EDITORIAL POLICY REMINDER

Chaps (and chapesses),

A number of us have spent years getting this site to where it is - a respected place for commentary and discussion about male gender and male sexual discrimination.

The editorial policy is clear  - there is to be no anti-women nonsense on this site. Anti-feminism, anti-gender feminism and anti anti-male feminism is fine but not anti-women.

I have had to delete a number of comments recently because they were extreme/anti-women/full of expletives and I will continue to do so. If people have a problem with that, they can set their own site up.

I get why some may be angry, this is why the site exists, but this is no place to channel that anger against women. I like women for a start!

Let's get back to it guys.

Posted by Skimmington

Comments

[Jon]

Well said.

[John Kimble]

Even better than anti-feminism is anti-gender feminism. Lets be as specific as possible in identifying the enemies of equality.

Gender feminists are the ones who tar all men with the same brush. We must at all times be the exact opposite of such people and be absolutely precise as to who the guilty really are.

[Skimmington]

Very sound as ever John - have changed it

[Jon]

Sorry guys, but to me pretty much all feminism is anti-men. I don't see the distinction but if that is part of your editorial policy then I will of course respect it or leave.

[Skimmington]

Hi Jon

Anti-feminism is certainly not banned from here at all - just to reassure you. I think John K wanted to be more specific about its description. I'll remove the strike through - we can get into this world of discussion another time.

My main issue is to reiterate and ensure we are not being anti-women and the posts I have had to delete were.

[ian]

Some men struggle to see what is actually being written and just listen to complaining women and act. Very disappointing and another reason why MRM don't get nowhere. One comment deleted I noticed was nothing to do with women, but Men and this very subject.

I'm outa here.

[John Kimble]

Just to clarify, I don't think there's any problem saying we're "anti-feminist" - after all most of the high profile feminists and almost all feminist organisations are indeed gender feminist. It's just BETTER to be more specific and stop man-haters twisting our words.

The term "feminist" is now so vague and meaningless that it could include all sorts of people, some of whom are decent or at least neutral.

If we attack gender feminism instead of just feminism it identifies exactly the type of people we have a problem with. If we simply attack "feminists" then the some of the less informed in society assume you to be against women's equality when that couldn't be further from the truth.

[John Kimble]

"to me pretty much all feminism is anti-men"

Indeed, but it's still nice to recognise the few feminists who aren't anti-men. Also if we can get the terms "gender feminism" and "equity feminism" to be more widely used than that would be of huge significance too, so it's a win-win situation.

[John Kimble]

I'd also like to add that I'm aware of one of the comments that have been deleted and tbh I thought it was a borderline case either way, and I personally would probably have given the poster the benefit of the doubt in the interests of freedom of speech and due to their track record of posting excellent comments here (though I'm not aware of other comments so perhaps those were worse)

That said, it's good to up our game and have high standards though we shouldn't overdo things either and I do hope no one leaves the blog.

[Jon]

Thanks guys for the clarification. (phew!) :)

[JOHN TAYLOR]

After being in, best described as the deep end,on Cancer Chat, re some comments made on here of which I disagreed, I must state there are good and bad in both sexes.

Let's go forward together using gentlemanly terminology...

Am pleased to state, I think I have overcome the wrath of one whom was highly critical of the comments on here.That female, I now consider to be an ally ...

I trust nobody leaves this site...

[Groan]

I think it counter productive to be anti women. At is falls into the hands of those crying misogyny. Also men in general have a deep desire to protect women and can be put off by apparent "doing down" of women. I think the focus of anti feminist is exactly right as that is an ideology supported by both men and women. And what I have found TROM refreshing for is honesty and fairness and factual debate. I like to think I,m for something rather than just against.

[ian]

" Indeed, but it's still nice to recognise the few feminists who aren't anti-men."

Sorry John but that statement shows you have no grasp of the history and roots of feminism or what feminism actually stands for. Feminism by its very definition is anti-men no matter what way you slice it. Anyone who comes out with that statement is damn right naive mate.

This might explain it better for you
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CwEf1uZhpk

I find it laughable, though not surprising that the site has pandered to the whim of a woman who had no logic in her argument, made her own insults, used all the usual victimology tactics and instead of coming on here and debating any issues she had, used a few suckers to do her bidding for her after she evokes some of the usual emotive blackmail.

Sums up all that is wrong with MRM. You say this site has come a long way and is so recognised, yet only a few people make virtually all the one or two comments you ever see on here, they are very thin on the ground at the best of times. There are rarely any debates or in depth argument, which it seems will probably be censored by the site anyway, whenever a women plays the "cards".

It has now dropped down massively in my esteem as a credible MRM site that will make any difference. It is like FNF who made no difference in 30 years, along come a more radical group F4J and they made more difference in 1/10th of that time until a few weak men undermined that too.

Personally I think you just scored a massive own goal. It is no wonder why I know quite a few men are looking to foreign MRA's and eastern groups for some real action and support. Fed up I suspect with the lack of backbone in British MRA's.

[ian]

http://www.avoiceformen.com/portal/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Shaming-tactics.pdf

I will leave this here for you as I think there are some who really need to read it.

Good luck.

[JOHN TAYLOR]

Ian, this is the terminology I did not agree with that caused the offence on Cancer Chat...

"Lets face it .. it's only the fat arsed miserable old feminists that needs the excuses, as always ..not women of real MERIT!...

Hope we can now put this to bed and move on...

Best wishes...

[ian]

..and what is not true about that statement John? Even given it's colourful wording, it is still true and also recognises women who actually have real merit over those who use other tactics to pretend they do. You speak as if the feminists it relates too do not use far worse terms toward men, which they do.

I fail to see the big issue with it and stand by all I have said.

[John Kimble]

"Feminism by its very definition is anti-men no matter what way you slice it. Anyone who comes out with that statement is damn right naive mate."

I suggest reading up on individualist feminism for a start. Those feminists are some of the best MRAs out there. "Feminism" is just such a vague term that it's better to use something more specific if possible. Suggestions could include: man-hating feminists, gender feminists, radical feminists, female supremacists. Alternatively just use the term "most" to condemn most feminists rather than every last one.

I knows it's a minor issue, but it's just a good way to once again be so much better than the opponents of equality who love tarring all men with the same brush, never mind all MRAs.

[ian]

I don't know what you are on John Kimble but I don't want no part of the MRM your peddling.

An individual women is simply a woman on her own merits no different from a man and needs no label or ideology and is not a feminist of any kind.

It is interesting to see after you walked away form the other forum with your old chap in your hand, she never answered your question and refused to address the base issue..your kind of feminist eh?

Sorry mate but your being ridiculous and I'm afraid from what I see most MRA's would disagree with you about the term feminist. You sound like I am talking to one.

End of debate, you as well as this blog has totally lost MRM credibility in my eyes.

[ian]

Also in my book anyone acting as an apologist or trying to qualify feminism or feminists to other MRA, yet claims to be MRA themselves, is someone not to be trusted.

[Jon]

This video from girlwriteswhat discusses the issue http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQWoNhrY_fM&feature=g-user-u

[ian]

I am not going to debate what I know is absolute fact there is no such thing as "good feminists" with regards to men's rights or proper and true equal rights, the very concept and roots of feminism negates this possibility.

If a woman of genuine merit has any self respect the last thing she would call herself is a feminist, in any shape or form. She would simply call herself a woman, a person and shut up and get on with it, as men do and just like the women I know who are self made and in strong positions, all of them have no time for feminism or feminists.

This woman in the video also has her facts wrong about shared parenting for a start, it has never been part of the family court mandate despite promises from Cameron and previous governments. Thus it cannot have been "removed" in the first place.

What's with the haircut too? is that what won you over John?

[ian]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9G9AAhlMo4&feature=relmfu

In her favour, you should see this one I think it is more relevant that the last. She actually explains why MRA is extremist or seen as such anyway and why I say some "extreme" forms of action are required to kick it into mainstream view.

[ian]

She say's John, in regard to MRA's and the way they think, speak etc

"If some people have a problem with the message simply by how it is delivered,they can really go fuck themselves. Strong language, it offends people, so what. Reality is offensive, so what. These issues need attention and frankly men have to scream to be heard"

I think she has more sense and bigger moxy than the men running this site. I doubt she would undermine herself while pandering to a whining opposer on another site who plays the usual "offended card" and frankly hands you your own balls while so easily skipping around answering the base issue it was all about in the first place.

Girlwriteswhat was your choice John, it was a good one, she goes against your own opinion it seems.

[John Kimble]

Ian, as I said before I don't really have an issue with your comments and I give you the benefit of the doubt. However, I also support Skimmington if he doesn't want strongish language used here - such posts are only going to be twisted by misandrists and used against us to make mountains out of mole hills. In fact that's exactly what has happened.

[John Kimble]

Also, there are 2 Johns and one "Jon" posting here and all the above is getting a bit confusing.

[ian]

Yeah...a whole lot of "Johns" on here, starting to sound like a red light district...you all wanna be careful, "she who must be obeyed" might pull a "card" on that one too and get you all running like good little boys :-)

[ian]

John K, that is not what happened at all, others made the mountain out of a molehill by entertaining a debate with a misandrist and giving it oxygen them the first place and not seeing exactly what she was doing. Not only that but letting them walk straight around the main issue without giving an answer. Then others undermining other MRA's to appease her.

People really are naive if they do not realise that everything will be taken out of context and manipulated by people like that regardless of how you say it, so please don't blame me for some peoples lack of knowledge on how to deal with such women.

I wasn't the one handed my hat...not the one censoring and certainly not the one appeasing blatant feminists who don't even have the front to debate before the one they are accusing. That's why they use idiots to do it for them.

[Dave]

Yeah, and I (Dave) could easily get confused with the other (dave) which doesn't help either.

[ian]

http://owningyourshit.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/transcript-of-all-those-dangerous-woman.html

I think the first paragraph of this article sums up everything that happened here. Read it quick before yet another comment gets deleted form this now ridiculous self undermining blog.

[ian]

...yes that was sarcasm...before anyone gets offended:-)

[ian]

Oh P.S

Some of you might find this useful

http://www.4shared.com/android/a07OC43X/app_70320_22193.html

A basic android app for feeds to the best MRM sites and their current posts, enjoy, share if you will.

[ian]

sorry wrong URL, this is the right one. Click blue button and wait for download time and click download file now. Then side-load into your android device.It may get upped to the Google play market at some point for easier access.

http://www.4shared.com/android/t2eB5zej/app_70320_22193.html

[ian]

http://www.4shared.com/android/NouGvSfW/app_70320_22193.html

Oh god for the love of an edit comment button: a mistake in one of the apps feed url's has been corrected now this is the one, finally (feel free to delete the others)

http://www.4shared.com/android/NouGvSfW/app_70320_22193.html

[JOHN TAYLOR]

Can only agree re the confusion John K...

It saddens me to have to repeat my comment above :

(Let's go forward together using gentlemanly terminology)...

...Then to read:"If some people have a problem with the message simply by how it is delivered,they can really go fuck themselves...

..To be frank there is too much use of the word "fcuk" used in forums - including by the fairer sex. I deliberately reversed the "cu"

Little did I know that I would have to blame Cancer Research UK's Race for Life for the use of the word "fcuk"....

Roll on the day when Equality has been achieved for both sexes..

John T...

[ian]

As I said John TAYLOR, gentlemanly words have got nowhere in 30 years, this much is very clear. I can only stand by what I think was an own goal by some here. Other prominent people, including female pro-MRM bloggers that have been cited, agree it seems with my view on this? :-)

Aaaaanyhooo......

The "MRM info" android app has been improved (v1.1) with proper site icons instead of generic buttons and will be available on the Getjar market shortly.

Will let you know when it is live. Any feeds/video channels, sites anyone think should be included/excluded from it, please let me know, review/rate it on getjar also For now it can be downloaded direct here until it is.

http://www.4shared.com/android/CMLr-nrk/app_70320_22193.html

[Jon]

ian, I'm here to support men's rights. That's all. I respect GWW's arguments, I don't agree with them all. I never said I disagree with swearing, but I'll respect the Ed's decision on it, 100%.

My points are:
1) We call ourselves "extremists" at our peril.
2) If we treat all women as feminists treat men, we are no better than they are and our argument is void.
3) Finally, as I think noone here is in disagreement with, violent protest is unacceptable.

To the editor Skimmington, I'd just like to say I do not share Ian's opinion of the site and will be sticking around and supporting it. You all do a great job IMO.

In general: We can disagree about certain elements but divisions amongst us because (basically) some of us dislike strong language or the exact definition of 'feminism' is just silly. Surely we have more in common than we have as differences. When I post here I just don't swear - I don't see the issue.

[ian]

oh and nobody has advocated violence at any stage in this matter, other than as self defence.

Don't forgot any division was started by others acting at the behest of a feminist hyperbolising and playing cards to get around answering a question and getting others to do her bidding.. just remember that much.

[Jon]

"oh and nobody has advocated violence at any stage in this matter, other than as self defence."

I'm aware of that Ian - *as I specifically said in my last post*

However if you describe yourself as an EXTREMIST then people will draw their own conclusions and might receive the PERCEPTION that you are advocating (or moving towards advocating) violence.

That's why it is a bad idea to call ourselves extremists. It is counter-productive.

I think I am through with this thread now.

[ian]

Who has described themselves as an extremist? What part of "they will call you an extremist for anything you do that upsets them" do you not understand. You worry more about what someone might call you or some feminist getting in a hyperbolised flap because of a word used than getting anything done. Nuff said.

I am sure we are all through with this thread and my point was shown clearly. There has been opportunities to maybe do more but all I see is a handful of blokes whining over their pints of bitter and repeating news headlines. As I said, Twenty years from now, people who do things your way will either still be sitting here saying the same old moans in twenty years or taking the credit for the work of others who went a bit further and made more effort, whether they are called extremist or not.

[ian]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2145009/Free-speech-strangled-law-bans-insults-triggered-series-controversial-arrests.html?ITO=1490

Saw this and thought of you. This cultural marxism brought in by the scumbags of labour is exactly the kind of thing you have pandered too that fuel the dopey woman in the other forum. The sooner it is given a big boot along with Labour the better. Then maybe men will grow a pair again and ignore arm flapping old bags using cards....take away their cards. Simple.

[ian]

Lets face it after looking at the handful of so called MRA on here ,the keyboard cowboys in their armchairs, holding a placard outside a building would be positively "Bin laden" to you wouldn't it..