Dr Jeffrey Ketland will be giving a presentation at the conference, titled, “A feminist witch hunt at Oxford University”. Brief details on Jeffrey are on the conference speakers’ page.
About two weeks ago we posted a blog piece with the snappy title, The case for “Men’s Rights Movement” (MRM) > “Gender Equality Movement” (GEM), and, in turn, “Men’s Rights Activist” (MRA) > “Gender Equality Activist” (GEA)”. We thank Jeffrey for his comments on the matter:
I agree with this, Mike. It’s similar to what I’ve said for about 4 years, since I first heard of MRM when I was hunted down like a some sort of animal in Oxford, by feminist vigilante zealots, in 2014. I think it’s why MRA/MRM cannot gain social & political traction. For, in a battle between MRM and Feminists (who say they advocate equality, though they don’t), feminists will win: this happened every day, for over thirty years. The reason, I’m sure, is gynocentrism, the natural inclination of men and women towards greater value and protection of girls & women. One cannot invert a biological urge with words. One has to counteract the systemic *politics*, *propaganda* and *policies* of feminist anti-egalitarianism, instead of hoping that something that really does exist (gynocentrism) can be made to go away. The policies and propaganda of feminist anti-egalitarianism can be pushed back, so long as the focus is how feminism attacks equality. And vast numbers of the population openly support equal treatment too, as well as being increasingly annoyed with Identity Politics.
In practice, the constant flow and the endless setbacks and defeats are all in the opposition direction, partly because of the basic gynocentric bias in human society. But while gynocentrism is the fuel that drives the tank forwards, feminists cornered the propaganda market in *equality*, and did so despite being obviously an anti-equality movement, even though they say of themselves that they’re in favour of equality. But they’re opposed to equality.
They’re just lying. Therefore, trying to respond with a “Men’s rights movement” makes it look, to a large number of neutral observers, as if that movement is opposed to equality, or even “misogynist”. It looks like it is an Identity-based movement. And this is the central propaganda technique that feminists used to demonize MRAs; it appears in every single article written by feminists. (Notice how this is exactly how people respond to BLM. They respond, rightly, by saying, “Hang on. All lives matter”.)
But this would not be easy if they were attacking GEAs. It undermines their central propaganda advantage. Think of it this way. What is happening? Two things: (1) Saturation level feminist — we believe in “gender equality” — Identity Politics propaganda/policies. And (2) gynocentrism, the fuel. But (2) cannot be changed. It’s as biological as having two legs. On the other hand, the propaganda is false and can be challenged, and can be defeated.
So I do think moving over to “Gender Equality Activist” is a strategic shift in the right direction.
A connected reason is that it also undermines the Identity Politics of feminism too: for feminism is group-based activism, and not based on universal, equal rights for all. And pointing out, “Men are mistreated, vilified, domestically abused, falsely accused, imprisoned, etc.” has little traction in practice – because, though it is true, the truth here doesn’t strongly impact people’s minds; the primary gynocentric bias works in the opposition direction. So an Identity Politics based on male group identity is doomed never to take off. In fact, feminists make more and more progress on that, every day. On the other hand, there is strong widespread sympathy for equality, as all polls show, whether from the Left, or the centre and conservatives. There is also growing dissatisfaction with Identity Politics.