Why I am not a Men’s Rights Activist

My initiation into anti-feminism was when I decided intellectually that I was in favor of patriarchy around 1995. The logic of my anti-feminism was that I should contribute to the lives of women more. I developed this 1950s style domestic fantasy that I should be the breadwinner taking care of my stay-at-home wife who dedicated herself to the raising and well being of my children. Me as breadwinner who provided for my wife who in turn took care of my children was a kind of eureka moment. Yes! I thought to myself, this is how I could be a good man desirable to a woman. Not only would being a breadwinner be desirable to a woman though, it would also be good for the children so being a breadwinner would not only be romantically desirable but it would also be morally virtuous and idealistic as well. The great problem at that point of my life was that women were just not interested in me romantically; there was some kind of huge barrier between me and women. I saw myself embracing patriarchy and taking on the breadwinner role associated with patriarchy as being a way I could overcome women’s romantic rejection of me. My conversion to patriarchy away from feminism started out as simply a way to gain romantic access to women; women in effect told me collectively that my feminist indifference to their well being was intolerable to them and that I was going to have to “man up” before I would gain approval from them.

Before my conversion to patriarchy I did have the beginnings of certain MRA (Men’s Rights Activist) resentments and styles of thinking. I remember resenting the expectation that I take the initiative in romantic interactions with women. I tended to be shy and not very sociable to begin with and whenever I did take initiative with women I invariably didn’t get a good response so I didn’t like the expectation of taking the romantic initiative being placed on me “just because I was a man.” I also did resent the expectation that the man pay for the date, that it was in general the man’s job to “impress” the woman and not the other way around. Me having to take romantic initiative and me having to pay for the date and me “taking charge” in terms of organizing the date and planning things so that the woman would have a “good time” and be “impressed” by me so that she would deem me worthy of a second date and ultimately a relationship with me. The whole set up was distasteful to me because it implied that everything was about the woman and I was supposed to “perform” for her to her satisfaction to be “worthy” of her. All the burden seemed to be on me and more importantly I felt incapable of being able to sufficiently “impress” the woman under this scheme so that all these demands being placed upon me effectively excluded me from access to women.

In addition to not liking the dating ritual set up involving demands on me I could not hope to meet I also resented women having all the reproductive rights and me having none, I resented the idea of child support that I would owe the woman for a child that I maybe never wanted to have in the first place. I also resented the man only draft, that only men had to sign up for the selective service, and there was an enforcement mechanism that men were not eligible for financial aid to go to college if they hadn’t signed up for the selective service first.

The whole world seemed to be a kind of conspiracy to pamper women and to give women “special treatment” and “special privileges” and that I as a man had to “serve women” and “impress” women if I wanted to make any progress with them romantically. The entire romantic interaction with women seemed to be based on me liking a woman and getting all excited because of the hormones rushing through my veins and then me having to jump through all sorts of hoops and meet all sorts of demands the woman would place on me to see if I “measured up” or was “good enough” so that my interaction with women was completely one sided where I would give and then she would judge whether what I gave was “good enough” and invariably what I had to offer was insufficient and so I was excluded once again.

At the same time as all this I was very ashamed of the fact that I as a man would be expected to make significantly more money than a woman, that all the leadership positions in society were held by men, that whenever I had strong feelings for a woman I could definitely feel inside of myself a strong desire to control her and gain influence over her and tell her what to do. I could see men being dominant in the society overall in terms of leadership and prestige and money and I could see my own desire to be dominant in relation to women personally and I thought these things were bad, that they represented abuse against women or the oppression of women. Male dominance and male power was bad I thought; it was a bad tendency within the society and it was a bad tendency within myself. It was a bad tendency that should be fought against and overcome.

In terms of how I imagined what a relationship between myself and a woman would look like; I really felt a great deal of distance from the woman. I imagined myself as being sort of on the sidelines. Family life was the woman’s project I thought. Women are the ones who cared more about children, I shouldn’t try to be domineering over the woman or “tell her what to do” and so therefore I should sort of stay out of the way. Maybe I would make a bit of financial contribution to the woman’s life, me and the woman would love each other and share good feelings and have sex, maybe there were household things I could do for the woman to support the running of the household. I saw myself as basically doing what the woman assigned me to do but not really being that involved or invested in the relationship. The purpose of my relationship with the woman was mostly just love sex and good feelings and maybe I could offer her a little practical support to make myself useful and more valuable to her I thought.

So this was sort of my view of gender relations before my conversion to patriarchy. I was kind of a hybrid between an MRA resenting female privileges and female demands I couldn’t live up to and a pandering eager to please male feminist trying to be “good” not being “dominant” and willing to do what I am told to please a woman. In addition to these elements of my thinking however I really wasn’t oriented towards giving to women and contributing to women; I was more focused on wanting to be loved and wanting to have sex and wanting to satisfy myself emotionally and I was willing to contribute to women a little bit materially and practically to gain these things but I really didn’t see myself as investing in a woman in practical ways very much. To me practically giving to a woman would have been a form of pandering and begging and I would have been willing to do it to a limited extent as part of supporting the woman’s family goals particularly as it related to the support of children as being a kind of noble calling of the woman I should probably support her in to some extent but in general I didn’t like the idea of me supporting the woman because it would just be more of me “serving” the woman because I was afraid of her rejection of me and I didn’t want to be exploited in that way. Also it was ordinary and expected that the woman would work, wasn’t it?

Anyways, this set up on my part in terms of how I thought about women didn’t work. No woman wanted me; there was some kind of woman repellent surrounding me. I was in a trap and I had to break out of it somehow. Then finally I came upon my solution. Patriarchy! Patriarchy was the answer! The reason why women were rejecting me is because I had nothing to offer women; I had no drive to serve women. Men were able to get women in the 1950s weren’t they? Men were very successful with women in the 1950s. I knew statistically that the family was in much better shape in the 1950s than it was at that current time in the mid-1990s at the time of my angst and failure with women. The 1950s were all about the male breadwinner and the woman staying home to care for the children. The 1950s were good and the 1950s worked! If I could be a breadwinner man then I would have something I could offer to women and then women would love me and not only that but I could give my children a good life to by giving to them a mother who could devote themselves to their needs full time! It was a brilliant solution! It was wonderful! Patriarchy! Patriarchy is the answer!

This is how I entered into support for patriarchy and anti-feminism. I blamed myself for my failures with women prior to my conversion to patriarchy; it was my fault because I was being emotionally selfish just wanting women to love me and have sex with me but myself not wanting to support them or materially benefit them in return. Women could sense I had nothing to offer them and so they rightfully and deservedly rejected me as I was unworthy of them because I wasn’t living up to my responsibilities as a man. So to repent it was my job to become a breadwinner and take on my rightful patriarchal role within the family just like they did things in the 1950s when men knew how to be men and society worked.

I didn’t come into contact with MRAs as a political and cultural force until much later but before coming into contact with the MRAs I already had a well developed idea of Chivalry and what my duties as a man were based on my Chivalrous duty to women. When I first ran into the MRAs I was overjoyed to see so many anti-feminists but when I discovered their rejection of Chivalry after not too long I realized right away that the MRAs were not for me. There was no way in hell I would give up my beloved Chivalry to fit in with the MRAs. The fact that the MRAs rejected Chivalry meant there was something seriously wrong with them.

As to why MRAs so heavily outnumber men like me in the secular realm? I think this is because MRAs are an extension of feminism rather than a rejection of feminism. MRAs are 4th Wave Feminists. MRAs take the idea of “gender equality” more literally than the feminists do. MRAs advocate for the same kinds of things the feminists do, they just take the equality of the sexes idea of feminism and apply it more rigorously without the bias in favor of women feminists usually fall back on. MRAs are not repudiating feminism, they are instead more feminist than the feminists; they are feminism without the pro-woman hypocrisy of feminism in practice.

I however repudiated feminism at a fundamental level which is why I am the rarity at least in the secular world. The religious world has the advantage of having an alternative world view based on religious faith with largely autonomous self-enclosed communities that have the ability of propagating an alternative world view and social model among their members. The secular world however has no such means of protection against the dominant feminist culture so going against feminism is more difficult for someone in the secular world.

I myself had started to develop some MRA tendencies in my own thinking before my renunciation of feminism and my conversion to patriarchy but the step of me converting to patriarchy was aimed at greater investment in women rather than withdrawal from women. What the MRAs stand for is men withdrawing from women but my conversion to patriarchy was in exactly the opposite direction of increasing my investment in women for the purpose of moving closer to women. This is why I am the opposite of an MRA today; why my version of anti-feminism is the opposite of the MRA version of anti-feminism.

Companion Piece: After my Conversion to Patriarchy to become more Powerful and Important in Women’s Lives so that Women would Love Me

References to more of my personal history:

Why I Support Patriarchy – Guest Post by me at Adventures in Keeping House

Masculinity and Man’s Purpose as a Man

References to the personal background of the women secular supporters of patriarchy closest to me:

The Radical One – Why I Believe in the Traditional Family

Jojo – My Parents’ Failure

To The Radical One and Jojo; I very much appreciate my shared experiences with both of you so far, I am grateful for the support each of you have shown to me. I hope to live up to my obligations as a man on your behalf.

About Jesse Powell TFA

Anti-Feminist, MRA, Pro-Traditional Women's Rights Traditional Family Activist (TFA)
This entry was posted in Gender Politics Analysis, Personal History and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

40 Responses to Why I am not a Men’s Rights Activist

  1. Pingback: Women For Women - Mutual Spiritual Affinity

  2. Pingback: American Women | The Reinvention of Man

  3. Sara says:

    Well done. I didn’t know the MRA’s movement was aimed at eliminating chivalry. I can only hypothesize it is due to men having been kicked around and taken to the cleaners by their ex-wives and ex-girlfriends. While they may have received terrible treatment, men are also born with intuition just like women. Just as women are reminded to keep their intuition in check when wondering if a man is not alright in the upstairs, the same can be said for men too. If you think you are dating a crusty, selfish woman, then don’t settle. Ladies, if you think a man is weird or has a history of violence, don’t settle. Once again, well done. I learned something new today…

  4. Hello Sara, thanks for commenting at my site.

    I don’t know how new you are to the gender politics scene but definitely MRAs are opposed to Chivalry; they rail against Chivalry all the time. I on the other hand love Chivalry and advocate for it all the time. That there is a clear and obvious dividing line between me and the MRAs. If you press an MRA on the subject of Chivalry sometimes the MRA agrees to Chivalry but only if the woman “earns it” or “deserves it” first. This is no good because Chivalry is something given to the woman by the man, it is not something the woman “earns” or “deserves” so to avoid confusion and to prevent the MRAs from playing manipulative word games I emphasize that I advocate for unconditional Chivalry; not conditional on the woman’s behavior or moral character or any other factor. Unconditional Chivalry always shuts the MRAs up; it is something no MRA will ever agree to.

    Feminism is female controlled Chivalry, patriarchy is male controlled Chivalry, MRAs are opposed to Chivalry all together. This is how I divide things up. I am in favor of patriarchy; male controlled Chivalry. Chivalry is men’s duty to provide for and protect women. MRAs are opposed to feminism because of the residual patriarchy still within feminism. I am opposed to feminism because of the partial rejection of patriarchy within feminism. Me and the MRAs are opposed to feminism for opposite reasons; I think feminism has too little patriarchy in it and the MRAs think feminism has too much patriarchy in it.

    I don’t deny many MRAs have had bad experiences with women in the past and indeed I agree with almost all of the criticisms MRAs make against feminism. Still however Chivalry (male controlled Chivalry) is a must for good relations between the sexes and is a must for the man being able to maintain his honor and integrity and positive sense of purpose as a man. Men must not lose sight of the big picture just because of their personal negative experiences with women. Men need to remember their guardianship status in relation to women and must seek to assert and maintain their authority over women. They also must remember that the power that women hold was given to them by men so that they first of all have other men to blame when a woman “abuses the system” rather than solely the woman herself. A man must never lose sight of what his role is in relation to women regardless of what his personal history with women is; he is the guardian, provider, protector, and authority over women.

  5. bodycrimes says:

    You leave out the rest of the story – how did you relationships with women change after you embraced patriarchy? Did you get married soon after?

  6. Pingback: After my Conversion to Patriarchy to become more Powerful and Important in Women’s Lives so that Women would Love Me | Secular Patriarchy

  7. mamaziller says:

    I only wish more men could see this..

  8. Adam says:

    “it was my fault because I was being emotionally selfish just wanting women to love me and have sex with me but myself not wanting to support them or materially benefit them in return”

    You feel that a woman should only love you if you materially benefit them in return? There’s nothing selfish about wanting women to love you in return for your love for them. Nothing at all. My girlfriend loves me and enjoys sex with me, however she actually makes more than me in her job (even though I work longer hours). That you feel that you have to give more to the woman than you receive, and that you think that you have to turn yourself into a wallet with legs for a woman to like tells me that you overvalue women and that you undervalue yourself.

    • Sara says:

      I imagine he has already tried the setup you are in now Adam, and while it works just fine for you, it may not for him. The author probably feels more chivalrous when he is the breadwinner and the woman can relax without constantly worrying about bills, electricity, water, or food. So it’s a hit and miss with what works for various people.

      • Adam says:

        It doesn’t seem that way to me, clue is in the very first paragraph:

        “The great problem at that point of my life was that women were just not interested in me romantically; there was some kind of huge barrier between me and women. I saw myself embracing patriarchy and taking on the breadwinner role associated with patriarchy as being a way I could overcome women’s romantic rejection of me. My conversion to patriarchy away from feminism started out as simply a way to gain romantic access to women; women in effect told me collectively that my feminist indifference to their well being was intolerable to them and that I was going to have to “man up” before I would gain approval from them.”

        He was undesirable to women, so he decided that he’d use money to gain their approval.

        “eager to please male feminist trying to be “good””

        He’s still that guy minus the feminist label. My point is that if he believes that money is the only thing he has going for him and that he has to buy love and affection, his mind-set is all wrong.

      • jacklabear says:

        I’ll put Adam’s thoughts more bluntly:
        He doesn’t have the masculine qualities that women want and consider a fair exchange for their feminine gifts in a relationship. Therefore, the only basis for a relationship he can see for himself is one that is a long term prostitution contract.

        “Man up” is used to shame men into provisioning women long term in exchange for ‘reproductive privileges’. This is a bad idea because the current social and legal climate allows women to default on their end of the bargain, but the man has to keep paying and paying without getting the domestic services, sex or the children. That is why there are angry writers in the manoshere. They did everything they were supposed to do, and only the women benefitted in the long run.

        A more valuable way to ‘man up’ would be to make oneself into a Man that a woman wants to have sex with, without him having to pay for it.

        Jess, you can’t change the world to what you would like it to be, but you can change yourself. So Man Up! I gave you some tips on that in a previous comment.

  9. Pingback: The Man’s Higher Purpose in a Romantic Relationship | Secular Patriarchy

  10. As far as my masculine qualities go, truth be told, I am stronger in the confidence / dominance region than I am in the money region. The money region is what I have to work on and improve. Very definitely men should be dominant in relation to women for a number of reasons including the woman’s ability and inclination to then be attracted to the man but “game” without the provisioning to back it up is just lies and manipulation in my book.

    Also, by no means is a man’s masculine attributes “fair exchange” for a woman’s feminine attributes in a relationship context. A man’s masculinity must be combined with a man’s provisioning. Women are dependent upon men, not the other way around, so the transfer of resources is a one way street from the man to the woman. The purpose of a romantic relationship is the support of those dependent upon the woman so the woman has to be taken care of by the man so that the woman can in turn take care of those dependent upon her (in particular children).

    The very idea of a man seeking to have sex with women without “having to pay for it” is outrageous and anti-social. That is not at all what “manning up” is about. To “man up” means to take responsibility and become a better man, not learning psychological manipulation techniques to fool women into thinking you are a better man than you actually are so you can then “pump and dump” them.

  11. Pingback: My Escape from the Prison of Feminism | Secular Patriarchy

  12. Pingback: Patriarchy and the Search for Identity and the Search for God | Secular Patriarchy

  13. Wrong says:

    MRA, anti-feminist, pro patriarchy, whatever — You still want women to want you for the qualities you value, not for what women value. I say the same to career women who say, I have 3 degrees and make lots of money and own my own house and am independent– I’m a good catch!!! (Even though I’m 80 pounds overweight with a horrendous attitude!!!)

    Men don’t get to decide what’s attractive to women any more than women get to decide what’s attractive to men.

    And not many women outside of mail order brides from 3rd world countries are interested in condescending misogynists who want some creepy version of a father-daughter relationship.

  14. fight says:

    Yes you are! Darling, yes you are! If you wanna push a women down and be a leader over her in her inherant feminine wiles and weakness. You are! Alas,if only you considered women equal to you, maybe just maybe, you will get one! We women could help you man be socially skilled enough to get and maintain any women, who decides you have worth.

    Do you read what you write? You don’t respect women, you don’t want a mutual love affair where both parties contribute and can live freely. You want sex slave and cleaner. You want someone to bully and imprison and limit their life. No matter what the woman wants/needs/says.
    Sweet red piller, I hope you never find a lover till you escape the delusion that emotionally abusing someone into loving you would, ever, ever, work out. People figure that shit out and you will be asked to leave and never come back.

    • Stop the Fight says:

      @fight You clearly don’t respect men. You don’t consider men to be equal to you. You want to dominate men under the guise of “equality.” You want a cash slave and provider. You want a relationship where you can bully the man by threatening to divorce him and then take as much of his assets as you can. You are proving this by emotionally abusing him right now on this post. I hope you are not married and I hope you don’t have children. It’s pretty easy to figure out the type of person you are. Why do you think women are more socially skilled than men? Based on what evidence? The majority of criminals are raised by single mothers. Women get pregnant with losers and then expect society to support them in the form of welfare. Is this evidence of women being socially skilled according to you? Society is already figuring this out and marriage and relationships are now becoming more obsolete. Sad.

      • FightingForever says:

        why do men leave pregnant woman? Why do men refuse to parent and help out around the house? Why do men pray on woman and make them pregnant and leave them hanging? Why do men leave women? Why do men always end up divorced? Why can’t men anticipate their wives needs? Why can’t men raise children? Why don’t men stay with woman? Why are their so many losers getting woman pregnant? Why are they do many losers? Why do men as a collective are boring and have no personality? Why are men so useless woman prefer to Go It Alone? Why are men so incompetent?

        My evidence, emotional labour-the metafilter thread, look it up, its so true , my own personal life, the entire red pill/rad trad community of pussy man babies, look it up, woman do it all the time for no credit, woman nurture and care about men and get jack shit back, no wonder bisexuals are sticking to woman, and woman are getting together, all day every day, have you seen tumblr? Woman don’t need men!
        Darling, I go a lot of questions for men as a collective, mostly, why are they so whingy and pathetic?

      • FightingForever says:

        Why do men leave woman who have children ? Why do men allow single mothers to exist in the world? Why do men knock up woman they don’t want to raise a family with? Why do you blame single mothers for their grown as sons who are criminals? Why can’t men control their. dicks? Why do men kill their wives? Why do men domestic abuse? Why is it always the woman’s fault the man is awful? Why do men need to abuse people into loving them? Why do men stalk women? Why dont men help out at home?

      • Chia maria says:

        Sorry, but FightingForever has a point. Many points in fact. Women can’t be solely blamed for society’s ills.

  15. FamilyFirstForever says:

    Men usually don’t leave pregnant women. Women are the ones who file for divorce and leave the men, taking the children with them. Why do women get pregnant with losers and then expect them to change? Why not find a decent, caring man, marry him and stay with him? Why do women file for divorce? Why do women kill their children and that doesn’t include abortions? Why do most criminals come from single mothers? Why are so many women getting pregnant by losers? Can’t women tell who a loser is? Why are so many mothers on welfare? Can’t they support the children they produced? Why are women more likely to initiate violence in relationships? Why are women more likely to abuse their children?

    Your evidence, is your own collection of bad personal choices. Why do women abuse men and children when they don’t get their way? Why do women stalk men? Why do women bad mouth the fathers of their children to their children? Why do women quit their jobs to stay home with their children and then expect the hard-working man to come home and do all of the housework even though they are at home all day and aren’t earning any income any more?

    Bisexuals tend to stick to men because they are easier to live with. Overall, lesbian relationships tend to break up faster than any other relationships. Women are more likely to wind up alone with 30 cats.

    Honey, I have questions for women as a collective: Why are women so angry, violent, abusive, needy, demanding, whiny, and pathetic? Why do they claim that they are independent and don’t need men but then they demand alimony after breaking up the family, child support that they don’t even spend on the children, welfare from the state for kids that they can’t support, abortions for kids that they created but don’t want and social services because they can’t run their own lives properly?

    Sorry, but these are excellent points. Men can’t be blamed for the ills of society because women are the ones who tend to raise children under terrible conditions. Most criminals – male and female – come from single mother homes. Women don’t know how to attract and retain decent men nor how to raise kids properly and society suffers as a result.

  16. FamilyFirst says:

    Google “women more likely to initiate domestic violence” and find out.

  17. lauren says:

    my ex was violent…the violence started while I was pregnant,the kid is only two things to the father,a fuck trophy & a ticket for citizenship,by fuck trophy I mean something to be paraded around before immigration officials proving he had ties to the country & it was with great happiness that I whom he called stupid ugly dumb lost him everything,watching him cry,beg scream threaten & finally watch as I with all that I was named as being,low quality n value now operate a business my now partner had an injury so doesn’t have paid employment,my kid is taken to & from school sports by my now partner

    • FamilyFirst says:

      Claudia Dias has counseled abusive men and women for over twenty years. She criticizes the different ways domestic violence against men and women is viewed. “When a man hits a woman, it’s abuse and felony. When she does it, it’s because she has a bad temper.” Claudia describes the cycles of domestic abuse as “a dance… it doesn’t matter which gender does which part.” The major difference, she says, is that men hit women to “make them shut up” whereas women hit men in order to “make them listen.”

      Rick kept his wife’s abuse secret for 21 years before finally leaving her. At one point he was forced to defend himself with Mace. When the police were finally called, Rick was the one arrested. “I felt betrayed by the system… by the courts… and by my wife.” Today, Rick has temporary custody of his children after his wife, angry because he returned them a few minutes late from a visitation, rammed his car with her vehicle while the children were still in it. Stephanie, their 14-year-old daughter, says her mother would often rage at the children as well, and that life at home was like “walking on eggshells”

      The stories we heard from abused men are no less horrifying than those told by women. They were kicked, hit, stabbed, pushed down stairs and through plate glass doors. Like their female counterparts, the men often covered up for their wives, lying to doctors and authorities about the true cause of their injuries. As one man said, “I’m supposed to take it like a man.” That often means not fighting back, not only because all the men on this show said they were raised not to hit women, but also because many police departments automatically consider the man the aggressor in cases of domestic abuse. Even when the woman is at fault.

      On March 1, 1999 The Oprah Winfrey Show aired a show on wives who beat their husbands, excerpted from Oprah’s Web site.

      It happens in other nations as well.

      Royal Navy Leading Seaman Simon Smith lost six pints of blood after his ex-wife Crystal plunged a knife twice into his back and once into his arm.

      Paul, a 47-year-old IT teacher, was scratched, punched and slapped by his 43-year-old wife Meena.

      Domestic violence against men has become a very middle-class problem.

      In 2012, Child Protective Services estimated that 686,000 children were victims of maltreatment in the United States — or 9.2 per 1,000 – and over 80% of the perpetrators of these crimes were the children’s parents. And of this number, 88% were biological parents, not step- or adopted as many of us have been taught to believe. And 54 percent of the perpetrators were women.

      • Crystal says:

        I’m against domestic violence regardless of the perpetrator. I agree with you on this: men who suffer domestic violence have fewer resources to turn to than women. That doesn’t mean that women shouldn’t have resources, it just means that men need more. I think the women you are thinking about could have psychopathic tendencies (yes, psychopathic females exist). This sounds like a real topic for a conversation between you and me, if you’re willing to have it.

    • Crystal says:

      Lauren, you have my total sympathies. Lots and lots of hugs if you want them

  18. FamilyFirst says:

    I never said that women shouldn’t have resources. Why is it when anyone talks about male victimhood, it becomes a competition among female and male victims? ALL victims deserve resources. And you claim that when women abuse men, it’s because the women have psychopathic tendencies? Well, when men abuse women, are you claiming that they are just being men? It seems as if you are trying to justify female abuse against male victims by claiming that the females are just insane and don’t have control over their actions. A lot of people may think that they are not gender-biased but they really are.

    • Crystal says:

      When men abuse women, they are also behaving psychopathically. My belief is that
      “being a man” does NOT include abuse! My point was that I was *agreeing* with your statement that ALL victims deserve resources, and you raise an excellent question of why it becomes a competition among male and female victims, although I think the evidence seems to show that women are more likely to be victimised due to their physically weaker stature, etc. I think it’s because women’s and men’s issues are hot-button topics akin to abortion and homosexuality. I have no desire to justify female abuse against male victims by claiming that the females are insane and don’t have control over their actions, because everyone has a choice to do good or evil. In my heart of hearts I really believe that domestic violence is a human problem, not just a gendered problem – as so many of these problems are. I hope I’ve explained myself a little more clearly and if I haven’t I’ll be happy to try again.

      • FamilyFirst says:

        Thank you for that response and I apologize for suspecting that you may be biased. It’s just that so many people don’t seem to care about the male victims of domestic violence at the hands of females and that is so sad and tragic. They think that domestic violence against males is funny or some type of “revenge justice”, which is totally wrong.

        The truth is, we don’t know who is more likely to be victimized. Studies show that females are more likely to initiate domestic violence and you don’t have to be physically stronger than someone to abuse them. A smaller person can use weapons or the element of surprise and there are many women who are quite fit and possess a great deal of strength. In any case, no one should be the victim of domestic violence and we need to help all victims regardless of race, financial status, gender, creed and so on.

        Thank you once again for your comment.

      • Crystal says:


        On this one, we’re cool. And that’s fine, really. DV victims regardless of sex or gender are a concern of mine. It is because of – not in spite of but because of – my egalitarian beliefs that I deem it utterly wrong for women to commit violence as much as men. Sometimes the system has been unfair to guys and I’m not afraid to admit that, especially as I would like the world to be a better place. You do have a good point about the element of surprise etc.

        Frankly I’m appalled with it all, as I said. If I were ever married I would take my responsibility to treat my husband with the utmost gentleness very keenly as I feel responsible for his future happiness and I hope he would feel the same way about me. I might be a woman but I still feel the need to handle a human being that entrusts himself to me with everything he has, with love and compassion; I couldn’t bear to hurt him (certainly not anyone else but in this case I’m talking about marriages) in that way. Nor could I do it to my roommate, or anyone else (yes, if you are boarding with someone and they abuse you physically it also counts as domestic violence) because I have a conscience and I want to treat people the way I want to be treated.

        I’m glad we found some common ground and I look forward to more conversations on this serious social dilemma with you in the future.

        PS: Could you please explain what you mean when you say that women are more likely to initiate domestic violence? I don’t understand you here but I really would appreciate an explanation if you wouldn’t mind giving it.

  19. lauren says:

    ff you think im a sympathy whore,wrong I am glad of my experiences it taught me my own strengths,my daughter knows what she will give & take from a man & my son is determined that a woman will never shed a tear because of him,my grandparents raised me to never be without my own resources & before you think I revel in victimisation.i revel in the fact that every derogatory term used at women I take & own,i am the cunt,the bitch that the ex ever called me & then some more,treat a woman as though she’s for sale you’ll only ever be renting her body & womb but you’ll never have the loyalty of desire & want only the despair of dependency…thank you Crystal your comment means a lot

    • Crystal says:

      Firstly, you are absolutely welcome and I appreciate that my comment meant a great deal to you. Secondly (if and only if you were referring to me, and if you weren’t I humbly apologise in advance for any possible offence I might cause through misunderstanding) I don’t perceive you as a sympathy whore at all, but rather as a very strong woman that faced a lot of tough sh*t. In short, you rock, and I sincerely hope you are living a much more joyful and fulfilled life now.

    • FamilyFirst says:

      If you are directing that comment to me (and I don’t know why you would), I would like to state that I never thought you were a sympathy whore.

      Your children (both your son and daughter) should know what they can give and take from their domestic partners and that neither should be in relationships where they shed tears or make others shed tears because of domestic violence. Neither of your children or any human should allow themselves to get to the point where they don’t have their own resources and where they are totally dependent on an abuser to get by.

      No one should be called derogatory terms nor treated as if their body if for sale. This applies to all humans. Many men are treated as cash slaves and sperm donors by the legal system. Many men are both ignored and abused by the legal and social systems just like many women are but people seem to be more tolerant of male victimhood.

      The legal and social systems should help all victims and should encourage the nurturing and caring of all humans by other humans instead of separating people into categories and claiming that some victims matter more than others.

  20. lauren says:

    Crystal no I never intended the whore remark at you & yes thank you for your kind wishes I work am in a relationship & having given up the way of my mother’s family & taking on the lessons of my father & his parents I am the most content I could hope to be…& I hope that you too are happy & fulfilled life.

    • Crystal says:

      I’m glad to know you never intended that remark at me and I’m so happy to know that your life is so much better than it used to be! I’m young (early twenties, actually), and have a lot of hope for the future. Your father’s family sound like really good people.

      • FamilyFirst says:

        I am so happy that you have a lot of hope for the future. Best of luck.

      • Crystal says:


        Thank you and I hope your life is treating you well also. Sorry for the roughhousing – I felt I needed to step in to defend another person but all the same I don’t like snapping at people online.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s