I am an MRA and a part of the Manosphere

I wish to publicly identify myself as being an MRA or Men’s Rights Activist and as part of the greater Manosphere overall. This does not indicate that my views regarding women or the duties that men owe to women have changed; instead my decision to declare myself to be an MRA is due to a change in what I believe the MRAs and the wider Manosphere overall represent. MRAs and the Manosphere in general represent the reemergence of patriarchy in the secular realm. I myself am part of this reemergence of patriarchy in the secular realm. Therefore I am an MRA and part of the Manosphere as I am part of the wider phenomenon of the reemergence of patriarchy in the secular realm.

There is a lot of baggage and a lot of negativity and a lot of dysfunction associated with the MRA world but that does not change the fact that in the grand scheme of things I fit in with the broader Men’s Rights Movement (MRM) / Manosphere quite well. The Manosphere today overall on average is low functioning while I in terms of my beliefs and what I advocate for am high functioning but me and the Manosphere overall are part of the same “thing”; that “thing” being the reestablishment of patriarchy in the secular sphere.

In terms of my psychological development and how I see the world regarding gender relations I am definitely an MRA and always have been. If I was to try to establish a “beginning” of my MRA path or my MRA psychological orientation I would say the “beginning” was my initial effort to declare my love towards and establish a relationship with the woman I loved the most in high school in 12th grade at age 17. That was when I first established in my mind a romantic identity or romantic persona; a sense of self-worth and purpose based on my love for a woman. I had a very rudimentary sense of asserting myself for the purpose of claiming a moral purpose in relation to a woman. What was “MRA” about this first assertion of myself romantically was that it was based on a self-defined morally oriented self-concept where I was trying to associate the romantic feelings I felt with a moral idealistic purpose that would give my romantic feelings moral purpose and moral value. In other words I was setting up for myself a concept of myself as a man in service to a woman on my own terms for my own moral purpose.

My conversion to patriarchy then in my mid-20s was Stage 2 of my development as an MRA. It was not a separation from what came before; it was instead a continuation and further development of the path I was already on. I believed in feminism and supported feminism intellectually before my conversion to patriarchy but I have never interacted with women romantically from a feminist mindset I would say; my very first intentional deliberate romantic efforts towards women have always been from the origin point of me trying to pursue my own goals with my own moral purpose in mind.

This brings up the issue of what is an MRA exactly? MRAs want to take power away from women; this seeming to be an MRA universal. I also want to take power away from women; this being consistent with the theme of me being an MRA. This desire to take power away from women however may not be the true fundamental core of what it means to be an MRA because in my initial romantic behavior at age 17 that was the beginning of my MRA psychological development my purpose was not to take power away from women; instead my purpose was to assert myself romantically to achieve a self-defined moral goal. So the real foundation to being an MRA may be independent self-defined male romantic identity and purpose. This desire in men to self-assert then leading very quickly to the desire to take power away from women as women’s independent power represents a direct attack against whatever self-defined purpose the man sought to create and assert for himself.

This issue of Chivalry then as it relates to MRAs is an interesting issue. Chivalry, the male duty to provide for and protect women, is something most MRAs oppose but it is something that I as an MRA strongly support. I think the source of the conflict regarding Chivalry among MRAs is that most MRAs see Chivalry as empowering women and since empowering women is bad therefore Chivalry is bad. I on the other hand see Chivalry as disempowering women, as the primary means by which women can be disempowered. Chivalry therefore in my view disempowers women and since disempowering women is good therefore Chivalry is good. The thing is Chivalry raises women’s status and raising women’s status is good. Women should have high status and low power. Chivalry raises women’s status and at the same time lowers women’s power; this being exactly what the goal should be.

Now what is patriarchy, traditional patriarchy, exactly? Patriarchy is the collective understanding of men on what the best way to treat women and organize society is based on male self-assertion and male self-defined moral purpose romantically. What traditional patriarchy and MRAs and the Manosphere in general have in common is that all are based on self-defined male romantic identity and purpose and don’t like women “telling them what to do” or the idea that women define what their purpose as men is. There is the difficulty however that the practice and beliefs of traditional patriarchy are very different from the practice and beliefs of most MRAs today. The underlying psychological motivation of patriarchy and modern MRAs is the same but the outcome of what traditional patriarchy was able to achieve is very much superior to the outcome that most MRAs are able to achieve right now. This is because traditional patriarchy is in alignment with the will of God while the typical MRA is simply doing his own thing and therefore messing things up.

I do believe however that MRAs are indeed Stage 1 or Stage 2 patriarchy; that they are on the right path with a good starting foundational orientation of seeking autonomy and self-defined moral purpose as men and that they correctly see feminism and women’s empowerment as the enemy. They are also correct in their perception that society is very anti-male and female supremacist and that feminists have a selfish abusive mentality towards men. Men are indeed “under attack” in modern feminist society.

I will add however that nothing positive will come from MRAs or the Manosphere until they understand that men are to be in service to women and that men must submit themselves to God before claiming authority over a woman.

I am currently proclaiming myself to be a Traditional Family Activist or TFA. This still holds true. I still think the TFA identity holds value; that the TFA identity offers a blue print for how political activism might be directed in the future. I am thinking however that my primary identity is that of being an MRA; that MRA is the “big tent” that I am a part of. TFAs then would be a sub-set of MRAs or form of MRA.

Consistent with my new self-proclaimed affiliation as an MRA I am radically re-working my blogroll. My guidelines for what I am linking to in my blogroll is that I want the site to be anti-feminist, to be against gender equality, to believe in traditional gender roles as a duty, and to not be racial / white supremacist.

Regarding comments; women are free to comment and those opposed to what I am saying are free to comment. MRAs are also free to comment. I do know that MRAs can get quite nasty in what they say about women and I am not a fan of women bashing. I do expect a certain degree of respect towards women in people’s comments. Try to be positive and socially constructive in what you advocate for. So far my free speech ethic has been quite strong in how I moderate or fail to moderate comments. I intend to maintain that overall approach unless a real problem develops.

 
Companion article: Rethinking the Manosphere and MRAs

Advertisements

About Jesse Powell TFA

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

11 Responses to I am an MRA and a part of the Manosphere

  1. Khaleesi says:

    My love, you are also a red pill, so proud you finally embraced your true self or a that will do self! Won’t get you a girl or a wife or a stable relationship but it will do, it will do.

  2. mamaziller says:

    I agree with you.. but this route will take forever to get back to a society with stable relationships.. but it does work in the lonnnnng term.

  3. I appreciate the supportive sentiment Mamaziller. 🙂 Nobody said the return to a well functioning society would be quick or easy. It is a project that will take decades. At the personal level however one can make things good for themselves by finding a suitable traditionally minded partner to share their life with and dedicate their life to. Also at least here in the United States social indicators actually seem to be improving at long long last. In particular the proportion of married women in the workforce has gone from 61.4% in 2009 to 58.4% in 2014. So the worst of social breakdown may already be behind us (here in the United States).

    Truthfully seeing the MRA phenomenon as early stage patriarchy in the secular realm does improve my outlook on things. It makes it more clear how the restoration of patriarchy will play out, how it will develop in a practical sense. You can see the growth of conservative Christian Complementarian churches and you can also see the growth of more traditional beliefs in the Manosphere. This then is a complete picture of how things are developing; what is going on on the Christian side and what is going on on the secular side. Together; the Christian side and the secular side together; these forces have the power to restore patriarchy as the dominant cultural norm for everybody.

  4. mamaziller says:

    Yes MRAs are men trying to fight feminism because feminism is unfair to men! If there was a patriarchy there would be no MRAS.. because patriarchy is fair. The way I see it, MRAs would be fine with patriarchy or with the society feminists claim to want.. an equal society. MRAs are saying we are fine with both but we do not want the trick that feminism calls for..which is inequality without patriarchy. When the sexes are not equal we need patriarchy so that female innate power is balanced by male innate power. When we are equal we can live without patriarchy (short term).

    MRAs are disappointing in that they do not demand a return to patriarchy BUT this could be said to be the case only because MEN instinctively know that women would never EVER EVER EVER be happy or content living in a truly equal society. What MRAs are really saying is … you want equality.. TAKE IT… because they know the moment there is equality women will cry for patriarchy, for female privileges embedded in patriarchy. The privileges that enabled us to be with our kids when they are young and to have the financial support of men while focusing on our children.

    MRAs are saying … sure if you want equally you can have it because they know that we dont want equality and that we CAN NOT handle equality. It is still disappointing though, because we will all suffer while this stupid game is being played. I support you as an MRA though, I support you as a conservative, pro-patriarchial MRA. As long as patriarchy is the end game I support it. I think many MRAs do not see themselves as pro-patriarchy because they are afraid of looking at their instincts and they are genuinely confused with respect to WHAT WOMEN WANT.

    Men are also hardwired to please women, they are naturally the leaders of the family but with that nature comes the fact that instinctively they want to please us and give us what we want in order for them to be happy. When men are as confused about what women want as this generation and as MRAs seem to be it becomes difficult for them to know what to fight for.

    Feminism is a trick being played on society… they say they want equality but they dont, MRAs are calling their bluff.. asking for real equality with the hope that women will give them equality only to see that…REAL equality is not something that they want.

    The problem in all this is that women are not stupid, and our instincts are just as strong as male instincts…we will never give men equality, no matter what we say, no matter how many sons we have, no matter what stories we hear of broken men, no matter what our INSTINCTS say protect our gender and get as much from men as you can.. if we can use the word equality to get that, as feminism has been doing, we will.

    We arent going to fall for MRAs game/calling us on our bluff because we KNOW that we are bluffing…. but we too have an instinct that leads us to want to please men..or rather to want to be loved, adored and cared for by men.. and this is something that men will have to use sooner or later to get what they want. MRAs will have to shame us, to not pedestal us, to decide what they want from women and put that type of woman (and her alone) on a pedestal…and then they will win. We will conform, we will give up and be what men want…. if they ever decide what they want.

    It will be a long battle…let’s see where it goes.

    —rambles of a secular traditionalist

  5. LeeLee says:

    “The thing is Chivalry raises women’s status and raising women’s status is good. Women should have high status and low power. Chivalry raises women’s status and at the same time lowers women’s power; this being exactly what the goal should be.”

    I really love this. Because this is what is really honoring to women and what makes feminine women happy.. and feminine women are healthy women.

    More power takes away from feminine status. The things that are beautiful about womanhood aren’t powerful things, they are gentle and delicate things.

  6. spinosauruskin says:

    You clearly don’t understand the MRM if you think patriarchy is our goal. I like how, just like feminists, there are no links or citation to any of your assertions.

    “Women should have high status and low power.”
    This is not something any MRA worth his salt would say, ever.
    Why not equal power and equal status?

    “nothing positive will come from MRAs or the Manosphere until they understand that men are to be in service to women and that men must submit themselves to God before claiming authority over a woman”
    Then why are you trying to join us?
    Men shouldn’t be in service to women. That’s the problem not the solution. And I don’t want to claim authority over women either.

    Also what would constitute you being an activist for men’s rights? Are you campaigning for fair child custody, male reproductive rights, genital integrity, fair treatment of all victims of domestic violence and rape and those accused?

    It seems you have just read a feminist article about the MRM and based all of your views on it off of that.

    “I do know that MRAs can get quite nasty in what they say about women”
    Citation needed. MRAs just acknowledge women are human and are just as capable as men of being violent and abusive. If you think that’s nasty then that says more about your view of men than mine on women.

  7. Paul Murray says:

    Where do you stand in the issue of a woman simply being able to point the finger, cry “Rape!” and the man’s life is irrevocably fucked?
    Where do you stand on the issue of ceteris paribus 50/50 custody?
    Where do you stand on the issue of forced paternity and paternity fraud?
    Where do you stand on the issue of them male partner being held to be a rapist when both parties are drunk?
    The fact that female teachers systematically discriminate against male students?

  8. Dar says:

    Shame really. I admired this site for being both ant-feminist and anti-MRA, and being pro-Traditionalism.

    Having become an MRA, it’s really only half a step to being a feminist, as they’re both the same, anti-Tradition.

    But, whatever makes you happy, I suppose.

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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s