only to throw bullshit and keep the women to see you in their favor.

Last 1600 years were worst for women. Could possibly be true in religious or spiritual contexts. Because the video was solely about that.

It was not about washing machines and household works of women or technological impacts on household works.

So basically you are picking up a statement somewhere from in between and giving lots of out of context explanations.”

About setting the context, for a self-proclaimed ‘enlightened’ being, who cares enough to pose appealingly for the cover of almost every book his publication publishes, a yoga teacher,  who cares enough to appear physically presentable in the press releases and media articles, a spiritual leader, who knows enough about the nuances of social media and hence, has a dedicated team equivalent to today’s online marketing team of Whirlpool, it feels fishy and intentional not to set the context, when he says that the past 1600 years have been terrible for women.  He clearly wanted the audience to think that he empathizes with women “socially”, if not in addition to, “spiritually”.  Going by your principles, it looks like he is not inclusive, because men didn’t have an awesome 1600 years either, spiritually or socially.

By talking difficulties faced by women ‘only’, ignoring the men’s difficulties, has negative consequences.  It makes women hate men.  And, at the same time, it makes men hate most of the other men, just to cope up with the support-system of women.  To me, any person, who does not talk about the difficulties faced by the society as a “whole”, only ends up spreading legal terrorism!  This is what is happening in the name of women-empowerment in India.  When everything is against men in a society, his last resort would be to become an anti-social.

And, we all know! Women exaggerate their pain to get attention.  Going by the terms of creationism, it is their ‘nature’ to be emotionally weak, to attract a male to protect them.  When one makes up his mind against men by listening to exaggerated and desperate cries to catch attention (and to gain a LOT from the attention gained), ends up discriminating against men.  This is how the universal judiciary is biased against the male clan.  Child access always goes to the mother in case of a separation.  Contrary to Human rights, a man is presumed guilty until proven innocent, when a woman puts an allegation of ‘gender-related’ crime against him.  These are the results of the thoughts and beliefs of people like YOU.  And, you guys talk as if you brought justice and inclusiveness to earth!

My anger in the original blog post was more towards the intention than towards the actual things that Mr. Sadhguru quoted.  And, yes, history would find two different and opposite variations for many things. For example, there is a less-popular variation of history (mythology, as I would call it) where Ravana is hailed as the hero and Ram as the villain.  The variation that a man sides with, talks a lot about what he actually means! Thus, I feel totally justified to bash a social figure, who irresponsibly spread male hatred in the name of spiritual talk.

I would like to end this post assuming that I have told helped you understand what our movement is all about, before you spew the internet and society with ill-informed understanding about Men’s rights movement.  After all, we are fighting for social betterment, what are you fighting for?  What is your contribution to betterment of the society? Huh?

P.S.: Thanks for correcting my typo! I will take care not to repeat such typos.

Tags: , , , ,

Category: Views

About the Author ()

Comments are closed.